Ross. Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 There was a Yes supporter on the previous page agreeing with the British governments stance on IS. It's not warmongering wanting your country to be involved in action around the world for humanitarian reasons. Under the current set up, humanitarian reasons consistently come second(If considered at all) to economic reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 8, 2014 Author Share Posted September 8, 2014 There was a Yes supporter on the previous page agreeing with the British governments stance on IS. Is there? Care to point that out? It's not warmongering wanting your country to be involved in action around the world for humanitarian reasons. Funny how that humanitarian aid tends to be weapons and airstrikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 No, I'm not blinkered. I don't speak on behalf of the 'no campaign' and I only stand by my own opinion. My opinion is that simply sitting back and allowing thousands to be massacred when you have the wealth, the influence, and the ability to intervene to save lives is cowardly. It's not even anything to do with Yes or No, it's a simple opinion and it's not a blinkered view. anything, your view that Scotland should just sit back and let it happen as it doesn't directly effect your country is blinkered. I'm not a fan of insular 'as long as we're alright' nationalist politics In a nice fluffy world that would be good. Problem is, it never is about saving innocent children. It's all about furthering our own interests. The US and the UK have made billions upon billions selling arms to our supposed allies in the gulf. The same allies, such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia who actively fund these extremist groups. Where's our condemnation of them ? I'm quite happy if an iScotland stays well away. We have enough resources of our own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumper Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 It's not warmongering wanting your country to be involved in action around the world for humanitarian reasons. Yes it is. If you want your government to go around declaring wars, then you're a warmonger. Fucking Ghengis Khan thought he was fighting just wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Is there? Care to point that out? Funny how that humanitarian aid tends to be weapons and airstrikes. East Fife supporter about 20 or so posts ago. I don't agree with arming the opposition especially, but airstrikes can be important to halt the advance. Requested by the Iraqi government. There has also been quite a bit of humanitarian aid in terms of food and water for those displaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davi3j Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 There was a Yes supporter on the previous page agreeing with the British governments stance on IS. It's not warmongering wanting your country to be involved in action around the world for humanitarian reasons. Killing brown people is humanitarian?????? Now thats fucked up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 I'm quite happy if an iScotland stays well away. We have enough resources of our own.You're entitled to hold that opinion, and I am entitled to think that that's cowardly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 You're entitled to hold that opinion, and I am entitled to think that that's cowardly. Are you or have you ever been in the armed forces? I would suggest not. How about you nip along to the nearest recruitment centre and sign up as there is a good chance that after your basic training that this fight will be on the ground. No reasons for ducking out of this or you are a coward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 8, 2014 Author Share Posted September 8, 2014 You're entitled to hold that opinion, and I am entitled to think that that's cowardly. Calls people for not wanting military action as cowardly, yet refuses to join the military to be part of that action. Who is the real coward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 As I said before, I pay my tax. As I help to pay for our armed forces, I am entitled to hold the opinion that they should be used to intervene around the world where innocent people are being slaughtered. I just think that the 'as long as we're ok' attitude that the people on here, and parties like the BNP and UKIP hold is cowardly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 8, 2014 Author Share Posted September 8, 2014 As I said before, I pay my tax. I pay tax too. I think you are a war mongering neo-con. See how easy that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 You're entitled to hold that opinion, and I am entitled to think that that's cowardly. Maybe you should join up to be sent to the next illegal war ? I don't mind if we help with the humanitarian side of things but the problems in the Middle East are down to the UK and the US. We back whichever dictator it suits us to back at any given time. That's been our foreign policy in the Middle East for years. Now it looks like we might be jumping into bed with Assad. You talk about having the means to help these countries. There are more than enough Middle Eastern countries with the means to deal with these nutters. They chose not to. There is a sectarian divide in the whole of the Middle East which makes any "interventions" in the region totally counter productive to reducing extremism and threats to our own internal security. The Middle East does have vast oil and gas reserves though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 As I said before, I pay my tax. As I help to pay for our armed forces, I am entitled to hold the opinion that they should be used to intervene around the world where innocent people are being slaughtered. I just think that the 'as long as we're ok' attitude that the people on here, and parties like the BNP and UKIP hold is cowardly. ^^^Coward* *The worst type of coward - expects someone else to die for his country's international reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 No, I'm not blinkered. I don't speak on behalf of the 'no campaign' and I only stand by my own opinion. My opinion is that simply sitting back and allowing thousands to be massacred when you have the wealth, the influence, and the ability to intervene to save lives is cowardly. It's not even anything to do with Yes or No, it's a simple opinion and it's not a blinkered view. If anything, your view that Scotland should just sit back and let it happen as it doesn't directly effect your country is blinkered. I'm not a fan of insular 'as long as we're alright' nationalist politics Take your example above. How about Westminster sitting back and throwing money at Trident, aircraft carriers and HS1 & 2 while not intervening to save folk who are starving thanks to benefits sanctions and austerity? How does your conscience square that one off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Take your example above. How about Westminster sitting back and throwing money at Trident, aircraft carriers and HS1 & 2 while not intervening to save folk who are starving thanks to benefits sanctions and austerity? How does your conscience square that one off? Different issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 8, 2014 Author Share Posted September 8, 2014 Different issues. Translation: I don't want to talk about it as it clearly undermines the point I am making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Different issues. No it isn't. In both cases it involves sitting idly back while people suffer. So are you going to address Westminster in relation to people in poverty and suffering under austerity cuts, or does it just not suit your agenda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 They aren't in any way similar. I work in social housing and have to deal with the consequences of benefit cuts and austerity day in, day out. My politics are left of centre. I don't agree with the cost of high speed rail and how so many areas of the UK will miss out. I think trident is a waste of money. However, I understand that some money has to be spent on defence and infrastructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Even in an independent Scotland, Holyrood will be weighing up issues like dueling the A9 while people in Glasgow East End might be starving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 8, 2014 Author Share Posted September 8, 2014 Even in an independent Scotland, Holyrood will be weighing up issues like dueling the A9 while people in Glasgow East End might be starving. So we should be spending money on solving the issues in our country rather than bombing foreign ones. Good, glad we have that settled then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.