Jump to content
The mkiv Supra Owners Club

Sex-starved?


michael

Recommended Posts

Good to see our Governments (and the yanks) intentions of bringing democracy to the Afghan people worked out well :blink:

 

yep 200 men and woman from this country have given their lives for that country and this is the mentality of the people governing it, this news must be a real comfort for all the families of the dead soldiers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the law will be pretty ineffective if they blokes over there are anything like me....usually it's the wife that feeds the husband and thus she is more than likely to decide to starve him than visa versa!

 

Its a law attempting to give the trousers to the man for once.

 

yep 200 men and woman from this country have given their lives for that country and this is the mentality of the people governing it, this news must be a real comfort for all the families of the dead soldiers

 

The problem was that we could have stopped the law coming in but that would have been even less democratic than they themselves are being. You don't invade a country to bring democracy and when we disagree with what they are doign say, sorry guys we are freezing yuor democratic system until it matches more like ours. Damned if we do and damned if we don't. It does create change but not over night. I noted with surprise that Iran was now allowing women into the government. Give them time.

 

Also, does anyone else think that the huge media hype about 200 soldiers dieing whilst invading and governing a war torn country is slightly over egged? Don't get me wrong I wish none of the lads over there had died but I can't help feeling that we have forgotten how not so long ago (WW1/WW2 etc) we would be talking in the 100,000's not the 100's. I think we should be pleased that so few have died. I suspect we lost more men in Ireland when we were not technically at war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, does anyone else think that the huge media hype about 200 soldiers dieing whilst invading and governing a war torn country is slightly over egged? Don't get me wrong I wish none of the lads over there had died but I can't help feeling that we have forgotten how not so long ago (WW1/WW2 etc) we would be talking in the 100,000's not the 100's. I think we should be pleased that so few have died. I suspect we lost more men in Ireland when we were not technically at war.

 

I am sure the families are over the moon about it

 

I am sure their brothers in arms are over the moon about it

 

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem was that we could have stopped the law coming in but that would have been even less democratic than they themselves are being. You don't invade a country to bring democracy and when we disagree with what they are doign say, sorry guys we are freezing yuor democratic system until it matches more like ours. Damned if we do and damned if we don't. It does create change but not over night. I noted with surprise that Iran was now allowing women into the government. Give them time.

Well said marbleapple. People can't impose a democratic system onto others using military means. As frustrating as it is, it has to come from politicians who enjoy the backing of a good proportion of the populus.

 

Also, does anyone else think that the huge media hype about 200 soldiers dieing whilst invading and governing a war torn country is slightly over egged? Don't get me wrong I wish none of the lads over there had died but I can't help feeling that we have forgotten how not so long ago (WW1/WW2 etc) we would be talking in the 100,000's not the 100's. I think we should be pleased that so few have died. I suspect we lost more men in Ireland when we were not technically at war.

 

An interesting paragraph. To those who read this, please do it at face value and don't read any hidden meaning into it. I don't know marbleapple but I think I know what he's getting at. He's not claiming that the lives of the families aren't devastated by what's happened to them. He's not claiming that it's not a tragedy they've died.

 

The media reports things for their own gain (i.e. whatever they think sells newspapers or gets bums in front of the TV). There is a danger that the public gets fatigued by reports of deaths in Afghanistan, but on the other hand if it's not reported then it goers unnoticed and forgotten. On that basis, I'd much rather it gets reported.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the media pushes such reports lower down their news bulletins once Parliament finishes its summer recess.

 

In case anyone takes a patriotic tangent over what I've said, I think our armed forces do a great job. I oscillate between envying their comradeship and thanking my lucky stars that I'm not going through what they sometimes have to go through. I can't imagine what it's like to do what they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The problem was that we could have stopped the law coming in but that would have been even less democratic than they themselves are being.

Also, does anyone else think that the huge media hype about 200 soldiers dieing whilst invading and governing a war torn country is slightly over egged? Don't get me wrong I wish none of the lads over there had died but I can't help feeling that we have forgotten how not so long ago (WW1/WW2 etc) we would be talking in the 100,000's not the 100's. I think we should be pleased that so few have died. I suspect we lost more men in Ireland when we were not technically at war.

 

no one could argue the point of democracy as its their country, my point was the mentality of the people making these kind of medieval rules whan he have woman over being killed fighting for them, and as for the numbers i think your way off with that mate and the situations were completely different, WW2 was a fight for the survival of our country, Afganistan and Iraq are more to do with political aims, my personal view is we should never have deployed troops to Afganistan, history is well and truly against us, we got beat there before, the Ruski's deployed around 1 million men and still pulled out, when faced with fanatics wars in these situations are very difficult to win (Vietnam), the Canadians have realised this and now have dates for phased withdrawal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, does anyone else think that the huge media hype about 200 soldiers dieing whilst invading and governing a war torn country is slightly over egged? Don't get me wrong I wish none of the lads over there had died but I can't help feeling that we have forgotten how not so long ago (WW1/WW2 etc) we would be talking in the 100,000's not the 100's. I think we should be pleased that so few have died. I suspect we lost more men in Ireland when we were not technically at war.

 

who beneifts is always the question.

 

i don't believe the soldiers are completely blame free (- for their own losses.) no one joins up without the knowledge they might die in combat. [and remember killing is their business.] by extension if no one joined the forces there would not be a body count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. You might also be interested in our Guidelines, Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.