2007-03-28 07:13:20 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Good question. It's not the individuals that have become soft, but the 'rulers', Blair and Co, they're scared to death of offending anyone, even if it means putting the country and it's people at risk.
2007-03-28 07:17:07 · answer #1 · answered by Ahwell 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋
The age of British Imperialism has been over for 60 odd years. The age of American Imperialism is at hand. There are two USN Aircraft carriers that have moved into position off the Gulf. It is not that British are soft. It has to be calculated. You cannot just clobber them without giving them a proper chance to return the sailors. You must look more than reasonable and patient in the eyes of the world. Rememeber that in London alone there are a million muslims - the last thing you want is a muslim uprising in Britain - all of the economic and political repercussions of that.
2007-03-28 07:19:00 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Not soft just astute, whilst all this diplomacy is going on do you not think the SAS/SBS are already there (& prob have been since Iraq), that satellites are scanning the country, intelligence being gathered/shared etc.. etc.. If/when Britain strikes it will be a considered response implemented with brawn & brains!
2007-03-30 12:09:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not soft just careful. We now have the world's press at all corners, usually in the way recording all events. This press are not really worried about the rights and wrongs just the thrill. that is why there is never any good news, they can't be bothered to report it. That is what has softened the approach.
2007-03-28 07:28:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Declaring war or invading to rescue the personnel would have consequences out of all proportion to the act by Iran, and would not necessarily accomplish anything. What if they were being held separately, miles apart? where would we start to look? And what if other Arab nations came out against us because of our aggression, notwithstanding that Iran started it? Negotiation and diplomacy is the way forward, we can always ratchet up the pressure and we're likely to carry others with us that way. Better to jaw jaw than to war war. After all, other innocents might be killed too.
2007-03-28 07:28:27 · answer #5 · answered by Duffer 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What like the US destroyed Tehran when the US hostages were taken in 1979?
2007-03-28 08:19:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I believe its the food, all our food is GM produced (in one way or another) and often packed in crap to make the animals calmer - less testosterone! Also the water supply has too much oestrogen in from all the women on the pill, and oestrogen can't all be gotten rid of before it is drank... it isn't just English guys, you'll have it too :-)
2007-03-28 09:16:03 · answer #7 · answered by floppity 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's the influx of liberalism into our society.It has destroyed every great civilization in the past.Sure the Incas and the Romans fell to invaders,but liberalism attacked their fortitude from inside like "cancer"The British are not Soft,but Political Correctness made them appear to be and thus vulnerable.PC is a liberal tool,so is "gay rights"
2007-03-28 07:27:05 · answer #8 · answered by siaosi 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
yes your right old friend but in this case its dialogue that gets the lads and the girl out of this alive but what goes around comes around we shall have Iran by the short and curlies in the future what a difference to the peacock throne days and Shah
2007-03-31 09:17:56 · answer #9 · answered by srracvuee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When the Iranians took 25 American prisoners some years, you took off your cap, pulled down your forelocks, ate humble pie and paid $millions in ransom, to get them released.
Your mouth is bigger than your brain.
2007-03-28 12:13:57 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The british man has not become soft. Lions led by donkeys, it was ever thus.
2007-03-28 08:25:31 · answer #11 · answered by Bob N 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋