Welldone David Cameron

Will you all join me in praising our Prime Minister for his role in making the Libyan revolt victorious.

His role clearly shows that the Conservative Party are good at managing global affairs in contrast with Labour and their bungled war in Iraq.

Will you all join me in praising our Prime Minister for his role in making the Libyan revolt victorious.

 

His role clearly shows that the Conservative Party are good at managing global affairs in contrast with Labour and their bungled war in Iraq.

Sad. Your wet-dream of a Prime Minister can shove his over-expanded egotistical head up his own backside.

I think this is a day for the Libyan people, not some ego trip by us. We can discuss our role in this at a later date.

Sad. Your wet-dream of a Prime Minister can shove his over-expanded egotistical head up his own backside.

but on the issue of Libya can we agree that he has shown that a Conservative Government is better at managing global affairs.

but on the issue of Libya can we agree that he has shown that a Conservative Government is better at managing global affairs.

Not really. If you want to do this kind of debate, what about Kosovo? Or Sierra Leone...

Don't forget that the Conservatives voted for both Iraq and Afghanistan and I doubt they would have done much different.

I really don't think we should pat ourself on the back too much over our wars, any of them, whether you think they are right or wrong. War isn't good, but sometimes it is necessary.

'War is the health of the state' - Bourne.

but on the issue of Libya can we agree that he has shown that a Conservative Government is better at managing global affairs.

I don't give a **** what Libya is doing to be honest.

but on the issue of Libya can we agree that he has shown that a Conservative Government is better at managing global affairs.

If by 'global affairs' you mean stretching the smokescreen of a mandate to 'protect civilians' to meaning acting as the de facto airforce of a rebel militia, then yes.

And our role in this is overstated. Yes, Cameron and Sarkozy pushed it, but America did the majority of the hard firepower stuff.

If by 'global affairs' you mean stretching the smokescreen of a mandate to 'protect civilians' to meaning acting as the de facto airforce of a rebel militia, then yes.

Indeed. The Conservative Party are the party of the Empire and as such managing the planet is ingrained in their psyche. Today is a proud day for Britain as we took a leading and victorious role in millitary conflict.

This is what you get with a Conservative government.

Perhaps he could go and met our troops and make a "job done" speech.

How can you say that it has been a sucsess, when we know nothing about the "victors". Dont forget we were on Bin Laden's side when the mujahideen were fighting the Russians.

Indeed. The Conservative Party are the party of the Empire and as such managing the planet is ingrained in their psyche. Today is a proud day for Britain as we took a leading and victorious role in millitary conflict.

 

This is what you get with a Conservative government.

How very 1930's !

And our role in this is overstated. Yes, Cameron and Sarkozy pushed it, but America did the majority of the hard firepower stuff.

Let's not forget that Dune backed Gadaffi when this all started.

Let's not forget that Dune backed Gadaffi when this all started.

Let's not forget that there will always be someone to bite on Dunes bait.... ;-)

Let's not forget that there will always be someone to bite on Dunes bait.... ;-)

This is true.

There's little 'victory' in what has happened in Libya, Afghanistan, or anywhere that has seen significant death or suffering either through the rule of these regimes, or the battles to overcome them. And we have no idea of what will transpire in the future either.

The world is ****ed up - frankly, anyone trying to gain credit or kudos for involvement in these things has their priorities all wrong. It may have been necessary, but 'celebrating' it is wrong IMO.

There's little 'victory' in what has happened in Libya, Afghanistan, or anywhere that has seen significant death or suffering either through the rule of these regimes, or the battles to overcome them. And we have no idea of what will transpire in the future either.

 

The world is ****ed up - frankly, anyone trying to gain credit or kudos for involvement in these things has their priorities all wrong. It may have been necessary, but 'celebrating' it is wrong IMO.

Thousands of Libyan people have died trying to liberate their country from a totalitarian dictator who mercilessly killed and tortured his own citizens - and who has been backed by various UK governments. There is no pride for us in his death, nor the liberation of Libya itself, because the Western leaders who sat back and did nothing for all those years while Gaddafi murdered the very people he was supposed to be ruling should have done something sooner. Unfortunately, the politics of oil decreed otherwise, and thousands of people suffered at his hands while we sat back and watched.

Really.????what was this majority of the hard stuff america did then...?

The whole milatary operation was US led. The US has spent hundreds of million's of dollars more than us, and without them we wouldn't have been able to do this.

The whole milatary operation was US led. The US has spent hundreds of million's of dollars more than us, and without them we wouldn't have been able to do this.

Mmmmm. No.

Really.????what was this majority of the hard stuff america did then...?

Andy knows even more about everything than Mikey.

Mikey you're going to have to hand over the "Super" baton to your apprentice.

Thousands of Libyan people have died trying to liberate their country from a totalitarian dictator who mercilessly killed and tortured his own citizens - and who has been backed by various UK governments. There is no pride for us in his death, nor the liberation of Libya itself, because the Western leaders who sat back and did nothing for all those years while Gaddafi murdered the very people he was supposed to be ruling should have done something sooner. Unfortunately, the politics of oil decreed otherwise, and thousands of people suffered at his hands while we sat back and watched.

Amen.

Amen.

Bless you my child.

but on the issue of Libya can we agree that he has shown that a Conservative Government is better at managing global affairs.

well, kinda. Yes for not sending in boots on the ground (except for the, cough, 'advisers' on sabbatical from a certain regiment based in Hereford). But let's nor blow our trumpet just yet. There is precious little evidence that Egypt has or ever will become democratic, and I have my reservations about Libya too.

Thousands of Libyan people have died trying to liberate their country from a totalitarian dictator who mercilessly killed and tortured his own citizens - and who has been backed by various UK governments. There is no pride for us in his death, nor the liberation of Libya itself, because the Western leaders who sat back and did nothing for all those years while Gaddafi murdered the very people he was supposed to be ruling should have done something sooner. Unfortunately, the politics of oil decreed otherwise, and thousands of people suffered at his hands while we sat back and watched.

Yeah, but then again it is nice to be able to drive a motor car. Screw the people, I want a Chelsea Tractor.

/sarc

Indeed. The Conservative Party are the party of the Empire and as such managing the planet is ingrained in their psyche. Today is a proud day for Britain as we took a leading and victorious role in millitary conflict.

 

This is what you get with a Conservative government.

But I thought you were a UKIP supporter Dune?

Are you paid to spout this stuff? It seems to be pretty much all you do, all day.

He is another slippery, lying, two faced politician. He promised a lot to get elected and couldn't wait to renege on most of it. He may well be classed as the third worst PM since WW2.

I'll never vote Conservative again while he is in charge. Another vote for UKIP. Maybe if we all voted UKIP next time we could destroy a whole generation of useless political ambition from all three parties.

Mmmmm. No.

So you think the UK would have been able to complete this mission by themselves?

So you think the UK would have been able to complete this mission by themselves?

Who said they were on their own?

I'd give it up if I were you, there are much better informed people on this thread.

Who said they were on their own?

 

I'd give it up if I were you, there are much better informed people on this thread.

It was an 'if' question. If without the US.

No I wouldn't like to join you - it's a civil war, not some political cock measuring contest.

No I wouldn't like to join you - it's a civil war, not some political cock measuring contest.

Here here.

Will you all join me in praising our Prime Minister for his role in making the Libyan revolt victorious.

 

His role clearly shows that the Conservative Party are good at managing global affairs in contrast with Labour and their bungled war in Iraq.

Here come the Cameron-luvvies, out in force again.

Indeed. The Conservative Party are the party of the Empire and as such managing the planet is ingrained in their psyche. Today is a proud day for Britain as we took a leading and victorious role in millitary conflict.

 

This is what you get with a Conservative government.

Go play toy soldiers dune.

The whole milatary operation was US led. The US has spent hundreds of million's of dollars more than us, and without them we wouldn't have been able to do this.

I know you think you know everything from your armchair

But that is just wrong

It was an 'if' question. If without the US.

Please tell us what the US have done this time that we could not do

Thanks

I know you think you know everything from your armchair

 

But that is just wrong

I don't think I know everything. I admit that I am deficient in many areas, most areas in fact. But what I do know is that America is vastly superior to us in Military strength and has poured much larger funds in this war than us, but took a back seat in rhetoric due to political awkwardness.

But fair enough, I will respectfully retreat from my position and leave you to take this one.

So you think the UK would have been able to complete this mission by themselves?

I know you think you know everything from your armchair

 

But that is just wrong

I'm simply in awe of how a 15 year old knows so much about everything.

Not taking any side in the statistics dispute, but these are apparently the 'facts' :

"Since 31 March, there have been more than 26,000 air sorties, almost 10,000 of them involving missile strikes of some kind. UK jets were responsible for 2,000 attack missions. "

"

Although it did not provide strike aircraft, nearly a quarter of all the air missions involved US planes. It provided all the unmanned surveillance drones and most other spying and refuelling assets.

"The US provided invaluable intelligence and surveillance, not least from its unique satellite capabilities,""

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/20/nato-libya-war-26000-missions?newsfeed=true

So when will your beloved leader tackle the major problem of Zimbawe? I suspect he

will never ever do anything. Unless of course the U.S. tells him to do something. As far

as I am concerned I think he only breathes in fresh air because the U.S. said it was for

him to do so, if they told him to stop he would.

Indeed. The Conservative Party are the party of the Empire and as such managing the planet is ingrained in their psyche. Today is a proud day for Britain as we took a leading and victorious role in millitary conflict.

 

This is what you get with a Conservative government.

The RAF actually flew about 10% of the missions as did Canada, Italy and Norway, the French flew 33%, the Yanks 16% and Denmark 11%. Hardly a leading role.

So, where next? Syria, Bahrain, Saudi?

The RAF actually flew about 10% of the missions as did Canada, Italy and Norway, the French flew 33%, the Yanks 16% and Denmark 11%. Hardly a leading role.

 

So, where next? Syria, Bahrain, Saudi?

riiight, was it just the RAF show was it..?

SF

Cruise missiles

RECON

ISTAR

naval blockade

etc etc

Not taking any side in the statistics dispute, but these are apparently the 'facts' :

 

"Since 31 March, there have been more than 26,000 air sorties, almost 10,000 of them involving missile strikes of some kind. UK jets were responsible for 2,000 attack missions. "

 

"

Although it did not provide strike aircraft, nearly a quarter of all the air missions involved US planes. It provided all the unmanned surveillance drones and most other spying and refuelling assets.

"The US provided invaluable intelligence and surveillance, not least from its unique satellite capabilities,""

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/20/nato-libya-war-26000-missions?newsfeed=true

So the question is, would we have been able to do the extra 8,000 attack missions by ourselves, plus all the intelligence the US provided. I don't want a smart arse answer, I want a detailed one as I am actually interested... thank-you

So the question is, would we have been able to do the extra 8,000 attack missions by ourselves, plus all the intelligence the US provided. I don't want a smart arse answer, I want a detailed one as I am actually interested... thank-you

yes mate, this could have easily been done without the US......but then, for some reason you don't want to hear that as I KEEP TELLING YOU..!!!!!

Excuse my assumption here and please correct me if I'm wrong: None of us are senior military officials and our knowledge of our military capability is probably not really up there with those who make these decisions, so perhaps, just maybe, this is all a bit of a pointless discussion without any detailed answer as to exactly how it could be done.

And, perhaps more to the point, who gives a **** who carries out an operation, and how much we're involved? If it needs doing, and there is agreement amongst nations that it needs doing, and someone does it, then great, job done. Why the need to congratulate or be jealous of any other country and their involvement. As was mentioned previously, the fact it needed doing at all, and the whole situation got to this point in the first place, makes it all rather sad.

Excuse my assumption here and please correct me if I'm wrong: None of us are senior military officials and our knowledge of our military capability is probably not really up there with those who make these decisions, so perhaps, just maybe, this is all a bit of a pointless discussion without any detailed answer as to exactly how it could be done.

 

And, perhaps more to the point, who gives a **** who carries out an operation, and how much we're involved? If it needs doing, and there is agreement amongst nations that it needs doing, and someone does it, then great, job done. Why the need to congratulate or be jealous of any other country and their involvement. As was mentioned previously, the fact it needed doing at all, and the whole situation got to this point in the first place, makes it all rather sad.

here here

Does anyone actually think that, Falklands excepted, we actually have an independent foreign policy?

Don't we just do whatever we're told, like a good little supplicant?

Does anyone actually think that, Falklands excepted, we actually have an independent foreign policy?

 

Don't we just do whatever we're told, like a good little supplicant?

that is why we have various treaties and agreements.....dont think many nations have an independent foreign policy

The RAF actually flew about 10% of the missions as did Canada, Italy and Norway, the French flew 33%, the Yanks 16% and Denmark 11%. Hardly a leading role.

 

So, where next? Syria, Bahrain, Saudi?

Rhodesia if it was down to me. Now that would be a popular war. Imagine the scenes of smiling faces bringing tea and homemade scones and jam to our boys liberating their farms.

Much like in the case of the Falklands this would be a conflict where we are fighting for our own. Fighting for the sons and grandsons who fought for Great Britain with pride during two world wars.

Will you all join me in praising our Prime Minister for his role in making the Libyan revolt victorious.

 

His role clearly shows that the Conservative Party are good at managing global affairs in contrast with Labour and their bungled war in Iraq.

B*ll*cks. Hes been lucky so far (right short-term result and no casualties). Lets see what sort of goverment Libya ends up with.