aintforever

Striker by a mile. We are light up front and were very lucky Lambert didn't get injured last season.

You could pay the Royals less and they would still be there so it wouldn't effect tourist revenue.

But it's not impossible that we get flogged to a rich Arab.

Not impossible but would take a serious amount of cash to happen any time soon.

I would call myself pro-royal but I don't think they should get as much money as they do. The main Royals are OK because the sense of tradition adds value to the UK brand but anyone outside the immediate family should have their wealth confiscated by the state, their homes turned into museums and put on one of Cameron's return to work schemes. Tourists will visit the UK to see the queen etc but there are too many snobby rich ass-hole relatives and hangers on who add no value at all. Sarah Ferguson for one should be on the tills at a Tescos somewhere.

I'm not anti royal at all but all this media coverage is getting on my tits, really who gives a sh!t.

Any sensible parent will have restrictions put on the internet for their kids anyway, don't see this making much difference. Would be a shame to go back to the dark old days where the only place teenagers could find porn is in a bush by the side of the road.

You are just making things up now. IF that story is true, they offered to put him on trial, a bit different to offering him up to the US. You are a f*cking fruit loop, seriously, get help.

Sell our best player to some nothing Championship club - yeah that's going to happen.

You really are a nutjob, that offer from the Taliban came a week after the war started! Of course the coalition were not going to stop, they needed regime change not just to capture/kill OBL. As for the Boston bomber, you know full well that you tried to make out he was "conveniently shot in the throat" so couldn't speak. Wasn't it some bizarre false flag conspiracy involving Russia letting the US into Syria? Yeah, that's worked out well hasn't it.

They will never get it through Parliament, MPs are the biggest bunch of w@nkers around.

1. The Afgan War was never just to capture OBL, it was to remove a government that openly supported attacks like 9/11. That's why it wasn't just the US but about 50 other countries that took part in it. 2. OBL was never used as a reason to invade Iraq 3. I expect executing OBL has always been the plan Face it, you have zero evidence for your theory, as always. I see the Boston bomber you said would never speak again has spoken in court. Not sure how this fits in with your other hair-brained theory.

Or until Turkish posts.

I don't believe a word of what we have been told by our governments over Iraq, we invaded for oil, pure and simple. Afganistan is a different story though. BinLaden was a very wealthy man with many loyal people around him. Plus it was not like he was an effective commander whilst in hiding so there was no huge urgency to find him. It's no surprise it took ages to get him.

..until they got him.

They invaded Iraq for Oil, what was the motive for Afganistan if it wasn't to deal with Al Qaeda?

Yes, considering the CNN video you posted says they met up with Bin Laden's media advisor first.

The answer is screamingly obvious. CNN didn't track him down, Bin Laden wanted to get his mug on TV to further his cause so he found them.

Don't ruin another thread with one of your loony theories. None of what you say makes sense. Why would the US make it all up just to spend billions on a war in Afganistan?

Fair play for standing up for something he believes in but I couldn't care less about Guantanomo. It's not an ideal situation but is necessary, without it Bin Laden would still be at large.

That's where you are wrong. This guy decapitated a man he had run over in a car, it was a cowardly act. He didn't try and take Rigby on in a straight fight because he knew a UK serviceman would more than likely win. He is a coward and is probably lying in bed sh!ting himself knowing that a couple of screws can come in at any moment and **** him over again. It doesn't matter what your state of mind is, no one likes having their teeth knocked out - this is a good thing.

You might be right about their attitude to violence but nobody would enjoy having their teeth knocked out. Has to be good news IMO.

Not at all, if I filmed myself at work calling my company's clients scum and posted it on the internet I would be sacked.

Expensive cold war relic, the money would be much better spent providing us with energy security than deterring some threat that doesn't even exist. Of course it provides that extra bit of security from potential overseas threats but I think getting rid would be worth the risk, especially given that we are skint and there are other risks to our safety. Energy, the environment and the potential collapse of our monetary system are all more potent risks IMO. There are plenty of countries around the world that don't need nukes, the best deterrent there is is to stop interfering in other countries issues.

Most important is: 1. A top quality striker (we were VERY lucky last season that Lambert didn't get inured) 2. Cover/competition for Shaw 3. Cover/competition for Clyne 4. Pacy wide/attacking player I'm happy with the CB and GK options but it obviously depends what the club's ambitions are and how far they are willing to go to make it realistic.