pap

If Al Qaeda was as billed, a cellular international terrorist organisation, then invading a country is not the right way to go about breaking that up, especially when there were countless other options on the table. The US could have tried to apply pressure through its partners in the region to secure Bin Laden. Even if it took ten years, which it eventually did after much loss of life, a surgical response to the 9/11 atrocity, along with heightened security to protect against further attack, would have been a more civilised way to handle the problem. What we eventually did cost a lot of lives and has diminished our moral authority.

Massive poppy growing region. Huge percentage of the world's morphine comes from there.

It should have been about Bin Laden. They should have gone after him and put him on trial at the Hague, treating him like any other war criminal. Our response to that should have been a testament to the values that we say we are supposed to uphold. That we care about the rule of law and don't inflict punishment indiscriminately. Instead, we invaded two strategically handy countries that happened to be filled with useful stuff, called them democracies and created a pile of corpses in the process. It was a massively disproportionate response which hurt far more people than it should have, and looks very dodgy in retrospect, particularly with what we know about Iraq.

I didn't cite that as the origin of the extremists, just that we created more of them.

There were many ways that the US could have responded to 9/11, including the option that US Forces eventually took - use special forces to track down OBL and murder him on the spot. Instead, they invaded one country, got us to invent evidence so we could invade another country and then killed over a million people looking for phantom WMDs. Pretty sad really, because at that point - America had the sympathy of the world. The response has been utterly disproportionate and has created countless extra problems for us to deal with.

Those beliefs stem from their interpretation of their Abrahamic religion, some shared by extremist Christian groups. I agree that the UK's presence in the Middle East has nothing to do with why some Muslims believe that homosexuals should be killed or that Sharia law should be the law. However, the US/UK presence did make a lot more of them consider blowing themselves up or causing mayhem in densely-populated areas like Mumbai. So yes, we created extremists.

It's more to do with the fact that over a million Iraqis were killed as a result of the latest conflict. You're putting a regressive attitude to homosexuality up against that? Perhaps you forget that it wasn't so long ago that we were committing homosexuals to asylums and saying that women weren't smart enough to vote. Go a little further back, we were burning people for being Catholic, or Protestant - depending on what year it was. The Islamic world doesn't have a monopoly on atrocity. It's just behind the times on a lot of issues, in my Western opinion of course. We've seen ourselves that mass demonstration and protest are huge catalysts for social change. The irony is that in throwing our weight around, we've allowed hardliners to clamp down in places like Iran, using Western aggression in the region as their excuse. It's all very easy when it's just good guys versus bad guys, but ultimately, it's as simplistic as super-gluing two incongruent concepts together and pretending they constitute a proper question.

In terms of what's needing to be done, yep - it is that easy. Finding the political will to do it is the problem. Unless someone is willing to commit genocide, no amount of warfare is going to stabilise the Middle East, and as long as US/UK armed forces are seen as an occupying force, we'll continue to create more extremists.

Archie, old chap! How's tricks? Wife okay? Still got that bit on the side? She's a spicy simian.

You took 42 minutes to solve this, which is 41.5 minutes longer than allowed. Worst Countdown contestant ever. A chimp could have solved this more quickly (probably).

We are never going to solve Islamic extremism while we are are killing Muslims. The Iraq War will be regarded as a dark stain on the US and UK for generations. Any upcoming conflict in Iran is going to inflame sentiment further. I suspect the long term solution for achieving peace in that region is going to involve a settlement of the Palestinian question, contrition, reconciliation and many long years of wary dealings between former foes. The EDL cannot achieve its stated objective. I suspect that what they want to do is shut people up who are protesting against the actions of Western governments. I know it is uncomfortable to have to deal with Islamic extremists saying they want to destroy the West, but let's at least have a bit of perspective. Total up the bodycount wrought by "The Forces of Good" versus "The Evil Muslims" and the Islamic lot score so low they could be a rounding error. The problem here is that the situation in the Middle East has been screwed since the creation of Israel, and instead of addressing that one basic problem, our governments have piled mistake upon mistake. We have finally found ourselves here, in a time where all Muslims are under suspicion of being bomb-chucking extremists, and far-right groups get to legitimise their existence by pinning their mast to an issue they know will resonate with a scared public. This really isn't a new trick. Lots of very dangerous movements have started out in the same way, citing some nebulous nemesis that only they can conquer. I'm personally not comfortable with such organisations, whoever they claim to be against.

mi5? Mi6?

That's a bit of a wooly answer. Can I trouble you for specifics? In your judgement, what constitutes a well-integrated immigrant?

How else do you see it working?

Hypo - have you ever thought how you might feel if you moved to another country, and then said country was involved in wars against the UK? Do you think under such circumstances, you might feel annoyed at the actions of your adopted country?

I'd agree with you on the timing. The problem is that we've never had time to catch our collective breath and consolidate, and if we continue to subscribe to the EU's principles of letting anyone live anywhere, we never will.

You're right. Personally, I'm on a 2 year upgrade cycle with most stuff. There doesn't seem to be enough new stuff on a yearly release to justify the expense. I think that there will be a lot of nerds like myself who've held back because of the screen that may be thinking along similar lines.

Failure to integrate is not something we Brits have a great track record on either. The world is littered with Little Britain communities, British Schools and the like. Ask yourself this. If you moved to another culture would you adopt or observe all the local customs? I can't honestly say that I would. I've been English everywhere I've gone. You don't suddenly become something else because you are somewhere else. Should our ex-pat communities in Spain shed their British roots and go native? Should dubai_phil? In many senses, the most realistic thing we can hope for when it comes to integration is that immigrants observe our laws. That's pretty much the deal with our people overseas. Integration requires the consent and participation of both sides to fully work.

They do that. I bought one for the missus thinking that she'd use it occasionally, when in actual fact it has become a replacement for her laptop for 90% of the stuff she does.

Looks like the US are burning up a lot of political goodwill to get these sanctions in place. 'Iran' is a weapon of subordination

I didn't realise you were claiming intellectual property rights. You're as bad as them bankers.

On the face of it, no - the iPad is not a phone, so will not ring. However, if you are hooked up to your wifi, the pad may make noises depending on what apps you've installed, whether you have allowed them to be noisy and/or the volume of your iPad. You could be about to (ahem) drop one off and receive a Words with Friends notification. CaptInterruption wants to play! Depending on how skittish you are, this may cause you to drop your iPad on the floor and suffer another broken screen. You might also install Skype, which will let your iPad pretend to be a phone. Same dilemma really. The other thing I should mention is that the more Apple products you own, the more likely you are to have a cock sprout out of your head.

We're getting close to spring, meaning that a new iPad is on the horizon. I have not yet succumbed to an iPad myself (although Ms pap has one). I'm a bit of a tech snob and didn't like the resolution on the screen, especially as I've got an iPhone 4 that looks the biz. However, it looks like they're about to sort that. Rumours:- Launch date is likely to be on or after March 7th. Apple have invited a load of retailers to an iPad launch event on that date. Screen is going to have 2048×1536 resolution (that's better than HD, luddites) 9.7inches on the diagonal Around $70-$90 more expensive than iPad 2 Quad-core processor Full list here Think this might be the one I take the plunge on. Anyone else looking forward to this?

Vulcan logic dictates that someone took the jam out of Turkish's doughnut. If you eliminate the impossible only the improbable remains.

The failure to initiate locking protocols will be a stain on the mods' souls for years to come. I imagine that they'll wake some nights, shivering and cold, suffering shudders that could corrugate titanium. Still, we have to work with the tools we are given, so to speak. I really wanted to give you the last word in this thread. After all, I think we can say that we've laughed, and hopefully learned something about the practicalities of a seemingly insuperable bottom itch. I know I have. And if you ask me, the only reason that SainticonsTM haven't been rolled out across the board is pure jealousy that they did not think of it first. They've been running this so-called SaintsWeb for yonks now, and not once have I seen them come up with SainticonsTM, never mind do as professional a job as you did. I bet the moment you posted that thread they vamoosed off to the mod-cave to decide your punishment. Now we know. They decided to not show you your propers on this thread. Why you gotta front, mods? As for the Ugly Inside - they've got a pap over there. He's a bit like me but has considerably less patience.