Our troops homecoming

[Seagull Steve]

I have just got back from saluting our HEROES. I was down North street and apart from one twat with a peace is not war banner, everyone clapped and cheered. All I want to say on the matter is, well done lads and lasses, we will never forget the ones you left behind.

 

[Dave the OAP]

It's about pipelines in Afghanistan. The gas pipeline will transport natural gas from the Caspian Sea from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan and through to India.

There has also been an ongoing desire to build an oil pipeline, which again would need to go through Afghanistan.

please point me to your evidence of "There has also been an ongoing desire to build an oil pipeline, which again would need to go through Afghanistan.". I would be extremely interested to read this.

 

[dingodan]

I thought they were locating and destroying terrorist training camps? Surely it is better to be proactive than to wait for thousands of trained terrorists to storm our shores!

Just a thought like!

Fear of an external enemy has long been used to justify invasion and empire. Thats the story of history.

"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower.

 

[dingodan]

please point me to your evidence of "There has also been an ongoing desire to build an oil pipeline, which again would need to go through Afghanistan.". I would be extremely interested to read this.

Why? is a gas pipeline not enough?

"The Afghanistan Oil Pipeline was a project proposed by several oil companies to transport oil from Azerbaijan and Central Asia through Afghanistan to Pakistan or India."

The above is from Wikipedia, not hard to find but if you really wanted to you could have found it yourself. There are other sources, in particular testimony to the House of Representatives, Committee on International Relations on 12/02/1998, from John Maresca, vice president of international relations for UNOCAL.

But I know that when you are in the mindset which you and many others are in, it doesnt matter what anyone says.

I do want to say though, both sides in this debate are "pro the troops". You want to support them by not questioning their mission. We want to support them by saving their lives. But we are all "pro the troops". Nobody is "anti the troops". So please dont take offence, what I am against is putting our brothers, sisters, mums, dads, sons and daughters, in harms way when it is not neccessary.

 

[N17]

Supporting our Troops is not the same as supporting the War (or whatever the correct terminology may be).

 

[dingodan]

Supporting our Troops is not the same as supporting the War (or whatever the correct terminology may be).

I agree. In fact this is a really important point.

So ask yourself this, why are people who are against the war, also considered to be against the troops?

If you truely believe that the two are not the same, then why are those against the war not as welcome at a rally for the troops as those who support it?

Because it is you and others like you who are equating decent with treason. It is you and others like you who believe that you cannot support the troops if you do not support the war.

The truth is that being against the war is the only way to support the troops.

 

[N17]

I agree. In fact this is a really important point.

So ask yourself this, why are people who are against the war, also considered to be against the troops?

If you truely believe that the two are not the same, then why are those against the war not as welcome at a rally for the troops as those who support it?

Because it is you and others like you who are equating decent with treason. It is you and others like you who believe that you cannot support the troops if you do not support the war.The truth is that being against the war is the only way to support the troops.

Rubbish. Where did i say that?

I support the troops but not the war. Protesting against the war at the homecoming of the troops is disrespectful to them (IMHO).

Please try not to tell me what my opinions are based on a one line post on an internet forum.

Ta

 

[daveinprague]

I commend the military. I was in Royal Navy myself. The wars we have been involved with in the last 10 years are American wars. Nothing to do with Britain or the protection of Britain. If anything, Britain is less safe now. Do our troops get any medals from the Americans? Or do the cheeky bastards just complain about our lack of helicopters despite the fact they have fecking hundreds sitting in the desert in mothballs.

 

[dingodan]

Rubbish. Where did i say that?

I support the troops but not the war. Protesting against the war at the homecoming of the troops is disrespectful to them (IMHO).

Please try not to tell me what my opinions are based on a one line post on an internet forum.

Ta

I do genuinely apologise, for some reason I thought that post was from Granny Weatherwax.

But...Protesting against the war at the homecoming of the troops is disrespectful to them

Ok so supporting the troops is not the same as supporting the war, but not supporting the war is the same as not supporting the troops.

This is what I mean. You call it disrespectful, but it is this silence, this is the political correctness, which basically says you are with us or against us.

Supporting the troops is not the same as supporting the war, like you said. But supporting what the troops do (calling them heros etc) is supporting the war. And supporting the war, supporting what the troops are asked to do, is not supporting the troops.

Many soldiers of war feel shame for the things they have done and seen, so tell me, if largely they dont feel good about what they do, why do so many of you feel so proud of it?

 

[Dave the OAP]

Why? is a gas pipeline not enough?


But I know that when you are in the mindset which you and many others are in, it doesnt matter what anyone says.

You patronising twat.

When you provide an argument based on " some people say", its normally common practice to at least backup what you say with some sort of evidence as opposed to what sounds like heresay.

I was asking you to provide that evidence.

....and by your tone, you assume I am in favour of what is going on in Afghanistan, do you know that for a fact, or is it another one of your assumptions?

 

[brunswick]

Countries need an Army for obvious reasons.

costa rica = no army = no aggro.
israel = everyone goes in the army = loads of trouble.

group think sheep arena my friend.......

 

[brunswick]

[MENTION=18559]dingodan[/MENTION].......good posts amigo, but this is am english football forum, most are right wing daily mail and sun readers who watch the bbc news for what is going on in the world..

.......the conditioning is too deep.

"our boys" lol.........not mine for sure.

 

[Dave the OAP]

[MENTION=18559]dingodan[/MENTION].......good posts amigo, but this is am english football forum, most are right wing daily mail and sun readers who watch the bbc news for what is going on in the world..

.......the conditioning is too deep.

"our boys" lol.........not mine for sure.

...am I allowed to read the Independant? If I am readinga paper, which I seldom do as it all appears right wing, I tend to pick up teh Independant. ( although they are a bit alarmist over Polar Bears!)

 

[N17]

costa rica = no army = no aggro.
israel = everyone goes in the army = loads of trouble.

group think sheep arena my friend.......

One of the funniest things i have read in a long time.

Bravo.

 

[N17]

[MENTION=18559]dingodan[/MENTION].......good posts amigo, but this is am english football forum, most are right wing daily mail and sun readers who watch the bbc news for what is going on in the world..

.......the conditioning is too deep.

"our boys" lol.........not mine for sure.

Ah, the old failsafe .. 'Daily Mail readers'.....

You are comedy genius fella. I wish i had found this board years ago.

You still buying The Grauniad?

 

[daveinprague]

Im getting a bit tired of calling anybody in the military a 'hero'... it lessens the actions of REAL heroes and acts of valour. To describe an army cook or clerk a hero just because he is in-country is ridiculous. This crap has come from the Americans. Along with their war. To brainwash people into backing their crap.

 

[dingodan]

You patronising twat.

When you provide an argument based on " some people say", its normally common practice to at least backup what you say with some sort of evidence as opposed to what sounds like heresay.

I was asking you to provide that evidence.

....and by your tone, you assume I am in favour of what is going on in Afghanistan, do you know that for a fact, or is it another one of your assumptions?

I have no idea what you think, except that you did not like me claiming that our troops are dying for oil and empire. I guess you believe that they are there for something else. That is what i gathered from your tone.

I assume this is what you found patronising: But I know that when you are in the mindset which you and many others are in, it doesnt matter what anyone says.

I truely believe that you do not want to hear this. That is the impression I get from you. If im wrong I apologise. When people constantly say "prove it, prove it, prove it" it gives the impression that they dont believe, and dont want to believe, what is being said.

This is an official transcript of the testimony of which I spoke, from U.S. House of Representatives - Committee Hearings .

Full Transcript: http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0.htm

Its very long, so I will highlight some key parts which clearly demonstrate my point. Again to clarify this is testimony from John Maresca, vice president of international relations for UNOCAL.

"Second, the need for U.S. support for international and regional efforts to achieve balanced and lasting political settlements to the conflicts in the region, including Afghanistan."

"The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company."

"As with the proposed Central Asia oil pipeline, CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place."

The point being that UNOCAL expressed a desire, in comittee, in 1998, to see the U.S. government assist in bringing changes in Afghanistan which would be conducive to the company pursuing its gas and oil pipeline projects.

I take no pleasure in the fact that this is the case. But it is.

 

[Dave the OAP]

I have no idea what you think, except that you did not like me claiming that our troops are dying for oil and empire. I guess you believe that they are there for something else. That is what i gathered from your tone.

I assume this is what you found patronising: But I know that when you are in the mindset which you and many others are in, it doesnt matter what anyone says.

I truely believe that you do not want to hear this. That is the impression I get from you. If im wrong I apologise. When people constantly say "prove it, prove it, prove it" it gives the impression that they dont believe, and dont want to believe, what is being said.

This is an official transcript of the testimony of which I spoke, from U.S. House of Representatives - Committee Hearings .

Full Transcript: http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0.htm

Its very long, so I will highlight some key parts which clearly demonstrate my point. Again to clarify this is testimony from John Maresca, vice president of international relations for UNOCAL.

"Second, the need for U.S. support for international and regional efforts to achieve balanced and lasting political settlements to the conflicts in the region, including Afghanistan."

"The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company."

"As with the proposed Central Asia oil pipeline, CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place."

The point being that UNOCAL expressed a desire, in comittee, in 1998, to see the U.S. government assist in bringing changes in Afghanistan which would be conducive to the company pursuing its gas and oil pipeline projects.

I take no pleasure in the fact that this is the case. But it is.

Thankyou that was very interesting.

 

[dingodan]

Thankyou that was very interesting.

BTW Did you remember Blue Peter on here a few years ago?

Do you mean a member called Blue Peter? I joined in Jan 2011.

 

[Dave the OAP]

Do you mean a member called Blue Peter? I joined in Jan 2011.

sorry i was being facetious