"no war" sign

[hotrod4]

I take it by now every1 has seen or heard of this "sign" (i use the term lightly)on the hill at the hospital.
Obviously done by some 1 who doesn't have a clue about the "real"world.

I think this is absolutely daft as war is inevitable and necessary in the case of Iraq.
Is this not an act of "graffiti" or as it is made with litter "littering" ???????
If i was to put a slogan on the hill proclaiming war on Iraq i would be classed as warmongering or looked down on as a vandal which would be perfectly right.

Dont the people that did this realiise that the reason they have the freedom to do theses sort of things is through wars?????
The people of Iraq cant because they are governed by a vicous dictator with no regard to human life.
War is necessary i dont have to like it but it has to happen if we all want to live in a free society.

[FairyFi]

Anyone got any idea who created that sign anyways?

Not that im for war in any way shape or form, but things like that do tend to trivialise it slightly...

[Angela]

I wonder if someone from Caithness.org could go and take a picture of this sign for all us down south to have a look at?????

I wonder who it was?

Angela

[Anonymous]

The reason people have had to go to war in the past to gain freedon is because previously no one was bright enough to come up with a better solution. And this sign makes you talk of littering or graffiti. WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON??????

This possible war is about OIL not freedom, not liberty, not human rights, not anything else but OIL. Tony Bush is going to send men to their deaths to try and save his political career. Not only send men to their deaths but send them to cause the death of others for OIL.

NONE OF THIS IS ABOUT TERRORISM OR FREEDOM.

ITS ABOUT OIL

I think the sign shows exactly what people think.

War is never inevitable. You just watch too much television and actually believe all the rubbish their telling you.

Of course Tony didnt actually say the word TANKS when he told the army to go and make people feel like they are in a state of war. How long do think it will be before he orders the "secret" army to blow something and pretent it was terrorists? Tanks at the airport? Big guns? They're all mental.

Lets face it, they've all been proven liars in recent days. If you believe anything they say from now on then you are just as bad as they are. Adolf Blair needs us to go to war or he's finished and he knows it. How many men would you send to their deaths to save your political career? How many people would you murder to get cheaper oil?

[Anonymous]

Agree with you on the reason for the war Naill - but disagree that Blair is doing it to "save" his political career, it looks like one of the worst political decisions of all time!

Sadam is a terrible dictator, however the people of Iraq should not have to suffer (any more) for this.

I have to laugh when I hear "them" say they are winning the war against terror when we have tanks at Heathrow and Army helicoptors circling over London - who is winning.

[Lynz39]

I cant believe there is a potential war brewing and all people are worried about is graffiting or littering the hill at the hospital!
I dont agree with this war at all. Mr Blair is pretending there is a high risk of a terrorist attack but really I think he is making the most of it to try to win peoples support for going to war. It is all very scary.

[Anonymous]

Yip, NO WAR PLEASE,
Something needs to be done with the likes of Saddam or MADD AS but what about Ireland, no oil so no sollution! There are ways besides war.

[2little2late]

I couldn't agree more with Niall. As election day nears Smug Blair is worried about his political career. After all, what's happened to all his promises? The NHS, education, public transport etc., etc. Sadly, I voted for this political party as I always have done, but I think Blair is a terrible leader.[Lets face it, he's scared of Gordon Brown. Why do you think he is still the chancellor of the exchequer? If Gordon Brown has any sense he will contest Blair for prime minister.] Blair is nothing but smug. All these so called security threats at the airports is nothing but scare mongering. We only have Blairs' word for it.
You've only to look at America now. They are putting the frighteners up their own people by telling them to buy respirators and to stock up on necessities. If that's not scare mongering then I don't know what is. It's about time this government put it's own people first. If America wants to go to war let them. Until the UN have 100% proof that Saddam isn't complying then leave well alone. If they want rid of Saddam why not put elite forces into Iraq and put him under house arrest. I'm sure the people of Iraq would rather have that option than to have to fight. Better still, tell him we are going to send Blair to run his country. He'll soon give himself up.

[Partan]

Tony Bush is going to send men to their deaths to try and save his political career. Not only send men to their deaths but send them to cause the death of others for OIL.

Of course Tony didnt actually say the word TANKS when he told the army to go and make people feel like they are in a state of war. How long do think it will be before he orders the "secret" army to blow something and pretent it was terrorists? Tanks at the airport? Big guns? wtf? They're all mental.

............

Adolf Blair needs us to go to war or he's finished and he knows it. How many men would you send to their deaths to save your political career? How many people would you murder to get cheaper oil?

This posting brings to mind the question:

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who moderates the moderator?)

Another appropriate quotation:

All power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

You are in a position of power, Niall, use it responsibly.

Partan

[Anonymous]

point taken

[brandy]

here is a quote for you .. war is hell
when has there ever been any war since time immaterial that has been good?
i dont care what it is over or who has the right and might
it dosent matter if it is with the best intentions.. the road to hell is paved with good intetions
war is nothing but a powr game and if we arnt careful a whole lot more is going to be at stake than a war in iraq...
N. Korea is on the brink of war and what happens when the pot is tippedd so to speak?
once somethinglike this starts you cant just stop it...
i think both bush and lair are idiots.. they go on and on aout terrorism but yet in laden is on the back buner and the saddam is now the main focus.. we think about iraq and the fighting there but think aout this.. if this goes to full scale war and not just in iraq ... its going to hit us.. its not just going to be something on tv... that we can safley watch from our living rooms and oohh and ahh about but reality.. there is not many that know the horror of war ... i dont and i dont want to either..
we see wars all the time on the telly but what is it going to be like when its you running for your life.. hiding in fear... not knowing if you and your family are going to be alive at the end of the day?
because i can tell you we are not ammune .. whats to stop us being attacked?
as most of you know im american and i am very worried for my family.. my mother is worried to death.. she wants to know how in the world you can prepare.. how do you seal dors and windows to protect you ?
well you cant
all you can do is pray and hope that it wont be you and yours that are under teh bombs and guns.. its ok to watch it on tv because it isnt real.. even when sept 11 th happened it wasnt REAL because it didnt happen to you ... go talk to someone that has lived thru a was and see what they say!
i can gurantee you they would rather do anything than experiance that again...
i know ill make people mad ith this post but its the truth.. war is never the answer..
and i know that a lot will say that im being ridiculous and that it will not come to the point that im talking about but you dont know that...
just think... if what they are telling us on the news now.. what they are not telling us...
just a few things to think about...

[Anonymous]

Brandy,

things are really serious, but do yourself a big favour, stop watching the news. Instead, start looking for your news information from the sources that the news teams "quote", most of this is available online. It sounds like the US TV news is trying to do to you what the UK news is trying to do to us. Scare us. Both the US and the UK governments are telling us about how close the threat really is to our own shores. Sending armed police and army units to guard the airport. Just what are the tanks going to do at heathrow airport? Look boys there's a terrorist, load up the tanks and blow him away. dont think so. Its to try and make people believe that we have a state of war on our own doorstep. They are trying to make you believe that if you say anything against the war then you are being anti-patriotic and will damage their war effort. Somehow I dont think Saddam will be doing any different, he certainly wont be telling his subjects that we dont want to go to war with his country over his oil. He'll be telling them how close we are to attacking his country and how they must step up their efforts to protect themselves.

See the news about the ordinary Iraq man in the street buying up all the guns now that they've been allowed to do so? - which side produced that propaganda?

Did you ask your leaders to go to war over this (or any) matter?

Neither did we, neither did the people of Iraq.

We in Scotland have a chance soon to make our feelings known in a way that cannot be ignored by Adolf Blair, we'll hit him with the ballot box, him and his whole party (who have not thrown him out yet).

I can only hope that the some of the ordinary people of Iraq have seen what is all over the internet right now showing just what we all think about this war. (unless they visit the gung-ho CNN web site, which seems to have taken a leaf from the John Wayne book of diplomacy - SHOWDOWN: IRAQ - come off it!!!) Mabee they'll see from this that we're just as opposed to this war as they probably are and for a short time we also are powerless to do anything about it.

All we can hope for is that Blair or Bush take the plugs out of their ears sometime soon and listen to what the people who put them in their place want them to do.

Blair has been saying in the last few days that to go to parliament to ask permission to go to war would lose them the element of surprise. I dont suppose Hitler asked if it was ok to go to war with the rest of the world and they called HIM a dictator...

[Anonymous]

I have been reading the messages and I would like to point out a few things.
The main question is…
Has Iraq got weapons of mass destruction?
Are they capable of making weapons of mass destruction?
Is Iraq harbouring terrorists?
Is Iraq a threat to peace in the Middle East? (By that, WE really mean, is could the price of OIL go up?)
Those are the main questions that should be asked. The first two questions, only the intelligence agencies can answer. The last two is a high probability, but not definite.
Then we look at how we got where we are now. We can go back and look at the last 100 years and see how the old Ottoman Empire was split up, but that will not help us. We can go back and look at the last decade, which would be easier. During the Iraqi & Iranian War, who supplied Iraq with weapons? France, Britain etc all did. Why? Iran had kicked the US out and accused all of the Western World of being “Satins Children” and tried to start a Holy War against the west. Iraq was seen as the good guys, so the West armed them. But then it turned nasty; Iraq used chemical warfare on the Iranians, or to be more pacific, the Kurds. Was this an act of war or terrorism?
Then in the 1980’s Iraq tried to make a nuclear weapon, but the Israelis bombed their nuclear plant, which put their nuclear capability back (but did not stop them). Who supplied them with the Nuclear Power Plant? France did. If they had a nuclear weapon would they have used it? The Israelis believed that they would!
We can now jump a few years and some politics and go straight to the Gulf War of 1992. Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1991. Why did they do this? For Oil! Why? To buy more power and or weapons.
It took the UN seven months to agree to let the Coalition attack Iraq, with the aim of kicking Iraq out of Kuwait. This was done with very little casualties on the Coalition side. In fact when we look at it, there was very little casualties to the civilian population of Iraq. The intelligence believes that more civilians were killed or died after the war, than during it. Now why is this? It was where Saddam decided to reap his revenge on the Kurds and people he believed did not do enough during the war, or people who he deemed were a threat to his leadership etc. Oh, also a lot of families were included in this, women and children.
Now we can look at what Iraq did to Kuwait. They tortured people left, right and centre. Executed people before evacuating the country. I will not bother with the fact that he pillaged the country first. Then decided to light the oilfields.
When the Iraqi soldier surrendered, did he support Saddam? No. Of the top of my head 90% hated him. So why do they support him now? It could be the fact that if a person does not, he or she disappears with their families. It sounds like the 1930’s & 40’s in Nazi Germany doesn’t it? It could be that they believe we are evil and the children of Satan. This depends on what they are being told. But I guarantee you one thing; WE are getting more information than they are!

So is Saddam a nice guy? Does he treat his people fairly? But the main question! Would he use a weapon of mass destruction against the West (if he has one or if he has the capability of making one)?

Now we look at what happened in Yugoslavia. Tito dies and leaves a vacuum, and then basically overnight, everyone is killing each other. This is called GENOCIDE!!!! This was what the UN was set up to prevent. It was intended to stop the Big Boys from invading smaller countries, as in the case of Iraq and Kuwait. So it did its job in 1992. It was also set up to stop GENOCIDE. This was to prevent what happened to the Jews, Gypsies etc in the 1930’s and 40’s. So why did it take SEVEN years for the UN to allow NATO to go in and “try” and stop the conflict? The reason was there was no OIL! Only men, women and children getting massacred.

So the next question is the UN any good? Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, Ethiopia etc all proves that the UN is a waste of time unless it is a rich country. If it is poor, thousands of lives can be killed (murdered) whilst they try and bring the “nutter” in charge around with embargos. Has anyone out there got any evidence that the UN embargos work? With the exception of France and the UK during the Suez crisis, as this does not count, as we are supposed to be a civilised country. I can’t find any.

So, who stopped the Coalition from going to Baghdad in 1992? It was the UN. Every country involved in the Gulf War was willing to sort out the Iraqi Government once and for all. But the UN stated that the coalition could not attack Baghdad as it had liberated Kuwait.

If (and history is a big IF) the coalition had been allowed to evict Saddam’s government in 1992, would we still be talking of attacking Iraq? I doubt it.

I seem to remember a day that shocked the western World, it was September the 11th. Most people can remember where they were on that day when they heard about the twin towers. WE, the US and the UK declared WAR on terrorism. It was not on Afghanistan, it was not the Russians etc. IT was war on Terrorism. I seem to remember Bush stating that this WAR would probably take years to fight. I also seem to remember most of the tabloid agreeing with this. But then again Britain has been at WAR with terrorism since 1969, in Northern Ireland and on the Mainland.

What has changed? Is it that the UN is softer? No, they have always been eager to try diplomacy, to the extent that it takes seven years of watching innocent people getting murdered. So what has changed? Is it that Iraq is a nicer country more “civilized”? Is it that Iraq is holding fair elections? Like the last one, where you have two boxes to tick, yes or no for Saddam. Oh and also you have to give you thumb print on the card!!! I wonder what happened to anyone who ticked the wrong box, once the Secret Police traced the person? I would the bet that they and their family have moved on and disappeared into the night.

Let's be realistic! What has changed since Sept 11th? Have we forgotten what has happened? Have we forgotten what could happen? We only have to look at Israel and watch the suicide bombers to see what can happen.

Is it that Blair is on a “Power” trip? Possibly, it could be he wants to do a Maggie Thatcher and the Falklands. But would it be any different if it was the Tories????

Niall states, “This possible war is about OIL not freedom, not liberty, not human rights, not anything else but OIL.” I think in all of the above there is a something about freedom, liberty and human rights. But I might be wrong! But it is sad to say, but true, he is right, it is about OIL. If it were a poor country, with no threat to the price of oil, then we would be backing the UN for at least seven years. But it is about OIL, with freedom, liberty and human rights to back it up.

I don’t like following the tabloids, as they “all” are biased, and all manipulate the “truth”, whatever that is! It is also like when NATO was threatening to go into the former Yugoslavia, with or without France’s and the Russian’s ok. Were NATO justified in what they did? I think they were and so did most of the military that I spoke to.
So now France, Germany & Russia are against a War with Iraq. I wonder why? Is it that they can see an arms sale in the future? It could be that France; Germany & Russia are not affected by Sept 11th.
I wonder what would have happened if Sept 11th had happened in Moscow or Paris? Probably the Mushroom of a nuclear blast would have disappeared by now and Baghdad (and any other “suspected” countries cities) would still be picking up the pieces. Oh, but not the French! Oh, no? Remember “Rainbow Warrior”, Tunisia etc. Then the Russians, when one of their satellite counties wanted independence. What do they do? They send in tanks, helicopters, troops etc. Then they flattened the city, men, women and children. So they are two countries with which to listen to, as they are “civilised”! Don’t get me wrong, WE are not innocent, but at least Scotland was allowed a vote on independence (whether fair or not). Whatever, I just wonder where their concerns are in the right place.

One of the problems is, that the military are gearing up for a war. A war that Saddam has had 11 years to prepare for. Will he make the same mistakes? Then if we do go in and save the day and Iraq gets their “freedom”, what happens when a puppet government fills the vacuum? Will it end up like Yugoslavia, one section seeking revenge on the other?

The other thing to remember, SADDAM HAS SWORN REVENGE ON THE US AND THE UK! It is too late to turn back the clock, and the other point, when he did this the Tories were in power! In a country that a persons word is held high and where losing face is a disgrace. I would take this very seriously.

I believe that the US and the UK should not fight another war on it’s own. I believe that the UN should be backing the sorting out of Iraq once and for all (including Somalia etc). If for no other reason, than freedom, liberty and human rights, never mind the OIL. The UN has had 11 years to sort this out and has done nothing to rectify it, even though that is what they are “supposed” to be there for.

If a War starts in Iraq, then the fundamental blame lies with the UN, as they had the opportunity to sort Iraq out in 1992, but did noting. Thus allowing other leaders the possibility to use the window of opportunity to further their own goals, whether it be the US, UK, France, Germany or Russia. They are all using it for political gains.

There is a saying “ a soldier is a person who fights for those who cannot fight for themselves” This is an honourable way for looking at the British Military. It is up to the Government to make sure that the war in which they fight is a honourable cause!

Which ever way we look at it. The world changed with Sept 11th. The question is are we on the right path or not?

[Anonymous]

We've been lied to by all sides.

I think if everyone had said "we're going to war to rid the world of Saddam" then people might have a differnt attitude.

I dont think anyone is against the idea that he is an evil man that should have been removed from power a long time ago.

I also think that people are afraid that these global networks of political control, NATO, UN, EU etc are going to break down very badly. These controls were surely being developed (however badly or slowly) to prevent just the type of action that the american administration wants to take here.

A point made about myself in another post fits neatly here also

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who moderates the moderator?)

If the American Administration (and the UK for that matter) can go against the will of their people and the will of all the other countries with which they have formed these "strong" alliances, who is to stop them? If most of the western world thinks differently to these administrations then how do we prevent them from becoming dictatorships like the one in Iraq?

Our own government has mobilised the Army within its own shores, with its tanks and big guns well on display. Who is this really to keep under control? Terrorists landing at heathrow? The masses who (in some cases) are now afraid to leave their homes because of this oppressing presence in their town? I dont really know, but what is observable fact is that both the UK and the US governments want to make their people afraid of an unknown and unseen enemy.

Thankfully we've not been subjected to the same nonsense as the US citizens have regarding building airtight rooms with plastic sheeting and duct tape, but we did go through this before with all the silly government booklets like "protect and survive". Some are able to see these things for what they really are, like Helen, and others are terrified, like brandy's mother. Really, we all should be terrified, we all should be able to believe the words of our leaders, after thats why we voted for them, no?

Bush at this time still holds all the right cards, he can still stand down his troops and tell everyone he's doing the diplomatic thing, but as it was put to me, this would make tony look like an even bigger monkey.

I'm afraid of this whole situation getting out of control, far beyond the borders of Iraq. If our adminstrations are allowed to go to war without the permission of the people and the alliances we have strived to hard to create and improve, then what happens next? Do we all get kicked out of NATO, the UN and the EU? Who does that put us at odds with then? Who are our friends? The UK and the US against the rest of the world? I dont think that would work. It might be fine for the US to decide it wants to seperate itself from the rest of the world and be responsible for its own (something which seems to be underlying in US foriegn poilicy) but we are on the doorstep of our friends in the EU, should we be turning our back on all the work that has gone into building it?

The internet has brought many people from many different countries/cultures together, its allowed the sharing of ideas, ideals and just basic information. I think it has been a great shock to many to find out what the other peoples of the world really think about matters of importance (like this one), to find out that what they hear directly from the horses mouth does not correspond to what they are told by their governments. We've been told over here that the "americans" want to go to war with Iraq, but as we have discovered, by "americans" they mean the US government, and we have found out for ourselves that this is not necessarily the desire the people of the US. I'm sure that Saddam is telling his people that all westerners hate them, but given the chance they would find that we dont. (we dont even know them!!!)

Weapons of mass destruction, when are the inspectors arriving in the UK to see what we have hidden away? or the US for that matter. We advertise the fact that we have the biggest stockpiles of these weapons and yet no one is threatening war with us.

Many nations around the world are more afraid of the capabilties of our nations than they ever will be of Iraq. None of us should have such weapons, not just Iraq.

The question of blame has arisen, well to that I say, who cares?

What does it now matter who gave what to who and why?

The problem that is now upon us is what do we do about it? how do we progress our species beyond these petty disputes over land and resources? Surely these things belong to all of us and none of us at the same time. We could have given up the major uses of oil a long time ago were it not for the western governments allowing the large corporates to shelve any plan that might topple their financial sand castle. Bush announced that he would be giving more support to hydrogen fuel cells, and many will think that this is a new idea, but alternatives to oil have been around for donkeys years. Oil companies and other major manufacturers (the car industry) have bought and salted these things away for the day when the oil finally does run out, so that they will still have control over our lives. These people are holding us back while they line their pockets with the money of those who do not have enough power/money to change things. We need more things to happen like the genome project which was released onto the internet as soon as it was completed to prevent anyone from taking control over it. Financially, I'm sure this was disaterous to some corporate strategies involving this project, but tough, we have it now and its not for sale, its free.

I know that the solutions to all our problems will be long and difficult but we have to start somewhere and reigning in our governments to do as WE instruct them to do and not what they tell us they've done has to be a good place to start. If we are to have nations built on moral standards that we all agree on then we must ensure that we rid ourselves of the morally corrupt leadership we've allowed to slime their way into controlling our lives. In this modern age, do we really need representatives? We are all here connected to a system that allows us to represent ourselves, to put our own views forward, we all make differnt choices and we all agree that this is a good thing. We agree that magority should rule, but only when it does no harm to the minority and we all have the capacity to change the views of the majority by empathising with the plight of the minority. I hope in this situation, the leaders of the world will see sense and listen to the voices of their people, after all isnt THAT what we fought so many wars in our history to preserve?

[Gizmo]

Mmmm! that "No War" sign was kinda lame, couldnt the two girls who were responsible for it just have stripped naked and walked around with a couple of banners instead

Seriously though, Saddam Insane is a threat to our future, but so is that idiot bush, he is just spoiling for a fight, where's Ronnie Raygun when you need him

I cant be bothered with all this conspiracy theory nonsense about oil, Iraq needs to be dealt with just like Afghanistan was dealt with, and look how better off the Afghan's are now and it was the same people spouting off against an attack on them, i just wish it wasnt a complete divot like George Bush that was dealing with it.

I mean, would you trust your future to a man who said..."the trouble with the French is that they have no word for entrepreneur".....oh dear! i think were in trouble

Giz

[Anonymous]

I think Niall, you are missing the point about the UN. The UN was set up after WWII to stop what the Nazi’s & Japan did to other countries. It was designed to protect small countries from the BIG countries. The idea was that it would have the biggest military force on hand to deal with any aggressor. Rather than with France, UK and Poland taking one side and Germany, Austria and Italy taking the other. Two world wars proved that alliances did not work. All it did was start an arms race, which led to war.
When North Korea invaded South Korea, it was the UN that decided to take military action. It was not an American, Anglo war, it was a UN war. It showed what could be brought together if needed.
When France and the UK invaded the Suez in the 50’s. It was seen as the BIG boy attacking the little boy, i.e. bullies. The UN threatened military and economic actions unless France and the UK pulled out, which they did.
But when we look at the 1970’s, 80’s, 90’s and now the 21st century, the worth of the UN in now useless as they all seem to have agendas. It seems that it now wants to sit back and talk, whilst innocent people are murdered. That was not what it was set up for; it was set up to prevent this. The proof of the last three decades proves that it is not working.
Saddam is another Hitler, ruling over a country, and to an extent surrounding countries, with the threat of death and destruction. His attack on Israel during the Gulf War proves this. As Israel had nothing to do with the war, it was a pawn in his big plan. He really thinks that he can do what he wants. If I had to chose between Saddam or Blair or even Bush (who is trying to finish of the job that his dad started), I would chose the latter two and be thankful for it. It is the UN’s responsibility for the last 11 years to ensure that Iraq was treating it’s own people humanly and to ensure that it was not a threat to Middle East stability. It has failed over the last 11 years. Anyone who thinks Saddam will just sit back and not bother rearming is a fool.
NATO was set up to counter any attack by the USSR. That was it’s sole job. Now that its job is over and some of the former USSR countries and now joining NATO. The question is why? Why do we need NATO? It is because we do not trust the UN. Think about it the Cold War is over, NATO can pack up and go home. The UN can ensure that peace lasts in Europe, or can it?
EU, now that is a joke, as each country (including the UK) is jockeying for pole position. I might be bias but the French seem to stab the UK in the back ever 5 minutes. Also they change sides at a drop of a hat, or whenever the wind changes. That can pack up and go home as far as I am concerned.
When we look at NATO, UN and the EU, other than NATO, the rest seems to be in total disarray. I agree the UN was set up to stop the US and UK doing what they are planning to do. But before that, the UN was set up to prevent Saddam doing what he did and is still doing. I don’t remember the troops fighting in the Gulf wearing the UN badge!
In the past I don’t seem to remember ANY government asking the people, or having a vote, as to whether we go to war or not! It is up to the “elected” Government as to when we go to war. Napoleonic War, Crimean War, Indian Mutiny, Sudan, Boer War, WWI, WWII, Borneo, Malaya, Korea (UN), Falklands, Gulf etc. Not one of those conflicts, were Joe Public asked about whether we should go to war or not. Other than by the papers. Why should this one be any different? Every war we have had, there has always been protesters against war, and quite rightly, it is called freedom of speech, or just freedom. Something that other countries like Iraq does not have.

You ask who moderates the moderator? Well the UN seems to fit the bill in this case. It is doing a wonderful job eh! I don’t see the US being too scared about it! So my point exactly, the UN is useless. Because of its lack of commitment, it has allowed things to escalate to this disaster.

Imagine if NATO told the US, “if you attack Iraq, we will attack you” or “if you attack Iraq, we will blockade the UK”. Or something along those lines. What do you think the US’s response would be? It would have to sit back and look at the Big picture! As on paper NATO (excluding the US and UK) is as strong as the US and UK. The UN has lost it military threat, it now is just a voice, which it seems the US and UK is ignoring.

Your reference to the Government mobilising the Tanks at Heathrow. If there was or is a threat of terrorism. What would you prefer the Terrorist to see, a London Bobby with his truncheon, or an strong show of force, with “Light” tanks and armed soldiers? If a threat of terrorism came to the far reaches of Caithness, I would be screaming for the Army and not the village Bobby with his CS Gas, Truncheon and Handcuffs.
In fact it is standard policy to use the Army if there is a threat of terrorism. It has been going on since 1969, in Ireland and the Mainland! By all parties in power! The Governments, since 1969, have been making the public afraid of the unseen terrorist and using the Armed Forces. In fact when the Armed Forces are used in anti-drug operations (mainly the RN), the public seems quite happy. But I don’t remember all this panic about becoming a dictatorship! I remember the miner’s strike and Maggie’s Police State, but she was ditched when she got carried away with herself! The same can happen to Blair!

It seems that we now want to know all, including State Secrets. If we don’t get all the information, then there is something wrong. The question is this, is there a real threat to our National Security or not?

I read a CIA report. That stated that the worst nightmare to the US was if someone released the Plague in the underground in rush hour. One bottle of this would contaminate 1,000’s of people. Who would then go home, or to work contaminating others? The only problem is, that it takes about three days for the system to appear and then it is like a cold, then sever cold, then death. But by that time it is too late. This was written before Sept 11. Who were they pointing at? Iraq. Who was backing this up? The Weapons inspectors! Who demonstrated how easy it was to culture the plague? The weapons inspectors! What has changed in the last few years?

I have to laugh at the reference (by Niall ) to Tony being a “bigger monkey” and it fits, as it is one of the biggest cock-up ever made, when he made us into the US Muppets. But whatever, we are in the s**t and have made ourselves targets along side the US. We have entered the Boxing Ring and the bell has gone! We are committed, rightly or wrongly. All I want people to see is (what I regard as the truth), that the UN is not worth the paper and has allowed (or helped) the last few years develop. It is like the Anti-smokers attacking the smokers and accusing them of polluting the atmosphere, whilst ignoring the cars and lorries, when we blame the US and the UK. The US and the UK are the easy targets, but who are the real baddies? It comes as no big shock to the British Armed Forces or the US Armed Forces, that they are heading for the Gulf. They have been expecting this for 10 years. It seems the biggest shock, is why it has taken so long. In fact it seems they have been expecting to go there to finish a job that should have been done in 1992.

Our “friends” are the US, we have shared the same bed and we are committed. The situation is out of control, in the world of politics. But are we now targets for the hidden terrorist? That is what we should be asking, is (now) the threat real? When (Niall) says “of our friends in the EU”. I hope you are joking! Take a look at what France is trying to do to the UK for the last few decades!!!

The difference with the UK having weapons of mass destruction is that we have not used it on anyone! Unlike Iraq. Also we have an agreement that the Inspectors can inspect any site with minimum notice (I think 24 hrs). Iraq has in the last 11 years not always allowed the Inspectors that privilege; in fact it is only recently that they have been allowed “unlimited” access!!!!!!

I wonder what would happen if we got rid of all the weapons of mass destruction? Would France get rid of its? Would Russia, China, N Korea, Iran, Israel, India, and Pakistan etc. The list goes on!

Niall states, “The question of blame has arisen, well to that I say, who cares?” I care! Once this is over, whatever way it turns out! It should not be allowed to happen again!
Lets say the US and UK turn around and said “April fool, Mr Saddam, we were only kidding”. They all kiss and forget everything. Are we expected to go through the same thing in another 10 years? Learn the lesson form this one and make sure it does not happen again! Find out how it was allowed to happen and prevent it from happening again. Or are we selfish, we don’t care about the future? So everything is a lie! We only care about ourselves! So much for Freedom, Humanity and Justice!

One thing to remember, if nothing else. We are humans, but first and foremost, we are animals! We have destroyed anything that stood in our way, for what we call progress, animal or mineral. As in the film Matrix, “the humans are the virus”!!! The human race will be killing until something wipes us out! That is a fact of life. Not nice but true! Don’t think because we are civilised, that we don’t kill. It just means we are killing in a more civilised way. We have advanced technology; it means we can now kill more people quicker. In case you did not notice, our Armies get smaller, but our weapons get bigger! The killing wont end. There is always a bigger nutter around the corner that is waiting to go power mad (it might be Blair and Bush), or it could be Saddam. Note: the only year that a British Service Person was not killed on active service 1900 –2000 AD was 1961. Not bad for a peaceful nation!

There is another saying! One mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist! All that differs is which side of the fence you site on.

The VOICE OF THE PEOPLE. I read that there were 25,000 on the streets of Scotland, against the War. The population of Scotland is 5,000,000 or there about! That was 0.5% of the population. Ok, lets say the 25% of Scotland is not eligible for a vote (so no voice), which leaves 3,750,000 people who have a voice! That means only 0.6% voiced their opinion that they are against the war! (I think the maths is correct). Or is the tabloids the voice of the people? Who by the way, were all behind Blair and Bush on Sept 11, 12, 13 etc. But then it seemed we were in the right then! There needs to be more than 25,000 out on the streets protesting before the voice (of Scotland certainly) is heard. The majority stayed at home!
Niall. You seem to change your tune. “We agree that majority should rule, but only when it does no harm to the minority and we all have the capacity to change the views of the majority by empathising with the plight of the minority.” This is a democracy, where the Majority counts, and stuff the minority. That is fact not fiction! And Scotland is one nation that should know that! Especially the back end of no-where, Caithness! Why do you think Dounreay came here? In case it went boom! Then the rest of the UK could carry on as if nothing happened! In fact there was a serious plan to test a nuclear bomb in a European environment in the 1950’s. Caithness was top of the list and that was not going to a vote! But it never came off and that is another debate!

Anyway. To prevent the same thing happening in the future, we can get rid of Blair, but can we get rid of the UN? Or can we replace the UN, which is now 50 years out of date, with something better?
Also we fought the last two wars in the name of GOD, KING and COUNTRY. Which lead to freedom, democracy (vote for all over 18 years), justice and most important humanity. Or so we were told, but then again that was by the Government, so it could be a lie!

[rachelle]

Niall

DO YOURSELF A FAVOUR, TRY LIVING IN THE REAL WORLD!

When Saddam has the technology needed, wonder who are we are going to run to when he nukes (are you so naive that you think he will never get them)?????????????

HEY!!! I HAVE AN IDEA!!!! ITS THE FINGERS CROSSED IDEA!!!!!!!!!!!! IF THERE IS A NUKE WAR, ITS EASY, LETS PUT OUR HEADS BETWEEN OUR LEGS, CROSS OUR FINGERS AND HOPE IT WILL ALL GO AWAY!

Sayin you want peace is easy, we ALL want peace

Call me insane, however I appreciate the incredible fact that young Americans have given their lives for freedom , I actually like Americans, rather than you, I have always liked em. .........

P.S. Its shocking how the lives of so many young Americans have been lost so you can post such rubbish............

[scorrie]

on poverty, unemployment and crime. It would be nice to see our own house put in order before considering problems other countries face around the world. The toppling of Saddam should be left for the Iraqi people to deal with and there is no dictator who cannot be brought down if the collective will of the people is strong enough. It happened in East Germany and the Soviet Union and any interference by Britain and the US just gives the Iraqi people a common enemy other than Saddam. The opportunity was there, at the end of the Gulf War, to force Saddam to relinquish power, it seems to me that a very tenuous premise for war is being used to make up for the fact that the job was not concluded properly the first time. Peace.

[rachelle]

My vote goes with America ...

It is interesting you mention Germany, I do not believe history cites that it was the german people responsible for overthrowing the dictator known as Hitler ... the atrocities he alone committed against the jews should never have been allowed to happen and yet once more the world is faced with another demented dictator - Saddam Hussien ... it is easy to bury ones head in the sand, let some other be responsible to take the necessary action, after all why should I get involved ... the why should be obvious, to ignore the likes of Saddam Hussien is to ignore humanity ...

Anti Americanism is rampant throughout the world at present and they are an obvious target, should they take action or should they forever be looking over their shoulder, waiting for another September 11 ... which would you prefer ... which would make you and your family feel safe ...

Give peace a chance they say and that is all nice and fine however I think Saddam Hussien has a very different agenda, one which is bound to affect us all in the end, even if we are not directly in his line of fire ...

God bless America ...

[scorrie]

If you look you will see that it was East Germany I mentioned and was, of course, referring to the Berlin Wall coming down. Far from having my head in the sand, I simply think it is more important for us to tackle the problems we face in our own country first instead of seeing ourselves, in league with the US, as some sort of global crusader sorting out the world's dictators. There are many atrocities in many countries worldwide but not many of them are oil rich. As I already said, the chance to remove Saddam was there at the end of the Gulf War, please tell me why it is right to do this now, and not then when there was the political support and public opinion that is lacking now?