What would you call the Wolverines in Red Dawn?
The EU citizens will listen to what they are told......Hitler anyone?CameronPoe wrote:
But that has nothing to do with economic matters.lowing wrote:
From what I gather reading on these forums, the average EU citizen does not hold the US in any better a light than the EU leaders do. Am I wrong?
ummmmmm,..................................... actors????Pubic wrote:
What would you call the Wolverines in Red Dawn?
Amen to that buddy, that must be the most insightful post in this whole thred[F7F7]KiNG_KaDaFFHi wrote:
Just because many non-christian nations don´t have coca-cola,McDonalds,KFC,pizza hut and the rest of all "privilliges" from the west they are not retarded.
Many of theese nations has been the place for many wars and conflicts (crusades,forming of new states,blockades,dirty politics and soo on ) that they did not choose themselves, more "civilized" nations has brought them there....many has been colonies and moore or less robbed blank by more "civilized" nations....no wonder some of them have some cathing up to do in some places.
Many "civilized" nations doesn´t have any interest in the evolution of theese less happy nations since they would loose from it themselves.
Yeah - the British are right behind Blair every step of the way. lollowing wrote:
The EU citizens will listen to what they are told......Hitler anyone?CameronPoe wrote:
But that has nothing to do with economic matters.lowing wrote:
From what I gather reading on these forums, the average EU citizen does not hold the US in any better a light than the EU leaders do. Am I wrong?
GB has always been in defience of main land Europe. No surprise there. GB is also the only country in the EU that has not been conquered by, surrendered to, or appeased a hostile force.CameronPoe wrote:
Yeah - the British are right behind Blair every step of the way. lollowing wrote:
The EU citizens will listen to what they are told......Hitler anyone?CameronPoe wrote:
But that has nothing to do with economic matters.
So really, I don't count GB as part of the EU, not yet. Unless GB gave up the pound for the Euro already. I dunno did they??
Either way, I hold GB with the utmost respect regardless of how they feel about the US now.
Last edited by lowing (2007-01-07 06:53:15)
No, they still have the pound, just as Sweden and a couple of other nations retained their currencies. But it's funny that the population of England openly despise Blair. Not exactly a model of democratic perfection.lowing wrote:
GB has always been in defience of main land Europe. No surprise there. GB is also the only country in the EU that has not been conquered by, surrendered to, or appeased a hostile force.CameronPoe wrote:
Yeah - the British are right behind Blair every step of the way. lollowing wrote:
The EU citizens will listen to what they are told......Hitler anyone?
So really, I don't count GB as part of the EU, not yet. Unless GB gave up the pound for the Euro already. I dunno did they??
After the London bombings........Why? Why do they hate him so much? With the GB's defiant attitude toward outside forces I would think they would embrace this fight.CameronPoe wrote:
No, they still have the pound, just as Sweden and a couple of other nations retained their currencies. But it's funny that the population of England openly despise Blair. Not exactly a model of democratic perfection.lowing wrote:
GB has always been in defiance of main land Europe. No surprise there. GB is also the only country in the EU that has not been conquered by, surrendered to, or appeased a hostile force.CameronPoe wrote:
Yeah - the British are right behind Blair every step of the way. lol
So really, I don't count GB as part of the EU, not yet. Unless GB gave up the pound for the Euro already. I dunno did they??
Because they blame him for inducing the bombing. Prior to Britain's involvement in Iraq there had never been an Islamist attack on the UK. The attack was carried out by people born and bred in Britain, UK citizens, who stated that their attack was a direct response to the UK involvement in Iraq - not some desire for a gigantic caliphate. Basically they view Blair's decision to side with USA rather than Europe as painting a giant crosshair on England and shouting 'Come bomb us, Islamists'.lowing wrote:
After the London bombings........Why? Why do they hate him so much? With the GB's defiant attitude toward outside forces I would think they would embrace this fight.CameronPoe wrote:
No, they still have the pound, just as Sweden and a couple of other nations retained their currencies. But it's funny that the population of England openly despise Blair. Not exactly a model of democratic perfection.lowing wrote:
GB has always been in defiance of main land Europe. No surprise there. GB is also the only country in the EU that has not been conquered by, surrendered to, or appeased a hostile force.
So really, I don't count GB as part of the EU, not yet. Unless GB gave up the pound for the Euro already. I dunno did they??
great, so they blame blair for the bombings and NOT the terrorists..........oh well, might as well blame water for getting wet.CameronPoe wrote:
Because they blame him for inducing the bombing. Prior to Britain's involvement in Iraq there had never been an Islamist attack on the UK. The attack was carried out by people born and bred in Britain, UK citizens, who stated that their attack was a direct response to the UK involvement in Iraq - not some desire for a gigantic caliphate. Basically they view Blair's decision to side with USA rather than Europe as painting a giant crosshair on England and shouting 'Come bomb us, Islamists'.lowing wrote:
After the London bombings........Why? Why do they hate him so much? With the GB's defiant attitude toward outside forces I would think they would embrace this fight.CameronPoe wrote:
No, they still have the pound, just as Sweden and a couple of other nations retained their currencies. But it's funny that the population of England openly despise Blair. Not exactly a model of democratic perfection.
Well the fact of the matter was that Blair went against the express will of the people to go to war against Iraq. The Brits were OK about Afghanistan but they didn't agree with Iraq at all, with the largest open air demonstrations on record in London prior to the war. They saw the Iraq war as unjust. So the 7/7 attacks were, if you like, directly attributable to Blair in their eyes.lowing wrote:
great, so they blame blair for the bombings and NOT the terrorists..........oh well, might as well blame water for getting wet.CameronPoe wrote:
Because they blame him for inducing the bombing. Prior to Britain's involvement in Iraq there had never been an Islamist attack on the UK. The attack was carried out by people born and bred in Britain, UK citizens, who stated that their attack was a direct response to the UK involvement in Iraq - not some desire for a gigantic caliphate. Basically they view Blair's decision to side with USA rather than Europe as painting a giant crosshair on England and shouting 'Come bomb us, Islamists'.lowing wrote:
After the London bombings........Why? Why do they hate him so much? With the GB's defiant attitude toward outside forces I would think they would embrace this fight.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-07 07:20:27)
I understand that, but really, we gotta start putting the blame where it really goes, on those that commit these acts. By blaming Blair and not the terrorists they are in essence "understanding" and "rationalizing" these acts. There must be an attitude of complete and utter condemnation of these acts as deplorable regardless of motive, if we are to gain any headway in this struggle. How great it must feel to be a terrorist that can blow up innocent people and have everyone get mad at, and blame somebody else for it.CameronPoe wrote:
Well the fact of the matter was that Blair went against the express will of the people to go to war against Iraq. The Brits were OK about Afghanistan but they didn't agree with Iraq at all, with the largest open air demonstrations on record in London prior to the war. They saw the Iraq war as unjust. So the 7/7 attacks were, if you like, directly attributable to Blair in their eyes.lowing wrote:
great, so they blame Blair for the bombings and NOT the terrorists..........oh well, might as well blame water for getting wet.CameronPoe wrote:
Because they blame him for inducing the bombing. Prior to Britain's involvement in Iraq there had never been an Islamist attack on the UK. The attack was carried out by people born and bred in Britain, UK citizens, who stated that their attack was a direct response to the UK involvement in Iraq - not some desire for a gigantic caliphate. Basically they view Blair's decision to side with USA rather than Europe as painting a giant crosshair on England and shouting 'Come bomb us, Islamists'.
Of course the people of Britain found the act itself and the perpetrators of it deplorable but the fact of the matter is, 7/7 or not, Britons always viewed the Iraq war as illegitimate and that Tony Blair, their elected leader, was going against their express wishes. 7/7 didn't change their opinion on Iraq that much.lowing wrote:
I understand that, but really, we gotta start putting the blame where it really goes, on those that commit these acts. By blaming Blair and not the terrorists they are in essence "understanding" and "rationalizing" these acts. There must be an attitude of complete and utter condemnation of these acts as deplorable regardless of motive, if we are to gain any headway in this struggle. How great it must feel to be a terrorist that can blow up innocent people and have everyone get mad at, and blame somebody else for it.CameronPoe wrote:
Well the fact of the matter was that Blair went against the express will of the people to go to war against Iraq. The Brits were OK about Afghanistan but they didn't agree with Iraq at all, with the largest open air demonstrations on record in London prior to the war. They saw the Iraq war as unjust. So the 7/7 attacks were, if you like, directly attributable to Blair in their eyes.lowing wrote:
great, so they blame Blair for the bombings and NOT the terrorists..........oh well, might as well blame water for getting wet.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-07 07:53:30)
Terrorists, Infidels, Insurgents... hmmm i wonder which forum member would fit where ??
im an Infidel ! sorry Lucky im not a Terrorist !!... I would be Insurgent in my country if it where under siege
or invaded by a foreign country ... LEAVE US IN PEACE ... NOT PIECES
Nederweeduh weeduh weed JAJA Nederweed Nederweeduhweeduhweeduhweeduhweed
SMOKE MORE POT !! for more 100% Debate and Serious Talk
im an Infidel ! sorry Lucky im not a Terrorist !!... I would be Insurgent in my country if it where under siege
or invaded by a foreign country ... LEAVE US IN PEACE ... NOT PIECES
Nederweeduh weeduh weed JAJA Nederweed Nederweeduhweeduhweeduhweeduhweed
SMOKE MORE POT !! for more 100% Debate and Serious Talk
Last edited by Tjasso (2007-01-07 08:01:42)