The drums or war....

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:04 pm

UK Govt voting tonight have voted in favour of war on Saddam

For: 412
Against: 149

A rebel amendment that a case for war has not yet been established was also beaten 396 to 217...

Nippy · Post by **Nippy** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:08 pm

Personally, it's as I thought. The British government have started to turn to Blair, as has a good majority of the British people in polls. I'm glad the government has given a united front at least.

fable · Post by **fable** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:12 pm

Originally posted by Nippy
Personally, it's as I thought. The British government have started to turn to Blair, as has a good majority of the British people in polls. I'm glad the government has given a united front at least.

That's not the way it looks. The last time Blair tried to win a vote on an Iraqi war, a couple of weeks back, there were 122 votes against him. Now, there are 139. The various news sources in the UK are calling it the "largest revolt ever against a Labour government."

I fully expect the government to spin it in another direction, but the facts are telling.

Nippy · Post by **Nippy** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:13 pm

I apologise, my comment was misleading, I meant to say that the Tories have added weight to Blair's decision, and even though the Labour revolt did occur, the great majority still sided with Blair.

fable · Post by **fable** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:19 pm

Originally posted by Nippy
I apologise, my comment was misleading, I meant to say that the Tories have added weight to Blair's decision, and even though the Labour revolt did occur, the great majority still sided with Blair.

I agree; but the Tories' vote was never in doubt. Blair got his backing, but 217 MPs voted in total against him. His administration is shaky, at this point. The message seemed pretty clear, to me: the war has to be won swiftly, and the casualties light (for the UK and US), or Blair will end up out of a job.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:20 pm

Coalition for immediate disarmament of Iraq
Afghanistan
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan (post-war)
Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:21 pm

Well, within the next 10 years, or so, there is going to be a lot of major events taking place. It's a very historical time period, IMHO. Regardless of what happens, war or not, the U.S. will not be looked upon in the same light as they were previously. If they succeed, I can see the next major (more than just this Iraq issue) war boiling over in the middle east, but not from regualr armies, but from the people themselves. I can also see countries like Korea and China capitilizing on this...

It's a sad time in the world, but at the same time, it is an exciting time (please don't confuse my excitment as pro-war, I'm speaking from a political sense)

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:21 pm

Originally posted by fable

I agree; but the Tories' vote was never in doubt. Blair got his backing, but 217 MPs voted in total against him. His administration is shaky, at this point. The message seemed pretty clear, to me: the war has to be won swiftly, and the casualties light (for the UK and US), or Blair will end up out of a job.

Agreed. Whether it would down the Labour government is debateable though. The Tories support him, it is his head not the Governments per se...

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:37 pm

I just want to say one thing. America isn't a country that is run by one person. Bush and his administration will not reign over this country forever. In the next ten years you will see a bunch of changes, one of them will be how people look up to Americans. Because our heads will be held high, higher than ever.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:49 pm

Originally posted by RandomThug
I just want to say one thing. America isn't a country that is run by one person. Bush and his administration will not reign over this country forever. In the next ten years you will see a bunch of changes, one of them will be how people look up to Americans. Because our heads will be held high, higher than ever.

You seem to think that the global perspective will be viewing Americans as a proud people. In a sense, you're right, but it won't be in a flattering way. even though the fault of the American people, per say, people are fickle beings. In the futue, the global image and opinion of Americans will only worsen.

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:57 pm

@Aeigis thats a large assumption. You deciding the opinion of a world....

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:00 pm

Originally posted by Aegis

You seem to think that the global perspective will be viewing Americans as a proud people. In a sense, you're right, but it won't be in a flattering way. even though the fault of the American people, per say, people are fickle beings. In the futue, the global image and opinion of Americans will only worsen.

To a point I agree...and the UK Govt should therefore be considered equally. On the one hand are these distraction moves? on the other hand we should remember that the actions of the government is not always in support of the favour of the populace. My own opinion is that this is not the place now for national pride, there are wider more impacting issues than this.

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:08 pm

Originally posted by Aegis
In the futue, the global image and opinion of Americans will only worsen.

So we in the US become the Super Great Satan?

Ummm, the US is already seen in this light.

Chanak · Post by **Chanak** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:09 pm

@Yshania: I agree. National pride, per se, is one way support for military action against Iraq has been drummed up here. It's the only card they actually carry, for the pertinent issues surrounding the affair don't support it at all. A very weak argument is to be found in the facts....therefore, it seems to me that the rhetoric coming from the White House has had to, by necessity, adopt a "tough guy" face. There is no doubt in my mind that war against Iraq was the intention of the Bush Administration from the very beginning.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:14 pm

Originally posted by RandomThug
@Aeigis thats a large assumption. You deciding the opinion of a world....

You seem to be ignoring a simple fact, and that is what people believe what they are told, and what they see. I am not assuming anything, merely predicting. The scary thing is, though, is this is probably prove to be quite an accurate assessment, considering how Americans are generally viewed by the world as is.

@Ysh: I think when it comes to the UK, I don't think it will be as much as a problem. The people in Britain have been one of, if not the most, vocal about not going to war, and it has been widely accepted that it is the choice of the government. The difference between the US and UK, though, is that the people will suffer from it the most, instead of the government.

fable · Post by **fable** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:24 pm

Originally posted by Weasel
So we in the US become the Super Great Satan?

Ummm, the US is already seen in this light.

Muslim culture is not monolithic, and the "Great Satan" rhetoric of Iran has been toned down in recent years. But when you have a US administration that refuses to do anything other than fawn over the current Israeli rulers, and invade a sovreign Islamic nation for highly specious reasons, you essentially hand terrorist organizations a magnificent propaganda victory that can be used to create new recruits.

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:31 pm

Something else I would like to add.

Your prediction may or may not come true, given the fact that sadam may or may not use chemical or biological weapons against us therefor proving us right.

Either way I doubt we will stop all our aid, even to those who hate us. Reality is I could care less what the average Iraqi person feels about me, my concern lies in the heart of stopping evil men. If I shoot your boss but you liked him even though he did horrible things to your business, I could care less of your opinion of me.

Excuse me if this comes off a little off but...

For those opposed to war, those who belittle the bush campaign.

Why not aim your anger at saddam leaving? Why not address the fact he has been given a choice but he would rather sacrafice his men for the little hours of power he has left. ? ? Just curious.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:39 pm

Originally posted by RandomThug
For those opposed to war, those who belittle the bush campaign.

Why not aim your anger at saddam leaving? Why not address the fact he has been given a choice but he would rather sacrafice his men for the little hours of power he has left. ? ? Just curious.

Why is Bush sacrificing the lives of Americans to take out someone who hasn't been proven to have these so-called weapons of mass destruction. All this is, is a game of poker on a global scale. Saddam basically called Bush's bluff, now Bush can't back down. If you ask me, Saddam is a very bright man, as he basically egged the Americans to make the first move, thus making them the instigators. History tends to look more favourably upon the victims, whether or not that is the real case.

IMHO, neither side is right. Saddam is a known dictator of a country, but at the same time, Bush is imposing American policy where it does not belong, making him almost as bad. The matter would've been completly different, though, if Bush had only decided to wait for the UN's decision, instead of going all gung-ho. When I am asked who the greater evil of this war will be, I'm going to have a very difficult time deciding which man...

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 7:07 pm

Originally posted by fable
Muslim culture is not monolithic, and the "Great Satan" rhetoric of Iran has been toned down in recent years.

Toned down? I still remember the people in the middle east dancing in the streets as US citizens where killed on 9/11.

Just the thought of this makes my blood boil. Never, I mean never will I support any state in the middle east who showed this type of behavior. I will not support Bush, I will not support Powell. I will not support the Pope. No one. Period.

Scayde · Post by **Scayde** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 7:15 pm

Originally posted by Weasel
Toned down? I still remember the people in the middle east dancing in the streets as US citizens where killed on 9/11.

Just the thought of this makes my blood boil. Never, I mean never will I support any state in the middle east who showed this type of behavior. I will not support Bush, I will not support Powell. I will not support the Pope. No one. Period.

I remember Weasel.........and it still gets to me too. I cannot forget the crowds shown partying in the streets while the Towers still burned. I don't think it will ever stop hurting.