When are we going to stop interfering in the Arab world - this is madness!
| Related: | Travel, Flights & Holidays•Money Abroad•Travel Money |
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13829697
In light of our own financial worries he hell decided we go to war in another arab country - it defies belief - what happened to politicians supposedly representing the people - im sure noo supports this intervention yet again.
Let the arabs alone - they will wipe themselves out soon enough without our help anyway!
Responses (8)
Interference in Libya was certainly not for humanitarian purposes as claimed by Cameron (I now put him in the same class as Blair) but because Gaddafi was going to withdraw from the oil/dollar merry-go-round. If it was purely for humanitarian purposes we would be involved in the Yemen and Syria, both worse cases than Libya as far as humanitarian causes are concerned. Libya, for example, had a free basic national health care system.
Here comes the rub. A study by West Point academics in 2005 identified Benghazi as the hotspot of Al-Qaida recruits fighting in Iraq, the same Benghazi (a muslim stronghold) where the supposed civilian rebels (armed to the teeth) are being attacked by Gaddafi. So we are supplying terrorists with money and arms to do our political masters dastardly deeds.
It is time that Britain withdrew from all conflicts which do not directly affect Britain or its protectorates.
The Government are making very large cuts in so many areas in this Country due to lack of funds and in many cases making unnecessary suffering to the ill and infirm and families with ever reducing incomes yet we are spending all this money overseas and interfering as you say Omendata in the Arab world. Why don't they look after this Country and stop meddling. - Sabre
Well said Sabre, overseas aid is a bugbear of mine.
When will Gov realise we are not a bottomless pit of money and what little we do have start filtering it this way a little more.
The interfering will never stop because that's where the oil is. The rubbish about 'humanitarian' reasons is codswallop, it's the oil and the money and therefore the power. It's a disgrace, it's legalised robbery (sometimes not legal in fact, I could rant for hours about it but best not.
I agree Wendi,it's always been that way and I can't see it changing, deep breaths now......
as soon as they run out of the black stuff we will, or that's the message I've picked up on...
trouble with backing out of everything that does not affect us that we lose the support of the others. We support the US and they in turn support us.
Take the recent activities around the falklands for example. Argentina want it back, we won't give it back. Now war would be a very extreme result from this I admit, but if it were to happen we would need the US aircraft carriers to defend the island... if we withdraw from our current commitments in the east with the US. I think the Argentine's would put their money on the US not supporting us with the falklands?
I'll scratch your back...
I seem to recall the UK winning a war over the Falklands not to long ago without aid from the US.
Too damn right, Noddy! Although we RAF/Navy/Army bods weren't allowed to call it a 'war', officially it was a 'conflict'.
With our commitment to the east and the fact we now only have 1 aircraft carrier, which is hardly massive anyway. I'd say if it does break out again, we will need them. It was a US aircraft carrier that 'expelled' the Argentine settlers before we were able to take control of the islands in the first place.
Yes, we have a strong military force, but the cut backs being made across all area's of the budget and the over-commitment in the east means that we probably do need the yanks - as much as it hurts to say it...
But once again... a possible war over the black stuff - surprise surprise!
How many British servicemen were killed in the Falklands conflict? 255! How many Americans? Zero! But then the US won WW2 single-handedly as well, didn't they?!
Its all about OIL not humanitarian reasons.We have people on the breadline ,homeless , unable to get adequate medication yet the government pumps billions of our £s into third world countries effectively subsidising them which enables them to buy arms and feather the nests of the rich in those countries.
Spot on, Noddy, it IS all about oil!
Yip too true and front page of the metro government now admits its costing us 100's of millions after satying tens of millions sp we can rest assured it is actually going to be billions and who is going to pay for it - not the rich or sure or the bankers or politicians as usual the wee man gets screwed right up the yeehaa again.
On top of that the government advertised for 500 redundancies in the army and got 5000 responses at a conservative estimate - looks like our guys are voting with their feet - if the government dont bring em back time for our guys to stop dying for oil its shameful truly truly shameful and an insult to all those that fought and are fighting still for this so called country fit for heroes.
I feel truly sad for the families of the murdered servicemen from the uk all over the world - the politicians use them like chess pieces on their own private board it truly is bewildering how ordinary people and our armed forces are putting up with this b*******
To be honest, I think that if it wasn't for the so called 'special relationship' with America, I don't think we would be in any of these places at all. It just ilustrates how the world is at war with itself in so many different ways and global anger and revenge is what we have ended up with, almost actively invited it.
Common sense, logic and decency should tell us, without fail, that building a safe, enjoyable and sharing world is the only way forward. But that is sadly missing. How on earth do we all cross these important bridges where warmongering takes second place?
I think Libya is different. The US had to be coerced into participating. This was Cameron supporting the French because Libya was altering its oil dealing position which was not good for France.
As we get older, we realise the futility of war. I can accept that our troops may have a role as peacekeepers but why are we actively engaging in combat? For what purpose? I wish someone would explain instead of mealy mouthed platitudes such as humanitarian reasons.
So true, Sealate, so true. And agreed, war is in essence so very futile. But warmongering, in whatever form, has been part of man's behaviour since he inherited this planet. Fighting is part of man's survival mechanism. And someone, somewhere is always chasing that need to win.
I hope that one day the aliens rain down from the skies and teach us a different tack. Either that or a supreme being shows himself or International Rescue get involved from the telly ( well they were a bunch of puppets as well, so no change there ).
Until then we will just have to accept government spin and their totally inane need to use the power that they have. Will man ever learn that the sanctity of every human life rises above the need to rule supreme?
Well, Snoops, if your parents and grandparents had taken that attitude in 1939, you'd have grown up speaking German and subject to a Nazi Government. Your parents' generation were fighting for peace and the sanctity of human life.
Well here we go again folks. Syria is definitely next on the hitlist for regime change although it getting very hard for US, UK and France to get any UN Security Council approval because Russia and China wont let them have their way this time.
Posts within the money.co.uk community represent the views, experiences and opinions of members only. They should not be taken as financial advice and should not be followed without further research.
Get fast answers to your money questions, Expert insight, top tips & much more...
