Western policies are to blame, says Livingstone

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Agent_Smith, Jul 20, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Well i knew it wouldnt be long till this lick spittle came out in the same general terms as our old pal gorgeous george, but it's less than 2 weeks since the bombings and some victims are still gravely ill.

    He has just confirmed what i alsways knew, he's scum.

  2. Well, what he's said (that UK policy may have influenced people) is hardly wrong. Nothing happens in isolation, action/reaction etc. Our actions in Afghanistan/Iraq may have been influenced by AQ actions in New York - Ken would say that too (or should).

    AQ et al are narked because we won't lie down and let them bully anyone around them, so they set out to kill anyone they can get near, and the easiest ones are civilians.

    We and the Spams are trying to destroy the bad boys, but leave the innocent untouched - but it doesn't always work out that way.

    For the innocent the result is much the same. Difficult to see how it's all going to end.
  3. Livingstone reverting to type really - once again - no surprise.

    agree that no action can be viewed in isolation and had he then justified his views with other points about the intolerance of that particular form of Islam, the fact that these particular individuals are not Afghans or Iraqis but in fact Saudis or British of Pakistani descent and therefore hardly responding to attacks by the British on their way of life and only using the current conflicts as an excuse to forward the cause global jihad (as supported and sponsored by their Wahabi belief) then maybe we could take Red Ken's view in a more understanding light.

    But he didn't! he expelled the same leftist anti-yank shite about, how its all our fault and the west is to blame for all the world's woes, and evil running dog imperialist........baaaaaaa

    the man's a cn*t, nuff said
  4. Change the angle a bit of this debate abit for all. Have anoyone notice that the world was a better place when there was a British Empire, all the problems arose in Middle East, African provety, India/Pakistan conflict and many other only happen after we dismantle it after the war. May be Imperialism isn't what to blame for all the wrong but the national self-determination. Any Challege or agreement to this though?
  5. Regardless of whose "fault" it is there is no excuse for killing civilians, Ken seems to think its ok because the bad west was to blame.

    Showing his usual colours, red and yellow.
  6. I live and work in London and I cannot get the idea out of my head that people here really dont give a sh1t about the bombs as long as it didnt effect them (traveling excluded)

    I have seen no anger or outrage or anything, I really think Londoners, certainly the white middle classes would rather not make a fuss and be accused of the worst crime going being seen as anti muslim or racist or whatever the ******* use to shut up any critisism.

  7. What utter crap, what do you expect people to do, rise up and start killing every muslim in a 50 mile radius ?

    The problem lies with the fact that there is no-one for people to take the anger out on, of course people are angry and outraged but what do you want them to do ?

    Yet another piece of moronic posting in here, we seem to have more than our fair share of people with the IQ of a bus stop, maybe i just need to stop reading this sh*t and keep my blood pressure down to reasonable levels.....
  8. Agent Smith - I dislike Red Ken every bit as much as you do. But, as far as the article goes, all he said was "We created these people. We built them up. We funded them." Inaccurate as this statement is in reference to AQ it hardly equals "Western policies are to blame, says Livingstone."
  9. No, 200 mile radius is far better...only joking....you know me

    Well taking the blame for it isn't on, nor is having assorted muslims tell us that. So what do YOU think we should do ? bend over and take a shafting from muslim murderers and say I deserve this ?

    Funny, thats exactly what I'd say about your post.
  10. Yes maybe you should stop reading,

    No I dont expect people to rise up, that is a misinterpretation on your part. I will try to explain for your benefit. I will assume you dont live in London? I think your locations states South West? I live and work in Central London, it doesnt give me any moral high ground but I would hope it gives me a level of observance. The point I was trying to make was that people do not seem to be angry or outraged. I was not advocating muslims or anyone else being killed (I think you went looking for something that was not in my post) My point was that from what I have seen, the atmosphere seems to be one of sticking our heads in the sand. Nobody dare be critical for fear of being portrayed as being anti muslim, I suppose your post itself reflects this, basiclly sounding similar to PC advocates shouting "you cant say that"... I'm sure this was not your intention.

    My additional point was that while an interpretation may be of London battling through, which is in IMHO good, from where I sit nobody really seems to have absorbed the gravity of this event and the future ramifications of action or inaction on the publics part. Your assertion that there is no one for the public to take its alleged anger out on is blinkered in the extreme. Fundamentalists, Labours war in Iraq, blah balh lots of avenues for both sides of the political spectrum to take their anger out on, you just have to look wider..... or read posts properly
  11. Gentlemen , no bickering please.
  12. Livingston is clearly a cnut, how was the cold war policy to assist Afghanistan in repelling the Soviet invasion and the spread of communism in the middle east to blame?

    The fact that the US and allies only assisted the fight with monies, weapons and intel and did not send troops was in respect of the Islamic belief that this was their fight, their Jihad. The fact that the vacuum left by the USSR withdraw was filled by a bunch of extremist loons like the Taliban was not really foreseeable, nor did the west want to meddle in what clearly looked like a sovereign country's interal strife.

    The policy was to stem the flow of communism, and to that end the west assisted muslims. If anything is to blame it is a lack of policy to erradicate the Taliban early on, the lack of policy to cap the wacky IaToilet of Iran and the lack of a policy to tell the Saudis to stop spouting hatered of the west or we invade and take over the oil fields.

    Instead we pretty much left the middle east alone, continued to buy their oil, allowed them to develop their bastardised version of Islam, come to their aid when SadAss decided he wanted to invade Kuwait...

    The west policies are not to blame, the lack of policies to fight the wacky extremist loons early on is to blame.
  13. Livingstone is indeed a Class 1 pr@t, and I am appalled by the senseless waste of life in our capital city. However; ask yourself a simple question: 'If Bliar had not ordered our troops to participate in Iraq riding pillion to Mr Bush, would those young demented British muslims have blown themselves up?'
    I think probably not.
  14. Of course they would have....Iraq is not the issue, the issue is that the UK is not an Islamic state/society...Iraq is merely an excuse being used to cloud the underlying issue which is their belief that all infidel must die.
  15. I think that the cause of so much hatred for the west is due to the Middle East Conflict. America's and Britains foreign policy played a very important part in messing that up. I find that the only solution is that the west has to address this problem and cant just keep on ignoring it. This is where the real problem lies. West unlikely to do anything as the jews have such a high influence over the US. So the US are just going to continue pumping money into the israelis.