RiderSite.com - Motorcycle Forums

Well, Air and Sea forces..

Neutralisation of Anti Air weaponry and tracking sites, key strategic targets etc

As if by magic it's expected that Gadaffi will employ human shields..

*sigh* never saw that coming

SKY NEWS

Maybe im just tired of it all, but i wish for once we'd just let them get on with it without us? more expenditure, fighting on multiple fronts...

Ah .... but there's oil involved so the powers that be will have to pretend they give a damn about the people (while not even pretending to give a damn for those in the countries without oil) .....

Oil, you say? Hmm.. Well I could do with a top up on the suntan... now you mention it.. and apparently Tripoli is quite nice on a Thursday night

As usual we're supporting the underdog against the bad man, regardless of the fact that the underdogs are hardly saints.

I havent heard the septics called the underdog for ages...

I still think we should just let them get on with it.

Camerons Falklands


And means the defence cuts will be rescinded - job done for the Tories

And yes the oil will be useful

Two minds with this one. Turning the army on your own people is a big no-no. Plus he's an arse. Typical example of absolute power corrupting absolutely.

Oil.. Hmm, yes, maybe.. But Cameron doesn't come across as a war mongerer.

For the record.. I'm not a Tory supporter.

I gave up supporting political parties when Screaming Lord Such died.

Theyre all as corrupt as each other, no matter what Team they play for.

Cameron doesnt come across as a war mongerer, however he was special advisor to Michael Howard, who is a closet War Mongerer.

Have a look at his voting stats.. http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?mpn ... p%3B+Hythe

Guarantee long chats over a scotch in Mike's cabinet office subversively groomed young David into a closet war mongerer too

Gadaffi needs to go, admittedly, however this should come from his own and not us as an allied force. Maybe we can turn the tide in favour of the home forces who oppose Gadaffi by imposing the No Fly zone (and knocking 7 kinds of it out of his forces all in the name of the No Fly zone as we are doing) but as soon as we physically step foot into Libya on a 'war' footing, we've gone a step too far.

All IMHO..

Oh and I hate the term 'War' which is bandied about by the press way too much. No declarations of War have been made in Decades, but that doesnt stop the media dressing conflicts up as full scale Wars..

I'll mention Lockerbie since nobody else has. How any politician came to shake his hand I'll never understand.

Kwackerz wrote:I gave up supporting political parties when Screaming Lord Such died.

nod nod

Oh and I hate the term 'War' which is bandied about by the press way too much. No declarations of War have been made in Decades, but that doesnt stop the media dressing conflicts up as full scale Wars..

and another nod nod, I wish they'd get their terms right and stop stirring crap

Sorry but I think that when two opposing forces are beating the crap out of wach other and killing each other - that's war, whatever you call it!

Cameron doesnt come across as a war monger

Cameron doesn't come across as anything much.

And means the defence cuts will be rescinded

I love an optimist. I think it just means the forces will be expected to do the job with less resources.

There is a civil war taking place and I hope we are just looking to stop war crimes and bring the criminal to account.

Hi all,

Yet again, the UN is being used as a military weapon, thought they were "Peace-keepers!" What happened to carrying out the processes of resolutions that have been used in the past They were uproar when the right procedures weren't followed when we ousted Saddam Hussein, so why have they by-passed all those for lybia. This is an "internal issue," for the whole of Lybia to sort out. But, because his country produces 1.8 million barrels of oil a day, they (the west) want to try and control this country. What about the other hundreds of country's in the world that have internal termoil and innocent people being killed in those country's? They don't have oil, so the UN isn't particularly bothered about those people to some degree. It won't be long before, Gaddaffi will send bombs to London. After all we seem to of forgotten the past miraculously. He help fund terrorist's who are now the modern-day freedom fighters. Venezuela, N Ireland, Germany etc...

This will affect us more that they (politician's) will know, for the worse

The coalition is enabling the removal of an unstable 'mad dog', whom no-one will miss - and the prospect of some nice oil and weapons deals with the successor government has, no doubt, been an inducement.

However, I can't see this predominantly Western coalition taking similar action against, say, Bahrain, in the name of preventing brutally repressive actions against its own people - wouldn't want to upset our 'mates' (e.g. Saudi) in the region, would we? - where else would we buy oil, and to who else would we sell those nice, profitable armaments?

More to the point, what the hell are we going to call the NAAFI if he gets assassinated?

On a slightly more serious note, I was very surprised to see the UN and the western world getting involved quite so quickly - I thought they would let them try and fight it out between themselves first. Think there may be more than a little truth in the oil theories.