Three major mistakes?

[ellboy]

Three major mistakes?

In the last twenty years there have been three major mistakes that have shaped the world we now live in IMO.

First mistake- The first Gulf War the link for info if some are not aware http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War .

IMO the Coalition of 34 countries, which was led by the U.S. and U.K., left the people of Iraq high and dry. The world should have finished what it had started there & then under the United Nations umbrella. They should have stayed to protect the good people of Iraq from there leader amongst other influences.

It was obvious even at that time as to when the coalition turned tail and left. That they were going to leave an already fractured society even more fractured and vulnerable to outside influences. It was speculated before the first Gulf war that the real motivation for it was oil (hence the reason why Saddam ordered the oil wells to be set a light. The coalition’s motivation was solely to protect Kuwait and return it to the control of the Emir of Kuwait. Once that was achieved along with Iraq’s ability to threaten its neighbours severely diminished. It was universally felt the job was done and it was time to pull out.

IMO That should never have happened; the UN left Iraq without rebuilding much of its infrastructure or the hearts & minds of its people. If they had seen it through way back then the second Gulf war would more than likely never have happened.


Second mistake-This is more of a hindsight mistake not exactly sure of the dates (maybe someone could help on that) however it is common knowledge that the U.S. had an opportunity to assassinate OBL, well before 9/11 all they had to do was order it and it would have happened. There is no doubt it would have been controversial but if the American intelligence services had made that decision, then 9/11 and what has followed since is unlikely to have happened.

Third mistake- Oslo Accords Oslo Accords - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 1993 on the white house lawn Clinton, Arafat and Rabin shook hands on a historic agreement. For a brief moment in the Palestinian - Israel conflict it seemed peace was a real possibility. On Arafat’s return to the Palestinian territories it was made clear to him by the people he represented, that under no circumstances they would accept the accords. The mistake IMO was Arafat made the decision to denounce the accords and in essence when he did that the possibility for peace under the Oslo accords died instantly. I think if Arafat had been stronger and stayed true to his word then we may have seen by now a flourishing Palestinian state living side by side in relative pace with Israel.

For me these three mistakes are the major moments over the last twenty years that have affected our world today. If the leaders we trust had been able to stay strong or make the hard decision. Then I would think our world would now be much safer and tollerant place in which to live.


It would be interesting to see your views.

P.S. The Wiki links are only for reference, not to be taken as gospel & neither is my post.

[zmcfc]

Mine would be...

1. Totally agree with you on the first one mate, if Saddam was taken out then, for a legitimate reason, then we wouldn't be facing the problem that the West have had in Iraq for the past five years.

2. IMO, NATO should have acted in Serbia and Kosovo many years before we did. We could have prevented one of the worst genocides in modern history. Although when NATO did react, it got rid of the problem easily...

3. We should have started to look for renewable energy sources decades ago IMO. We also shouldn't have relied to heavily on Saudi oil, because that was one of the main reasons Bin laden and co. were upset with the west. It'll take decades until man can find an alternative to oil as our main source of fuel, but the pil will run out much sooner.

[ellboy]

Originally Posted by zmcfczm

Mine would be...

1. Totally agree with you on the first one mate, if Saddam was taken out then, for a legitimate reason, then we wouldn't be facing the problem that the West have had in Iraq for the past five years.

2. IMO, NATO should have acted in Serbia and Kosovo many years before we did. We could have prevented one of the worst genocides in modern history. Although when NATO did react, it got rid of the problem easily...

3. We should have started to look for renewable energy sources decades ago IMO. We also shouldn't have relied to heavily on Saudi oil, because that was one of the main reasons Bin laden and co. were upset with the west. It'll take decades until man can find an alternative to oil as our main source of fuel, but the pil will run out much sooner.

Your second point- It truly amazes me how long it takes for the world to get itself together before it takes action. You would have thought lessons would have been learned many times over as to the importance of quick action, Serbia and Kosovo being a prime example. Obviously different problems need different actions but in almost all cases the premise has been the same, one group of people’s hatred towards another. If left alone it is inevitable that barbaric and in-comprehensible actions occur. The world seems to talk and talk and all the while people suffer. The same is now happening with the problems in Tibet, Zimbabwe, Darfur, Sudan and many other areas around the world. IMO There needs to be a proposal drawn upby the worlds community, that would basically cover all pre or post existing tensions. So it can be implemented with immediate effect. The finite details of each individual circumstance should be discussed later IMO.


Your third point I couldn’t agree more. This will be the world’s biggest test for our future, we need to find an alternate source. As it is imperative the world gets off its oil dependency, I am not so sure how great the will is to find it though. With all the problems just now with environmental issues the politically correct world in which we now live in has made this search even harder to achieve.

[venegoorstrokes]

Originally Posted by ellboy

Your second point- It truly amazes me how long it takes for the world to get itself together before it takes action. You would have thought lessons would have been learned many times over as to the importance of quick action, Serbia and Kosovo being a prime example. Obviously different problems need different actions but in almost all cases the premise has been the same, one group of people’s hatred towards another. If left alone it is inevitable that barbaric and in-comprehensible actions occur. The world seems to talk and talk and all the while people suffer. The same is now happening with the problems in Tibet, Zimbabwe, Darfur, Sudan and many other areas around the world. IMO There needs to be a proposal drawn upby the worlds community, that would basically cover all pre or post existing tensions. So it can be implemented with immediate effect. The finite details of each individual circumstance should be discussed later IMO.



Your third point I couldn’t agree more. This will be the world’s biggest test for our future, we need to find an alternate source. It is imperative the world gets off its oil dependency, I am not so sure how great the will is to find it though. With all the problems just now with environmental issues the politically correct world in which we now live in has made this search even harder to achieve.

I think the EU needs a large shared military (land, air, sea, nuclear) to deal with issues within and bordering the EU.

[ellboy]

Originally Posted by Keltoi

I think the EU needs a large shared military (land, air, sea, nuclear) to deal with issues within and bordering the EU.

I am not so sure I would agree with that. I mean who would command the shared military? sounds like acase of too many cooks IMO.

[Towelie]

Originally Posted by Keltoi

I think the EU needs a large shared military (land, air, sea, nuclear) to deal with issues within and bordering the EU.

I agree. I think the EU should share large military. I think it makes more sense with issues within the Europe. So its not just one country fighting it. It is the all of Europe.

[ellboy]

Originally Posted by Towelie

I agree. I think the EU should share large military. I think it makes more sense with issues within the Europe. So its not just one country fighting it. It is the all of Europe.

There are big problems that come to mind in relation to this idea. As I said earlier who would command it?

Would this mean each country would have to give up there own forces and hand them over to be badged under the EU banner?

Any major decision needs all 27 member states to agree, for it to be implemented as the recent Lisbon treaty has proved. (obviously with Ireland voting against it, of which I agree with BTW)

Sometime down the line there will be a need for big decisions to be taken. With the vast differences between the 27 EU countries, I just can’t see everyone coming together especially for a decision of such importance as military action.

In essence IMO this idea would be a non starter as if it did happen there is every likely hood that we would have a dormant military and our own national security would not be within our own hands. Oh and BTW what about the millions of troops who gave there lives to protect it.

[Colin McRae]

surely DJ's scott brown exclusive must be up there

[Towelie]

Originally Posted by ellboy

There are big problems that come to mind in relation to this idea. As I said earlier who would command it?

Would this mean each country would have to give up there own forces? or hand them over to be badged under the EU banner?

Any major decision needs all 27 member states to agree, for it to be implemented as the recent Lisbon treaty has proved. (obviously with Ireland voting against it, of which I agree with BTW)

Sometime down the line there will be a need for big decisions to be taken. With the vast differences between the 27 EU countries, I just can’t see everyone coming together especially for a decision of such importance as military action.

In essence IMO this idea would be a non starter as if it did happen there is every likely hood that we would have a dormant military and our own national security would not be within our own hands. Oh and BTW what about the millions of troops who gave there lives to protect it.

I would be very hard to make an EU military army. Even though I think it is a good idea and makes sense, I doubt it would happen due to the complications.

[hairytoes]

Originally Posted by ellboy

There are big problems that come to mind in relation to this idea. As I said earlier who would command it?

Would this mean each country would have to give up there own forces and hand them over to be badged under the EU banner?

Any major decision needs all 27 member states to agree, for it to be implemented as the recent Lisbon treaty has proved. (obviously with Ireland voting against it, of which I agree with BTW)

Sometime down the line there will be a need for big decisions to be taken. With the vast differences between the 27 EU countries, I just can’t see everyone coming together especially for a decision of such importance as military action.

In essence IMO this idea would be a non starter as if it did happen there is every likely hood that we would have a dormant military and our own national security would not be within our own hands. Oh and BTW what about the millions of troops who gave there lives to protect it.

Your wrong there pal.

If the Lisbon treaty gets verified & pushed through Brussels, there will be both a European President (sorry President of the European Council)& a European Foriegn Affairs Dude (or to give him a more masonic & ludicrous title - the high representative for foriegn affairs).

This couple of fannies (who will be installed without any public vote, Tony Blair is clear favorite for President), will then have the power of a pan-European military - to invade whoever the fook they like...without consultation from any of the member states who they now over-ride.

As the European Central Bank already rules over all banks in EuroZone, nulifying their previous ability to alter their own interest/inflation rates - all power will be "centralized", into the hands of people you know fook all about!

Look at how they are already railroading over the Irish Citizens "democratic" desicion.

If you want to gives these people the power of a continent's collective strength - you really should think again....please.

[Feed the bear]

Have to agree with your 3rd point Ellboy. There was no way Hamas and the Iranians and Syrians were going to allow Arafat to broker any peace deal with Israel and to them they've been justified as Hamas now run Gaza.

One thing that amazes me is how any Christian can possibly support Hamas in the knowledge that they actively target Christians and have previously (and only recently) burned churches, burned catholic libraries and seminaries and forcibly ejected christians from the Gaza strip. Mind you, ignorance is bliss eh!

[hoopymo]

i'd say appeasement and not stopping hitler was a bigger mistake than those 3

[Martin]

You do seem to be quite obsessed with the Middle East Ellboy.

Your question is a difficult one. If I could suggest something different I believe one of the major problems facing the world is that consumerism seems to be the new religion in the western world. Other values have collapsed and what has replaced them is greed, selfishness and a deep rooted dissatisfaction within people because we so desperately want to be the 'haves' when in reality the vast majority are the 'have nots'. We have been sold a myth that our lives are infinitely better.

So many areas of our lives are now run on purely economic lines, things which were not previously. Education and health are two examples. I do understand that money makes the world go round but some things in life shouldn't be about 'economic viability'.

I'll have a think about the other two.

[venegoorstrokes]

Originally Posted by Feed the bear

Have to agree with your 3rd point Ellboy. There was no way Hamas and the Iranians and Syrians were going to allow Arafat to broker any peace deal with Israel and to them they've been justified as Hamas now run Gaza.

One thing that amazes me is how any Christian can possibly support Hamas in the knowledge that they actively target Christians and have previously (and only recently) burned churches, burned catholic libraries and seminaries and forcibly ejected christians from the Gaza strip. Mind you, ignorance is bliss eh!

we can send in the EU army commanded by John Barrowman on an out-of-Europe mission to sort it all out.

[ellboy]

Originally Posted by hairytoes

Your wrong there pal.

If the Lisbon treaty gets verified & pushed through Brussels, there will be both a European President (sorry President of the European Council)& a European Foriegn Affairs Dude (or to give him a more masonic & ludicrous title - the high representative for foriegn affairs).

This couple of fannies (who will be installed without any public vote, Tony Blair is clear favorite for President), will then have the power of a pan-European military - to invade whoever the fook they like...without consultation from any of the member states who they now over-ride.

As the European Central Bank already rules over all banks in EuroZone, nulifying their previous ability to alter their own interest/inflation rates - all power will be "centralized", into the hands of people you know fook all about!

Look at how they are already railroading over the Irish Citizens "democratic" desicion.

If you want to gives these people the power of a continent's collective strength - you really should think again....please.

I stand corrected mate, I love the way you constructed your post, top class.

BTW the last two paragraphs we are on the same wave length.

Originally Posted by Feed the bear

Have to agree with your 3rd point Ellboy. There was no way Hamas and the Iranians and Syrians were going to allow Arafat to broker any peace deal with Israel and to them they've been justified as Hamas now run Gaza.

One thing that amazes me is how any Christian can possibly support Hamas in the knowledge that they actively target Christians and have previously (and only recently) burned churches, burned catholic libraries and seminaries and forcibly ejected christians from the Gaza strip. Mind you, ignorance is bliss eh!

This is what annoys me greatly when people talk about this conflict. People need to realise that the groups you have mentioned within your post, along with many more like them have never shown a true desire for peace. Until attitudes change then there will always be tensions.

Bear mate I read a post of yours somewhere on here about you and your daughter, being close to an attack. I can’t imagine what that moment would have been like, it must have been truly frightening. I had a friend who unfortunately was not so lucky he lost his life while eating Pizza inside a Jerusalem restaurant when a bomb went off.

Originally Posted by hoopymo

i'd say appeasement and not stopping hitler was a bigger mistake than those 3

Your right mate that was a doozie but I was asking about the last twenty years.

Originally Posted by Martin

You do seem to be quite obsessed with the Middle East Ellboy.

Your question is a difficult one. If I could suggest something different I believe one of the major problems facing the world is that consumerism seems to be the new religion in the western world. Other values have collapsed and what has replaced them is greed, selfishness and a deep rooted dissatisfaction within people because we so desperately want to be the 'haves' when in reality the vast majority are the 'have nots'. We have been sold a myth that our lives are infinitely better.

So many areas of our lives are now run on purely economic lines, things which were not previously. Education and health are two examples. I do understand that money makes the world go round but some things in life shouldn't be about 'economic viability'.

I'll have a think about the other two.

Regards to the Middle East, I really think this is the major issue that the world faces today, in fact it has been for far too long. I truly believe the whole issue is miss-represented throughout the media. It never used to be that way but around 10 years or so ago there was a general shift in the media that took a very one sided view. I feel this un-balanced reporting has had a major effect on the general public’s psyche, when it comes to this issue. The ramifications of this have been quite severe and I feel irresponsible journalism has had a dangerous and negative effect.

Your point about consumerism is a good one, I would agree with you to an extent. I think that is a major problem within today’s society and one of the major factors as to why we are seeing a breakdown especially within our youth.