We send thousands of troops, tanks, aircraft, ships etc. to countries that harbour or train terrorists which costs the tax payer millions of pounds, yet when there's any terrorist threat in the U.K. what do we get, a flat footed bobby with a hand gun, half a dozen bullets in his a**e pocket, oh, and a black baseball hat.
Why? to keep a low profile in case they offend a passing immigrant I suppose.
2006-08-11 10:15:46 · 16 answers · asked by button mushroom 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Can you imagine the panic if the immigrants got off their planes to be greeted by a bunch of unwashed squadies in armoured personnel carriers, Carrying a few guns between them .
They would all run screaming to some bleeding heart that would claim unfair persicution .
A "flat foot bobby with a hand gun, " Well its better than having some poor sod with nothing but a baton. God help us all.
The British armed forces are stretched to the max as it is. Lets put the useless politicains out there instead , They might as well , they do sod all else for the country.
2006-08-11 10:27:35 · answer #1 · answered by Dirty Rob 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
there is not any connection between 9/11 and Iraq. The attackers have been Saudis usually. Bush mandatory an excuse to invade Iiraq, understanding that maximum human beings must be fooled into thinking there replaced right into a connection. 30 saudis attacked the U. S. Bush invaded a diverse united states of america altogether. No. Bush allowed 9/11 to happen and became the U. S. air rigidity in a diverse path so the attack could prevail. Bush then introduced his marketing campaign contained in the middle East. the point is to dominate the finished center east. Bush sent UN inspectors to Iraq who mentioned there have been no weapons there or perhaps blew up the regularly occurring missiles in Iraq. whilst it replaced into superb and risk-free, the U. S. invaded and killed on the fringe of a thousands and thousands Iraqis, a conflict crime for which Bush and an excellent sort of human beings are in charge. the U. S. is after imperialism and domination of the middle east and its oil reserves for destiny use. there is likewise the ingredient of clearing an area around Israel to guard it and supply it unfastened reign to wipe out Palestine.
2016-09-29 04:22:43 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you somewhat...
As I see it, we also have millions of citizens on the job. None of us, Uk, US, Japan, Russia, Germany, France or India or where ever, want to see a bombing or kidnapping as a result of another successful terrorist attack ...and I think we're making some ground at putting the trash out to sea. A group were just arrested yesterday, before they could do harm to innocent air travelers - my son-in-law and my oldest daughter happen to be among the travelers just by chance - I'm very happy to say that the arrests were in part the good work of an ordinary Joe Blow off the street who heard about the plans and then pointed the finger at the bad guys... 24 more terrorists off to jail. Whoopie.
But, anyhow, you're right... there could be more protection at home. I'd like it just fine... however in the mean time, I'll just keep my eyes and ears open. It's my world after all... our world... and we all have to help keep it safe.
{}{}{}{} r u randy? {}{}{}{}
2006-08-11 10:33:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The uk are not really i the state on Iraq and prayfully people are not yet going to theextremes of war. Otherwise they would be redemployed here.
Incidentally my friends husband is off to Afganistan this week, just had a baby boy 9 weeks ago and hes only 19.
2006-08-11 18:49:12 · answer #4 · answered by churchls0904 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're perfectly correct. A few army regiments sent to places like Dewsbury, Walthamstow, Bradford and High Wycombe would probably find more anti-British terorists than there are in Afghanistan and Iraq combined.
2006-08-12 13:15:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NIcely put. In my openion the goverment is only after what they can get. The UK does not have a big oil supply but Iraq does and that is all that matters top the goverment.
2006-08-11 10:25:21 · answer #6 · answered by sam 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We send thousands to Afganistan and Iraq because they actually need it. The UK can take care of themselves.
2006-08-11 10:20:58 · answer #7 · answered by Luekas 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bottom line: What the government does, does not have to make sense. Rhyme or reason is not a prerequisite to spending money or much of anything else. It's government.
2006-08-11 13:29:47 · answer #8 · answered by nothing 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The troops are in Afghanistan because many of these fanatics were trained there.
2006-08-13 03:35:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question exudes ignorance.! Beyond compare. We fight them there so we don't have to here. The US needs more friends like there British.
2006-08-11 10:24:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋