I hear what you're saying paxx and I agree entirely. There are issues in terms of the financial position of nations and this is understandable. My disappointment is actually focussed more at the rest of Europe. If we are supposed to be 'one' why is it that France, Germany, Italy etc don't send some troops. In the UK we could very usefully spend £700000 x each Tomahawk on our run down health service and public transport systems!
_Martin_
True. I don't mean to belittle their support and it is welcome, just feel we in the UK usually have to act so visibly!
Let's hope they do learn! The one thing I'm keen to understand is when the rest of the world will commit to action rather than words. Considering the majority of the world is supportive of the actions I am annoyed that as usual it is the US and UK that commit forces. It is estimated that the UK have 200 special forces troops in Afghanistan, 23000 troops in the region, an aircraft carrier, 3 nuclear submarines, and we are firing Tomahawks. As such we are risking our own peopl
Elwin: hehe
Martin realised that JOKE /JOKE tags aren't visible
Hehe, we'll protect anyone who make's nice chocolate ... now what was the reason for protecting Poland
TANKERx - is that not my point? Though the US supported nations at war, they weren't at war themselves UNTIL 1941 whereas we in the UK started 2 years, previously, as did others.
Interesting, and I believe it raises fundamental issues and questions. I'm not saying I have the answers but they provoke thought. Do excuse me if I make any mistakes - I know you're sharp on historical accuracy 1) The Japanese pilots acted 'on behalf' of the government of the nation where they were based. This raises 2 issues: a) Evidence of the people responsible was clear, whereas in this case i
3 works - Wow, Wow, WOW !!! Great stuff, and the Pixstudio suite is awesome. Now has pride of place on my desktop! Good work guys. Thanks for everything you do for the community.
OK, so if I finish the test, get an error "CGIWrap Error: Script Execution Failed", and don't really understand it what's my score!!
I'll second that. It has had a lot of work put into making this the most impressive and intuitive WindowBlinds yet, and hits the mark with both. Good job guys, Martin
Sorry bout that I received an error first time so I thought it didn't work!
To be honest this is really difficult to discuss, and I almost wonder whether it should be. The truth is, that we know very little about the facts. There is a prime suspect, but there is not yet proof. I'm not saying that Bin Laden is innocent, even IF he was not responsible for this attack, there MAY be justification for a concerted effort to remove him from the planet. Reaction without clarifying which of these motives is the one being acted upon is dangerous. We are not m
Noneofurbusiness: As I understand it, China are fully in support of the international community's condemnation of this attrocity. Bit of a surprise, but a welcome one.
Feline, Agree entirely. Most people cannot relate to this sort of thing, and obviously never will be able to unless directly involved. I don't think that anyone here could honestly say they would feel the same if this tragedy was somewhere they had barely heard of involving people they cannot easily relate to. I'm not saying this is a correct attitude, just that it is true. The more the press can more the incident a 'local' issue the more people can relate, the more they can
SSL_tin, Then that is unfortunate. Reading all the comments I think you will see much call for moderation and a focused approach to justice (not retaliation ... not revenge). There are occassion extreme comments, but short term they can be excused to some extent due to anger, as long as in the longer term the approach is more rational. Comments here are made on latest information. It has not been confirmed who carried out the attacks and therefore no specific reference to pe
Amen ... proud to be standing next to you
My point exactly ... whatever the response it needs to be measured and precise.
And it is these sort of sentiments that are the most dangerous. I understand why this man and no doubt many others feel this way, and to some extend concur, but the tone is PURELY one of anger. The biggest risk is of retaliation without consideration. This article exudes an arrogance and a sense of superiority which is precisely the sort of attitude which the terrorists justify their actions upon. The time of the SuperPower is gone, it is time to realise that no nation is beyond th
This highlights the key issue which is the definition of terrorism: 1) A weed is just a plant growing where you don't want it 2) Pollution is a substance in a place where it impacts negatively on the environment ... therefore to some extent .... 3) Terrorism is an armed campaign of fear which negatively impacts on you. Not to push a point, but some Irish-Americans fund the IRA because it is a cause (i.e. doesn't impact on them), to UK citizens the IRA are terrorist
I don't thing you'll find we in the UK, and the UK news are doing this at all. I believe it is a method of highlighting how this was not purely an attack on the United States, but on the entire democratic community. The WTC is a target specifically because it is international. If the aim was to strike at the US specifically, there would have been more appropriate targets. The UK media is definitely focussing on the international tragedy, but the way to avoid to mentality of "it was
I agree with Frogboy's comments whole heartedly. My only fear is that only a few countries will bear the burden of risking their people's lives to do this. It appears (and this is based on impression rather than hard fact), that in the majority of cases (especially within Europe) it is left largely to the US and UK to provide the military might (with occassional support from Canada and other European nations).
... which is the most frightening prospect of all
SSL_tin, I think the key is the state of US awareness. Remember, they got their fingers burnt in Vietnam where they got in and couldn't not get out. You guys had the same in Afghanistan and to some degree Chechnya. The distinction between the 2 is that the US had a SPECIFIC target - a nation. The experience of other nations including both Russia, UK, Spain is one of terrorists, which the problem is with a MINORITY of individuals, which cannot be targetted 'en-masse'. There are mill