Time to get behind the taliban

so flango - you think tbe british army are a force of good in the world & you think racism is ok?

gerrardno1 wrote:

If the taliban had half the chance they would make Ireland a Muslim state and introduce numerous draconian suppressive laws so they are both as bad as each other.

Just curious Raven cause I dont know the facts (only what you have written above) but what would you do if you were a soldier and a car was driving at you at speed during the troubles?

if the taliban had the chance- wtf are you on about?? britain owns part of our country- time you dealt with reality rather than posting what if scenarios

gerrardno1 wrote:

If the taliban had half the chance they would make Ireland a Muslim state and introduce numerous draconian suppressive laws so they are both as bad as each other.

Just curious Raven cause I dont know the facts (only what you have written above) but what would you do if you were a soldier and a car was driving at you at speed during the troubles?

are you justifying lee cleggs actions?

Lets just all put on Turbans, eat kebabs and praise allah and turn our toilets away from Mecca!! Iā€™d rather take an oath to the queen then live in a world like that!!

Actually no, I like Kebabs!

Iā€™ll say this.

Iā€™m not a huge fan of the BA or what they did in Ireland in the past but to say they are an evil force, worse than the Taliban, nowadays is plainly ridiculous. Seriously I cant see how anyone could say so.

As for the racism stuff, they bring it on themselves.

What was that bird on the bus thinking when she didnā€™t move out of the way for the white guy?

And Ainsley Harriotā€¦

Iā€™m not a huge fan of the BA

Yeah they serve shitty salads on their flights

BenShermin wrote:

Iā€™m not a huge fan of the BA

Yeah they serve shitty salads on their flights

Banter

Fingal Flano wrote:

[quote]Iā€™ll say this.

Iā€™m not a huge fan of the BA or what they did in Ireland in the past but to say they are an evil force, worse than the Taliban, nowadays is plainly ridiculous. Seriously I cant see how anyone could say so.

As for the racism stuff, they bring it on themselves.

What was that bird on the bus thinking when she didnā€™t move out of the way for the white guy?

And Ainsley Harriotā€¦[/quot

hundreds of thousands of dead in iraq & they are not a force of evil

Fingal Flano wrote:

Iā€™ll say this.

Iā€™m not a huge fan of the BA or what they did in Ireland in the past but to say they are an evil force, worse than the Taliban, nowadays is plainly ridiculous. Seriously I cant see how anyone could say so.

As for the racism stuff, they bring it on themselves.

What was that bird on the bus thinking when she didnā€™t move out of the way for the white guy?

And Ainsley Harriotā€¦

I had a huge row with a lapsed forum member last year about the British Army. I would have thought their genocide in Iraq would have made them worse than the taliban.

i concur bandage - while there is a hint of anti muslim sectarianism in some posters thread I cant see how anyone can not say genocide is not evil

Iā€™ll make this simple. The British Army is not committing genocide.

I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger, even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit, for instance that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race, to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.

Winston Churchill: what he said of the Palestinians - 1937

i can see now why you support fc biggles

Biggles?

Quoting a racist like Churchill to back up your point kind of suggests you agree with his racist points and therefore are a racist yourself Flaninho.

Ah I just read that on someones myspace about 2 minutes before I posted here and decided to share it with everyone. I like the new nickname for me Bandage, Flaninho, I like it.

fc bigles= boez

jog on flango

Keep on runnin raven, keep on runnin.

A new ā€˜super-weaponā€™ being supplied to British soldiers in Afghanistan employs technology based on the ā€œthermobaricā€ principle which uses heat and pressure to kill people targeted across a wide air by sucking the air out of lungs and rupturing internal organs.

The so-called ā€œenhanced blastā€ weapon uses similar technology used in the US ā€œbunker bustingā€ bombs and the devastating bombs dropped by the Russians to destroy the Chechen capital, Grozny.

Such weapons are brutally effective because they first disperse a gas or chemical agent which is lit at a second stage, allowing the blast to fill the spaces of a building or the crevices of a cave. When the US military deployed a version of these weapons in 2005, DefenseTech wrote an article titled, ā€œMarines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon.ā€

According to the US Defense Intelligence Agency, which released a study on thermobaric weapons in 1993, ā€œThe [blast] kill mechanism against living targets is uniqueā€“and unpleasantā€¦ What kills is the pressure wave, and more importantly, the subsequent rarefaction [vacuum], which ruptures the lungs. If the fuel deflagrates but does not detonate, victims will be severely burned and will probably also inhale the burning fuel. Since the most common FAE fuels, ethylene oxide and propylene oxide, are highly toxic, undetonated FAE should prove as lethal to personnel caught within the cloud as most chemical agents.ā€

A second DIA study said, ā€œshock and pressure waves cause minimal damage to brain tissueā€¦ it is possible that victims of FAEs are not rendered unconscious by the blast, but instead suffer for several seconds or minutes while they suffocate.ā€

ā€œThe effect of an FAE explosion within confined spaces is immense,ā€ said a CIA study of the weapons. ā€œThose near the ignition point are obliterated. Those at the fringe are likely to suffer many internal, and thus invisible injuries, including burst eardrums and crushed inner ear organs, severe concussions, ruptured lungs and internal organs, and possibly blindness.ā€

British defense officials told the UK Guardian that British bombs were ā€œdifferent.ā€

ā€œThey are optimized to create blast [rather than heat]ā€, one said, speaking on the standard condition of anonymity in Britain. The official added that it would be misleading to call them ā€œthermobaric.ā€

Officials told the Guardian the new weapon was classified as a soldier launched ā€œlight anti-structure munitionā€ and that the bombs would be more effective because ā€œeven when they hit the damage is limited to a confined area.ā€

ā€œThe continuing issue of civilian casualties in Afghanistan has enormous importance in the battle for hearts and minds,ā€ said Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell in the article. ā€œIf these weapons contribute to the deaths of civilians then a primary purpose of the British deployment is going to be made yet more difficult.ā€

According to Campbell, the deployment of the weapons was not announced to Parliament.

That weapon sounds class.