 |
|
|
|
|
#4
04-07-17, 22:20
|
|||
|
|||
Well ... to our British friends ...
Been from a colonial country; Brits have been our Lords for more that 200 years, and they are still. I have always cherished the days when Brits ruled over us with such nobility and civility. I have passionate admiration to the British, and maintain with positive eagerness my role as a servant for them. British calendar is set on my smart phone ... this is what really matters for me. 
|
|
#6
05-07-17, 00:49
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Life can be such a "rip-off!" 
|
|
#8
05-07-17, 16:20
|
|||
|
|||
 After reading Satinfun's entry, i say let's bring back the British Empire. Life was better under British colonialism No problems in the Middle East, no tyrants like Gaddafi, Sadam Hussain or Robert Mugabi to deal with. No mass starvations in Africa for us to solve.__A time when ISIS weren't terrorists,___they were the no.2 Oxford boat in the annual University boat race! How different life was when we ruled the World__!! A couple more years of Donald Trump and i suspect that even the Americans ( who were at the height of their achievements before Independence in 1776), will be pleading with us to take back control. To all my American friends ( what do you mean i haven't got any! ), don't worry i'm only joking--my humour is not easily understood, even by my fellow Brits. I genuinely hope that you all had an enjoyable day.
|
|
#9
05-07-17, 23:53
|
|||
|
|||
|
That's absolutely true. Britain and America are the Lords of the Middle East, their superiority must be respected and obeyed. It makes the world safer and better. When you pull a harness over a horse head, attach it to a carriage, apply bridle, hold the reins, use the crop/whip, and drive away, you are not humiliating the horse; the horse is simply doing it's job in life. The problem is that everyone wants to rule, which I believe it's wrong. Wise superiors rule, others obey. The struggle should be to keep superiors strong and always on top, and not to support inferiors in their hopeless attempts to become superiors. It's integration rather than competition.
Saddam who thought that he is an Arab man-of-might who could stand up to the West spend more than 30 years of work to acquire a nuclear bomb and become superior over the West (mainly Britain as an ex-colonial administrator). He wanted to invade the world. He had read the history very well, but thought he is different and invincible! Although Saddam was symbol of defiance, arrogance, and promised never to surrender, Britain and America did not throw a nuclear bomb on him. Actually they did something much better and more efficient than that! The clean shaved, man-of-steel, supremely powerful and disciplined dictator image that Saddam had built for himself for many years was destroyed by less than a minute of video. The video of his capture after his defeat. He insisted on his ways with a haughty pride during his medical exam after his capture, but the medic said "Open Wide, Now say Ahhh..." while he stuck a tongue depressor in his mouth and shined in a light to examine his tonsils!! After that his beard was shaved off, in one of the most humiliating acts that can be done to an Arab, he was then cleaned, and locked somewhere in his palace. It was rumoured that he was taken in a cage, and they were planning to show this on TV, but refrained for political reasons. Many Arab countries did not see this as a brutal treatment of a ruler, but rather a behaviour correction of an arrogant dictator and a well-done job by Britain and America. The dictator was infantalised and the superman image that he built for himself was toppled in a nice way. The video was more effective in collapsing the folly of the proud than using a nuclear bomb. The ultimate setback of Saddam was his capture  and lock in a bird cage in his palace by his ex-colonial administrator! This is the best punishment he could ever receive for his wrong ways. It was a tremendous win in the battle with dictatorship in the Middle East, and a good lesson for other remaining dictatorships. Fully support Britain to restore the direct rule of the Empire ... your boots will be polished on ground!
|
|
#11
07-07-17, 09:40
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
#12
07-07-17, 23:34
|
|||
|
|||
|
Indeed, Punkawallah, Fan bearer, and Human-pulled rickshaw are just few examples of how our predecessors were useful to the British colonists. They were put in good use by the Brits to do useful work instead of leaving them to waste their time on unimportant things.
Anyone remember the "Mad Dog" behaviour of Ghaddafi and his quotes!? "I'm the King of Kings!!" "I will invade Europe!!!!" "I will capture all these rats in my country!" And how Britain and America cleaned this mess: https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-gaddafi-libya And Saddam made to clean his clothes for the first time ... in his pants during the day ... in his nappy during the night ... better than thinking to invade the world ... I guess! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Iraq-jail.html
|
|
#13
08-07-17, 00:47
|
|||
|
|||
We mustn't kid ourselves that everything we did in our days of Empire were good. One our most shameful acts was to starve the inhabitants of the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia by withdrawing their regular deliveries of food so that the island became uninhabited between 1963/8.---( this happened under Harold Wilson's Labour Government. ) As an uninhabited island, we could grant a long lease to the Americans who wanted it as an airforce base from which they could reach Iraq and Afghanistan. That base remains fully operational today by the U.S. airforce. The inhabitants of Diego Garcia were shipped off to Seychelles and Mauritius against their wishes. As a reward for taking them in, both islands were given their independence. Here we are 50 years later and the descendants of those forced migrants continue to live in the same squalid conditions as their forefathers with no prospects of work or ever improving their status. In exchange for "selling" this island to the Americans, we obtained big discounts on the import of their Polaris Nuclear Missiles! I first came across this story about 20 years ago and consider it to be one of the most disgraceful episodes in our history. Anyone who is interested can read the full account on Wikipedia.
|
|
#14
08-07-17, 01:30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Although the British colonial empire era has some disadvantages, it also has a lot of advantages, talking about the Middle East, and generally speaking the Brits played significant role in taming the wildness of the Middle East.
The Brits used a sort of behaviour correction as part of civilisation mission. They tried to break the "aggressive" spiritual and cultural heritage of the Arabs. So they proposed to replace many countries' old educational systems and cultures with it's own. The idea was to make the Arabs think that all that was British was better than Arab's own heritage. This would then cause the Arabs to lose their aggressive and resistive behaviour. The British used to manage the Middle East in an efficient way, they have put a great effort to civilise the region, from the British Empire era up till now. This without doubt has contributed to the peace of the world, and should be respected. I will give two examples, one from the past, and another more recent one. The British know the Middle East region very well, they have experience in managing indigenous anti-occupier rebellion, see for example during the invasion of Iraq in 2003, when the coalition forces met with unexpected resistance in Basra and environs. After a few days of combat, most of the invading American troops moved northwards, leaving Basra for the British to deal with, since they are considered more experienced because of their history as colonial administrators of Iraq. Finally, Basra was totally under control. Another example is from the British Empire days. Yemen was considered an extremely rebellious and difficult to occupy and manage. In fact, before the British Empire, many Arabs used to take pride in that Yemen is the only territory that has never ever been colonised by any foreign country, they say that this is due to two reasons: unbeatable fierce anti-colonial resistance, and the geographical difficulty of the country. The Brits took control of Aden (south Yemen), it was under full British control 1839–1967, until 1937, and was governed as part of British India ... known as the 'Aden Settlement'.
|
|
#15
13-07-17, 22:40
|
|||
|
|||
|
Good news here!!
Complete defeat of ISIS in Iraq has been announced: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ion-Mosul.html And the "Heroes" who vowed never to surrender flee dressed in WOMEN's and GIRLS' clothes!!! They look fantastic ... I think it is bed time for little girls! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti....html#comments http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ack-veils.html I think big thanks go to Britain, US, and Russia for completing the job. 
|
|
#17
14-07-17, 12:28
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm not prepared to shower the Russians with any credit until they stop supporting Bashar al-Assad of Syria. We've long taken the view that he must be overthrown in order to bring peace to the country. In view of recent experiences in the Middle East and the fact that such action invariably results in a vacuum of power and stability in the region, perhaps we need to change tac slightly. Rather than depose him, we must persuade him to become more humane in the way he treats his people and to behave in a more all-inclusive fashion. ( TO STOP KILLING THEM WOULD BE A GOOD START_!!! ) I think this is the best way to maintain peace and stability in the region and this is where the Russians come into their own and can play a vital role in transforming what is a 'rogue' country. If they can help bring this about, then AND ONLY THEN will the Russians under Putin deserve credit. That may not prevent Bashar al-Assad from one day escaping judgement from the International Court of Justice in The Hague, but if he changes his ways and proves genuine remorse, it may help his case when the day of reckoning comes. Gosh!!--this is all a bit heavy. Are there any beautiful girls out there who fancy taking their clothes off for us in order to lighten the mood a little?? Last edited by peter92305; 14-07-17 at 12:30.
|
|
#18
14-07-17, 15:37
|
|||
|
|||
|
Assad is on the waiting list after ISIS!!
In the Middle East there used to be an Anti-West campaign led by dictators. This campaign is preventing the Middle Eastern countries from developing and used to present the West as an enemy. Fortunately, this campaign is almost defeated, the only remaining dictator is Assad. Assad is clearly an Anti-West dictator, who caused a lot of trouble to his neighbour Middle Eastern countries (Israel) and killed a lot of Syrians. Not only Assad should be taken out and defeated, but also he MUST be taught a lesson, because he has not learned from Saddam's and Gaddafi's endings. Two points to note: 1- Assad's survival means survival of dictatorship and great victory to the last Anti-West regime in the Middle East. It also mean "defeat" to the will of the West, mainly Britain, U.S., and Israel. This way Assad proves he is different from Saddam and Gaddafi. 2- This is ultimately the best chance to get rid of him, if he survived now the regime will survive forever, as Assad will become a "hero" and the man who can stand up for the West. Unfortunately, he cannot be toppled easily, boots on ground might not work, as it requires heavy involvement, I mean heavy boots on ground, the Russians and Iranians are already there supporting him, but this might work: - Intense intelligence work and special operations to hunt for Assad. A scenario like the capture of Mr Ocalan might be possible: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/fe… UK/France/U.S./Israel with the cooperation of other Middle Eastern countries. If a surprise and successful man hunt of Assad was successful, the Russians will accept the current situation. Actually, they will be in a weak political position, and probably will not fight back ... the person whom they are defending is gone/captured. It is important to note that Assad MUST be taken out, and should not escape. - Install fresh government/regime, with strong law enforcement forces. - New rule for the Arabs: NO weapons what so ever, weapons and security will be managed by UK/France/U.S./Russia/Israel ONLY.
|
|
#19
14-07-17, 18:59
|
|||
|
|||
|
I can't help thinking that it could prove difficult to capture Assad whilst the Russians continue to support him. They may capitulate in that event although there is no guarantee that they will not try and redress the balance. On the other hand if we take him out completely, he dies a martyr and we all know what happens in that scenario. There is also the factor that there is no appetite in the West, ( with the possible exception of Trump ) for getting involved on the ground which would entail a massive and costly campaign involving Allied losses. Whilst i'm in no way a supporter of Trump, the fact that he is totally unpredictable means the Russians, ( as well as the Chinese and North Korea ) need to think very carefully before deciding which way to jump on all potentially confrontational matters. That's why i would prefer to involve Assad in the initial solution in the hope that we can avoid further killings and fleeing of women and children in fear of their lives. Having said all that, you are closer to the action than I am, and i would never suggest that i know better than you.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Linear Mode
