Blair to Bush: "Back off and shut up!"

C

Cypress

Will work for Scooby snacks
Blair to Bush: Back off and shut up

Sat Apr 07, 2007

From today's Guardian, we learn that the Bush administration wanted to escalate tensions with Iran after the 15 British sailors were seized two weeks ago. How predictable; for Bush and Cheney, any resort to diplomacy is a token of weakness. Bush offered to use American naval forces provocatively in order to threaten Iran.

Instead, Blair told them to stay out of it. He also asked Bush & Co. to tone down the rhetoric while Britain tried to free the hostages without provoking a war.

Hence Bush's closest ally in his Middle East fiasco has concluded that he cannot be trusted with any sensitive issues. No wonder that the success of the British negotiations has sent Bush's apologists into orbit. It's an insult to everything their guy stands for, not to give war a chance.




http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2051971,00.html
 
it is a sign of weakness. They bent over and kiss the ass of those that captured them. They didn't even fire a shot. The british were pussies to the highest degree. They should be ashamed of themselves for ever letting themselves get captured like that when they were ARMED.

What's the point of bullets if you aren't going to use them?

For a pussy, it's a decoration.
 
Wow, this is a really interesting article. Thanks for posting it, I hadn't seen it.

This is a real attention-grabber:

The British declined the offer and said the US could calm the situation by staying out of it. London also asked the US to tone down military exercises that were already under way in the Gulf. Three days before the capture of the 15 Britons , a second carrier group arrived having been ordered there by president George Bush in January. The aim was to add to pressure on Iran over its nuclear programme and alleged operations inside Iraq against coalition forces.
At the request of the British, the two US carrier groups, totalling 40 ships plus aircraft, modified their exercises to make them less confrontational.

So now, we go back to being "confrontational"? And when the incident we are trying to provoke occurs, how large of a majority of us develop that most American of all dieases, amnesia?
 
I wonder if chertoff's statement about Britons could attack us was in retalatiation for Blairs Keep yer trap shut to Bush ?
 
Grind said:
it is a sign of weakness. They bent over and kiss the ass of those that captured them. They didn't even fire a shot. The british were pussies to the highest degree. They should be ashamed of themselves for ever letting themselves get captured like that when they were ARMED.

What's the point of bullets if you aren't going to use them?

For a pussy, it's a decoration.
Click to expand...

I'd rather be a pussy than dead, personally. Call me selfish.

It's better to sacrifice our stupid pride and deal with the little children in the most pragmatic manner than to show off your balls and have half a million dead because of it. Too many people have died in history because of thinking like you do.

Yeah the British were ARMED. The Iranians were ARMED too, and they had bombers. I think the Iranians would win and the British would end up dead. But at least they wouldn't be "weak".

What an irrational and emotional way to respond to a question, Grind.
 
Watermark said:
I'd rather be a pussy than dead, personally. Call me selfish.

It's better to sacrifice our stupid pride and deal with the little children in the most pragmatic manner than to show off your balls and have half a million dead because of it. Too many people have died in history because of thinking like you do.

Yeah the British were ARMED. The Iranians were ARMED too, and they had bombers. I think the Iranians would win and the British would end up dead. But at least they wouldn't be "weak".

What an irrational and emotional way to respond to a question, Grind.
Click to expand...


It's also easy to judge the actions of another, when you are not in the position they are in. It's easy to say "i would do this" when you don't actually have a gun aimed at you. I don't believe that anyone really knows what they would do. And I kind of suspect that the ones who talk the loudest about how brave they would be, and whose ass they would kick and how they would go down fighting, would in actuality, be the first one to crap their pants.
 
yes Darkla, usually the bravest talking are not the bravest acting when their ass is on the line.
But as with all things concerning human behaviour, no one rule is absolute.
imho a loud front is usually to cover for insecurity. The best defense is a strong offense kind of thing.
 
uscitizen said:
yes Darkla, usually the bravest talking are not the bravest acting when their ass is on the line.
But as with all things concerning human behaviour, no one rule is absolute.
imho a loud front is usually to cover for insecurity. The best defense is a strong offense kind of thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's definitely not an absolute. I'm sure there are some tough talking badasses out there. But in my personal experience, the badest asses I have ever known never threatened anybody or talked it up much at all.

But you know, I personally wouldn't get in their faces.
 
I'll tell you one thing though usc, I'm with water on this one. If I were surrounded by armed soliders, my first concern would be "how do I get out of this alive" not "how tough can I go down?" Because you know, I want to live. Only if I had my niece or nephew with me, would my first concern become not "how can I survive this" but "how can I survive this for long enough to make certain they survive this?"

Other than that, I got nothing to prove to anybody, and I wouldn't care who was sitting in their bedroom calling me a coward on the internet.
 
They were seriously outgunned, and it was clearly planned that way.

Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor. Live to fight another day.
 
He will be the last cowboy president for a while...

LBJ was a miserable failure as has been GWB!


WE should learn to never elect Texans president.
 
Grind said:
it is a sign of weakness. They bent over and kiss the ass of those that captured them. They didn't even fire a shot. The british were pussies to the highest degree. They should be ashamed of themselves for ever letting themselves get captured like that when they were ARMED.

What's the point of bullets if you aren't going to use them?

For a pussy, it's a decoration.
Click to expand...


Young man,

It warms my heart to know there are brave, courageous Christians out there who would gladly lay down their life, and sacrifice their soul for this great christian crusade in the Middle East. Bravo.

I usually counsel my flock to remain here in the homeland, to fight the culture wars - a dangerous and important assignment. But, I encourage a brave christian like yourself, to enlist in our Christian army to go over and fight in our crusade in Mesopotamia. Those infidel Persians will cower in fear when they know american christians like you, will never surrender - will fight, and die against impossible odds. As you described above.

God bless you young man.



Warmest Regards,

Ted
 
Umm should we issue suicide bombs to our troops so they can take a lot of the enemy out if capture/failure is iminent ?

Grind seems to be pushing an Islamofascist tool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top