Liverpool FC Forum

[Roger Red Hat]

dont even get me started.....

so sorry that you had an earthquake but 'shit happens

[JBG]

The problem is, when it comes to natural disasters, there is not much you can do about it. Even though people are entitled to their opinions, I believe in God but there you go. Sometimes, faith gives people something to believe in and give them hope. You take the faith away, you will take a lot of people's hopes away as well.

However, the middle east is a perfect example and Northern Ireland is too that people who ardently follow these religions can cause many problems in the world as well.

I think your post is indicative of many common misunderstandings about Northern Ireland.

The IRA's war was not a religious war like that of Al Qauida, but a war with political and revolutionary aims. The IRA wanted a 32 county United Ireland, preferably with a Marxist government and also the emancipation of Republicans/Nationalists in the North, who were being discriminated against.

Republicans and Nationalists happened to be Catholic and those people who wished to remain in Britain happened to be Protestant. As it happens, there are many great Irish Patriots who sought a free Ireland throughout its history who were not Catholic but Protestant (Charles Stuart Parnell being the most famous of them).

The war in Northern Ireland then degenerated into civil strife between the two tribes. Their religion was only a marker as to their position as to allegiance to the crown. It was only after decades of war did religion and what side the of the political fence you sat on became intertwined and unfortunately there was violence on both sides where random Catholics and Protestants were murdered because of their religion. However, I feel that this was not because of religious fanaticism, but because your religion symbolised where your loyalties lay.

Loyalists and Unionists like Ian Paisley often beat the religion drum (most famously when Paisley cat called the Pope during the Pontiff's speech to the European Parliament in the early 1980s) and claim that they would be discriminated against in a united Ireland, yet ignoring that the small Protestant population in the South is completely integrated and there are no sectarian issues whatsoever there. Indeed, Protestants are actually very well treated, and many receive government grants etc allowing them to go to Protestant boarding schools if they wish.

The IRA did not carry out its terrorism under the flag of religion but of revolution and insurgency. You cannot brand the IRA as Catholic terrorists but as Irish terrorists, not that they were ever supported in modern times other than by a tiny percentage of Irish people.

[Lando_Griffin]

Sometimes, faith gives people something to believe in and give them hope. You take the faith away, you will take a lot of people's hopes away as well.

However, the middle east is a perfect example and Northern Ireland is too that people who ardently follow these religions can cause many problems in the world as well.

Exactly. I believe in God, a different God to the one Muslims, etc believe in. This isn't the problem. The problem is that certain people take religion and use it as an excuse to be ar*eholes to others. Why don't they take that energy and use it to make better lives for themselves and their families?
I would never dream of bombing the silly c*nts who would happily kill me and everyone on this board, just for daring to have different Gods.
Am I missing the point? Here I was thinking God (as we think of him, at least) was a loving, accepting, forgiving Lord. One who knows no limit to the love, compassion and patience he may show us. He wishes for us to love one another, honour, and do the right thing. THAT is what my God is about.
I can't understand anyone misreading that.
And what of the other religions? I am aware that the Mormons believe that there is a limit to the amount of people allowed to enter Heaven. They spend their entire lives in a state of discomfort on the off-chance that they may get into Heaven. Why would God be like that? I thought it was as simple as;if you're good, you go upstairs, if you're bad, you go downstairs. Evidently there are millions who disagree.
Where did the suicide bombers, etc, get the notion that God wanted them to murder thousands of people? What kind of God is that? I'm not being Blasphemous, but that sounds more like Satan to me. Why can't the fools realise that you have do good things, not bad? I'll tell you something for free;the stupid murdering b*stards will wish they hadn't done it now. (Assuming there is an afterlife.)

It's about time some people learnt a bit of compassion, love and common sense, and stopped turning every version of the holy book/scriptures into a license to kill.

These idiots that kill, are exploiting a loophole in their religion to justify murder.

It will never stop i feel, but get worse. Terrorism has been around long before the USA etc took an interest in global affairs. It much like a bubble that has burst, it must run it course until like during the last two world wars, where it may be more appropriate to go to war fully.

mark my words, this is a distinct possibility. So i say to the men on here, get yourself fit just in case!!

Should there ever be a third world war, there will be no man to man fighting. A few punks with their fingers on the buttons would wipe entire countries out with a single flick.

[Woollyback]

if the next world war is fought with nuclear weapons, then the one after that will be fought with sticks and stones

[Judge]

war is so stupid, but things can escalate very fast. Thats what worries me the most.

what about my kids future. its very worrying indeed.

i agree with you woolly, sticks and stones....yes indeed

[JBG]

I don't think there will ever be another large scale conflagaration like World War I or II. Even without WMD, a large scale war with conventional weapons would be catastrophic. However, thats a moot point as countries capable of fighting a large scale war would inevitably resort to WMD.

Wars involving the western nations will be small scale, high tech affairs, with less emphasis on ground combat and more emphasis on aircraft, tactical assaults, "precision" bombing and highly trained and specialised ground forces which would only be used in limited and local theatres. I think the days of large scale armoured combat such as that seen in the Eastern Front in World War Two or in the Arab Israeli conflicts are a thing of the past.

The main fear of war would surely involve third world countries or second world countries like India or Pakistan. China and Tawain is also potential for a disaster.

I think that the West does not have to fear the likes of an armoured invasion experienced in World War 2 or at the height of the cold war. Terrorism is about as far as it goes, and if truth be told, there is a lot of unnecessary hysteria about terrorism. George Bush makes the terrorist threat equate to the fear of nuclear annihilation by the Soviet Union in the Cold War days, now, that was something to be worried about. For most of the Cold War people were safe as houses as neither side would risk a nuclear exchange, but for some periods there was a genuine and real danger, as both sides briefly thought they had the capacity to strike first and win.

[Judge]

good post jbg, well thought analysis, you can tell your a lawyer

however, the threat from terror, could be the dirty bomb. Dont discount major war, especially in the middle east. Maybe not in our lifetime, but i feel sure it will happen at some point as things have been boiling up since the sixties.

I take your point on no large scale armoured invasion, but so called developed countries with heavy military capabilities would consider armoured invasion, following sustained air and sea bombardment. Sometimes, the most conventional ways of war, are full scale invasions, and would probably figure heavily in any future battles. Im sure of that.

[wrighty (not mark!)]

I'm very concerned about korea and China, I'll tell you that. Diplomacy must be used at it's maximum level to prevent any potential incidents occuring most definately.

I'm also rather worried that Nuclear power is on the agenda. Could be more trouble than it's worth.

[woof woof !]

I'm very concerned about korea and China, I'll tell you that. Diplomacy must be used at it's maximum level to prevent any potential incidents occuring most definately.

I'm also rather worried that Nuclear power is on the agenda. Could be more trouble than it's worth.

Wouldn't be too concerned about China Wrighty . They are the next economic superpower and have as much if not more than even the west  invested in seeing a stable world in which they can flex their new found economic muscle .
Much more concern should be paid to the spiders who run Iran and it's nuke program and also (as you mentioned ) Korea , China may be able to keep Korea on a leash and may even in the longer term bring about some positive changes within that benighted place.(I'm assuming were talking about North Korea ) .

Iran , it nuclear program and it's terror links is the the armegeddon I hope doesn't happen in my lifetime , but if islamic nutters are ever gonna lay their hands on a nuke it'll have "made in Iran" written all over it .

[JBG]

The main threats to international peace and secuirt, in no particular order, over the next 50 or so years are as follows:

1. International terrorism where terrorist groups get their hands on WMD.
2. Nuclear proliferation. This is a huge danger. Its already started with India and Pakistan. It could have a knock on effect across the world. The big fear is that Germany and Japan will feel threatened enough to abandon their pacifist ways and commence nuclear weapons programmes. This is a real danger with Japan as it may decide to build its own nuclear deterrent against North Korea (in the medium term) and China (in the long term). It might not seem plausible now, but some people still fear a resurgance of militarism in Germany, as guilt over the second war war dissapates and a new generation of disenchanted Germans arise over economic and social problems in that country. I don't think there is any great fear of Germany becoming "bad" again, but even a democratic Japan rearming is worrying, given the potential to start an arms race with China.
3. China's emergence as a super power. Economics and trade disputes often lead to war, and Japan's economic growth will come at the expense of the USA and Japan. Neither of them will like that.

[Judge]

are you saying that Iran is run by islamic nutters?

[kazza 1]

The problem is, when it comes to natural disasters, there is not much you can do about it. Even though people are entitled to their opinions, I believe in God but there you go. Sometimes, faith gives people something to believe in and give them hope. You take the faith away, you will take a lot of people's hopes away as well.

However, the middle east is a perfect example and Northern Ireland is too that people who ardently follow these religions can cause many problems in the world as well.

I think your post is indicative of many common misunderstandings about Northern Ireland.

The IRA's war was not a religious war like that of Al Qauida, but a war with political and revolutionary aims. The IRA wanted a 32 county United Ireland, preferably with a Marxist government and also the emancipation of Republicans/Nationalists in the North, who were being discriminated against.

Republicans and Nationalists happened to be Catholic and those people who wished to remain in Britain happened to be Protestant. As it happens, there are many great Irish Patriots who sought a free Ireland throughout its history who were not Catholic but Protestant (Charles Stuart Parnell being the most famous of them).

The war in Northern Ireland then degenerated into civil strife between the two tribes. Their religion was only a marker as to their position as to allegiance to the crown. It was only after decades of war did religion and what side the of the political fence you sat on became intertwined and unfortunately there was violence on both sides where random Catholics and Protestants were murdered because of their religion. However, I feel that this was not because of religious fanaticism, but because your religion symbolised where your loyalties lay.

Loyalists and Unionists like Ian Paisley often beat the religion drum (most famously when Paisley cat called the Pope during the Pontiff's speech to the European Parliament in the early 1980s) and claim that they would be discriminated against in a united Ireland, yet ignoring that the small Protestant population in the South is completely integrated and there are no sectarian issues whatsoever there. Indeed, Protestants are actually very well treated, and many receive government grants etc allowing them to go to Protestant boarding schools if they wish.

The IRA did not carry out its terrorism under the flag of religion but of revolution and insurgency. You cannot brand the IRA as Catholic terrorists but as Irish terrorists, not that they were ever supported in modern times other than by a tiny percentage of Irish people.

JBG, Thank God you put him right!! God knows what might have started!!! But I do see where he was coming from! The conflict in NI might have started the  way that it did. But before the peace agreement it was a "religious war". So I can understand why people make the  comparison between what has happened here to what happening now in Iraq. But, as you can see with NI, things can change! There is still a lot of animosity between both religon's here and a lot of things need to be changed...
Anyway on the subject of the earthquake, I think a lot of people are to wrapped up in their own lives to let it get to them. To be honest, I was out over the weekend and knew nothing about it till yesterday.... I do feel for the families who have lost loved ones (esp those who lost children). But as I said, theres a lot going on in my own life, that I really have'nt had time to think about it......

[JBG]

I'm very concerned about korea and China, I'll tell you that. Diplomacy must be used at it's maximum level to prevent any potential incidents occuring most definately.

I'm also rather worried that Nuclear power is on the agenda. Could be more trouble than it's worth.

Wouldn't be too concerned about China Wrighty . They are the next economic superpower and have as much if not more than even the west  invested in seeing a stable world in which they can flex their new found economic muscle .

Thats true to a point woof, but if you look at history, economic rivalry can often lead to conflict. Look at it this way:

1. China will become the number one rival to the US for fossil fuel resources over the next 50 years. It has very little local supplies and is dependent on imports. Like the US, it will eventually start protecting its interests, and we'll eventually see China involved in the Middle East and Africa. Chinese influence in Sudan has already massively complicated the Darfur situation, as China is dependent on Sudan for oil and will not like a UN peace keeping force go in there unless its made up of Chinese (or its allies) troops.
2. China is already challenging Japan's economic dominance of the Far East. While it is true that there are becoming increasingly ecomically dependant on each other, China still has a hostile attitude towards Japan and will not flinch in capturing Asian markets from Japan. Japan won't like that.
3. Despite a few major hiccups, the Pacific Rim will be the most important economic area in the world for the next 100 years. At one end there will be China, the other the USA. Squeezed into the middle will be Japan. The US has gone to war to protect its economic interests before, and it won't stand idly by and watch China grab all of its markets. People forget that in the year before 9/11, US-Sino relations fell to their lowest point since pre-Nixon days, with the row over the WTO, Chinese nuclear spying and the embarassment of a US spy plane having to emergency land in a Chinese airport.
4. China will eventually try to reclaim Tawain. Tawain is after all, Chinese, having been taken from the Chinese by Japan in the 19th century and then occupied by the defeated Nationalist army after 1949. Cold War geopolitics saw the US extend its nuclear umbrella to cover Tawain. The Chinese are chomping at the bit to invade the island, and as soon as they see a weakness in America, they will. Nothing is more certain, its simply a matter of time.

[66-1120597113]

I'm very concerned about korea and China, I'll tell you that. Diplomacy must be used at it's maximum level to prevent any potential incidents occuring most definately.

I'm also rather worried that Nuclear power is on the agenda. Could be more trouble than it's worth.

Wouldn't be too concerned about China Wrighty . They are the next economic superpower and have as much if not more than even the west  invested in seeing a stable world in which they can flex their new found economic muscle .
Much more concern should be paid to the spiders who run Iran and it's nuke program and also (as you mentioned ) Korea , China may be able to keep Korea on a leash and may even in the longer term bring about some positive changes within that benighted place.(I'm assuming were talking about North Korea ) .

Iran , it nuclear program and it's terror links is the the armegeddon I hope doesn't happen in my lifetime , but if islamic nutters are ever gonna lay their hands on a nuke it'll have "made in Iran" written all over it .

All his nuke talk scares the shi.t outta me!!
Surely if any of thes countries wanted to use these bombs they'd target the USA 1st.Im not saying thats ok its just more likely in my eyes!
But are there not safety measures in place?
I mean if a nuke was launched at us would it not be detected miles away and shot down???
Or if a plane tried to approach us would it not be shot down before we could come to any harm??
I always tell myself yes!!

Can remember seeing a movie years ago called 'threads' and ever since then ive been petrified at the thought of it ever happeninng....
I think as said above its the Iranians should be most concerned about and the fact that Blair and Bush have chose not to invade by now says that its too late...meaning they have nuclear warheads already and are not afraid to use them!!

[Judge]

maybe the USA will declare war on China for overuse of fossil fuels, much as Japan declared war on the USA for them not having enough fossil fuel to give to japan (oil)??!!


fuel drives war, especially in the modern era