A Man Of His Word.

by Englishman 30 Replies latest social current

• 

  foreword

  realist.....exactly my sentiment.....

  When every one was yelling National Security for the reasons they are attacking now, it came to thought that Native American Indians still have a right to oppose the invasion of their land by the english and spaniards. They were treated pretty bad by the english (now americans) and while we cry to Saddam to treat our prisoners humanely we had no respect for the Native Americans. Typical english law concepts, "we can but you can't".

  What if some American Indian were to stage a (so-called) terrorist attack on the US, how would americans see it then? Terrorist act or national (native american) security?
• 

  hurt

  Tony Blair stands out and tall as leaders come. He is decisive, strong, astute. A man of his word. A honourable man. After listening to his speech about unpopularity being the "price of leadership and the cost of conviction", I was simply smitten. It was him against a larger part of Britain. Brave man.
• 

  Simon

  I can't stand him.

  If htey didn't lie about so many things ... even the little, more insignificant things like the Cherrie / Property scandal then maybe I'd trust him more but he always seems to me to be acting sincere.
• 

  Realist

  thichi,

  Bush has more moral worth in his left hand than you do in your whole body.

  thank you for the compliment! since bush is the most moral person on earth i guess that puts me still ahead of 90% of all people!

  personal insults aside...

  what exactly was wrong about my statments? did the UK occupy half the world or not? did churchill agree to deliver poland under the control of stalin? did britain trample on basic human rights in their colonies? maybe you can educate me!
• 

  Matty

  Jacques Chirac looked all washed up a year ago, but his stance on the war has improved his popularity with France's voters. This war could make or break Tony Blair and his party, he is running a huge risk backing George W - if it all goes pear shaped he's pretty much finished.
• 

  expatbrit

  Jacques Chirac looked all washed up a year ago, but his stance on the war has improved his popularity with France's voters.

  Bing! Mr. Chirac nailed in a single sentence! Good on ya Matty.

  Expatbrit
• 

  ThiChi

  ""Native American Indians still have a right to oppose the invasion of their land by the english and spaniards""

  What a red herring. Name one country that has not been invaded at one point in History? Lets dig up the offenders and try all of them? Though we cannot change the past, we can control or influence the present. Your argument only leads to the conclusion of a false choice, "do nothing."

  The do nothing crowed is what has gotten us to this point. Appeasement of Devils and tyrants do noting but encourage more of the same. Times have changed, action is now.....

  Regan, with the howling of the appeasers, confronted the USSR, by deployment of defenses and the rejecting of appeasement as an option. It worked.

  Blair, Bush and thirty other Nations and their leaders have now rejected the past policy of appeasement of Tyrants and devils, with all the risks, for a better world.
• 

  ThiChi

  Realist:

  Only you can personally insult people? Bush is not a criminal. Time and history will prove this. It is statements like this, with no proof, that is the true insult. Why don’t you just say that you disagree? Why stoop to the level of the absurd?

  If you want to examine the facts, then lets go to it.

  Simon:

  Don’t fall into the justice trap! If we discounted everyone who lied to us, then we would not even be married or know anyone that we respect. Basically good people make mistakes and all have lied, true? Over all Blair is a good person. I do disagree with many labor issues, however, that does not make him unqualified to be PM.
• 

  Realist

  thichi,

  if attacking bush is equivalent with insulting you personally than i think its time for you to do a reality check!

  despite the current war which makes bush to a murderer he has a criminal history.

  http://www.campaignwatch.org/more1.htm
• 

  Englishman

  Realist said:

  did the UK occupy half the world or not? did churchill agree to deliver poland under the control of stalin? did britain trample on basic human rights in their colonies? maybe you can educate me! Yes, the British did occupy a fair part of the world at one time. It went like this: Spain was once the major power, but it obtained it's wealth by robbery and pillage of South America. Britain sought to do something similar by using privateers. That's a government licensed pirate BTW. One of these privateers, Captain Morgan I recall, instead of just robbing a foreign land, decided to make the whole enterprise more profitable by making the conquered cland productive. That's how Jamaica became famous for it's sugar cane, and by extension, it's rum. This sort of caught on with the Brits, so eventually, all conquered countries became productive, which in turn, helped many of the locals make a living. India was virtually a commercial company in it's own right at one time. The worst thing of course was slavery, although this was eventually outlawed by Act of parliament in the 1830's. Eventually the whole Empire thing ceased to work, so the Brits decided to call it a day, and, country by country, gave them back their independence. But! They always put in a sytem of government before they left and also made sure that an education system for the benefit of the youngsters was up and running too. In actual fact, the British disposed of their empire with honour, a fact that is evident by the fact that the now independant countries still wish to keep their ties in place. Englishman.