E U. Should we stay or should we leave.

[Huge_Vitae]

So Cameron had nothing to with the Causing the Libya invasion my arse which comic book you being reading beano !!http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/libya-report-britain-uk-gaddafi-civil-war-david-cameron-responsible-terrorism-isis-al-qaeda-mali-a7309821.html

Obviously not your comic book, again, posting some other idiots mistakes written in a comic don't win discussions, try writing something semi original about, well anything.

 

On 19th March 2011 a multi national NATO led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973. The United Nations Intent and Voting was to have "an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute crimes against humanity ... imposing a ban on all flights in the country's airspace a no-fly zone and tightened sanctions on the Qadhafi regime and its supporters." The resolution was taken in response to events during the Libyan Civil War, and military operations began, with American and British naval forces firing over 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles, the French Air Force, British Royal Air Force, and Royal Canadian Air Force undertaking sorties across Libya and a naval blockade by Coalition forces. French jets launched air strikes against Libyan Army tanks and vehicles. The official names for the interventions by the coalition members are Opération Harmattan by France; Operation Ellamy by the United Kingdom; Operation Mobile for the Canadian participation and Operation Odyssey Dawn for the United States.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Huge_Vitae

[big_cod]

Obviously not your comic book, again, posting some other idiots mistakes written in a comic don't win discussions, try writing something semi original about, well anything.

 

On 19th March 2011 a multi national NATO led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973. The United Nations Intent and Voting was to have "an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute crimes against humanity ... imposing a ban on all flights in the country's airspace a no-fly zone and tightened sanctions on the Qadhafi regime and its supporters." The resolution was taken in response to events during the Libyan Civil War, and military operations began, with American and British naval forces firing over 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles, the French Air Force, British Royal Air Force, and Royal Canadian Air Force undertaking sorties across Libya and a naval blockade by Coalition forces. French jets launched air strikes against Libyan Army tanks and vehicles. The official names for the interventions by the coalition members are Opération Harmattan by France; Operation Ellamy by the United Kingdom; Operation Mobile for the Canadian participation and Operation Odyssey Dawn for the United States.

According to a parliamentary report David Cameron was held full responsible for the collapse of Libya

 

Read the link again.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/libya-report-britain-uk-gaddafi-civil-war-david-cameron-responsible-terrorism-isis-al-qaeda-mali-a7309821.html

Edited November 28, 2017 by big_cod

[chesters1]

According to a parliamentary report David Cameron was held full responsible for collapse of Libya .GEETY.

What are you on?

[big_cod]

What are you on?

Tell you what Chesters I would mind some of what your on !!!

[chesters1]

Tell you what Chesters I would mind some of what your on !!!

Not sure you could handle a dose of logic ,sense and the ability to see what is written is nothing more than someone elses opinion

[big_cod]

Not sure you could handle a dose of logic ,sense and the ability to see what is written is nothing more than someone elses opinion

You being smoking something again Chesters

Edited November 28, 2017 by big_cod

[Huge_Vitae]

According to a parliamentary report David Cameron was held full responsible for the collapse of Libya

Read the link again.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/libya-report-britain-uk-gaddafi-civil-war-david-cameron-responsible-terrorism-isis-al-qaeda-mali-a7309821.html

You can ask me to read a link to a comic publication as many times as you like, I won't read it, another matter we have been over before that you seem to be unable to understand, If I was to reply to you as I have done in the past you will undoubtedly get all 'chavvy' about it and once again start throwing insults which, given your stature and ability are not worthy of my considerations.

 

I will answer your own words, "According to a parliamentary report...." Now research that decision and tell me why you would support any enquiry that called upon 'Former Prime Minister Tony Blair' to tell them just what a smashing, top notch chap 'Col' Gadhaffi was, how misunderstood he was and that all we had to do was release a few more murderers of women and children and he might, just might tell us who shot to death unarmed Woman Police Constable Yvonne Fletcher.

 

But putting aside my own thoughts, go back and explain to me exactly how you think a coalition of nineteen Countries enforcing a no fly zone in accordance with the instructions of the United Nations is the same as two Countries INVADING another contrary to the recommendations of the same.

 

Equally, whatever you, I or anybody think about that having been done, the simple fact remains that it was done, I personally think that the UK as senior members of the UN Security Council (NOT as members of the EU, in World affairs the EU is not that important) should enforce and abide by it's wishes. This is not nor was not the case with Iraq.

 

Now add to those points that my original point was, the legal argument BLiar took before committing our Armed Forces was a single page and yet in Stamer's own words in the House today 800 pages are not enough, not that he has seen or read them of course, because they are redacted, not that he has seen the original uncensored (correct word in English usage) report to know that the 800 pages he has not seen are censored.

 

And then, after explaining to you proper procedure, that Davis cannot be summonsed to appear in the House, you now say that he has been 'told' to appear before the Brexit sub committee. Once again, he has been 'invited' to attend nothing more.

 

As for your question 'why would he not attend?' I am not his keeper, but I can assure you he is doing something else regarding his duties, he certainly isn't having a week at Butlins, Bognor Regis.

[big_cod]

You can ask me to read a link to a comic publication as many times as you like, I won't read it, another matter we have been over before that you seem to be unable to understand, If I was to reply to you as I have done in the past you will undoubtedly get all 'chavvy' about it and once again start throwing insults which, given your stature and ability are not worthy of my considerations.

 

I will answer your own words, "According to a parliamentary report...." Now research that decision and tell me why you would support any enquiry that called upon 'Former Prime Minister Tony Blair' to tell them just what a smashing, top notch chap 'Col' Gadhaffi was, how misunderstood he was and that all we had to do was release a few more murderers of women and children and he might, just might tell us who shot to death unarmed Woman Police Constable Yvonne Fletcher.

 

But putting aside my own thoughts, go back and explain to me exactly how you think a coalition of nineteen Countries enforcing a no fly zone in accordance with the instructions of the United Nations is the same as two Countries INVADING another contrary to the recommendations of the same.

 

Equally, whatever you, I or anybody think about that having been done, the simple fact remains that it was done, I personally think that the UK as senior members of the UN Security Council (NOT as members of the EU, in World affairs the EU is not that important) should enforce and abide by it's wishes. This is not nor was not the case with Iraq.

 

Now add to those points that my original point was, the legal argument BLiar took before committing our Armed Forces was a single page and yet in Stamer's own words in the House today 800 pages are not enough, not that he has seen or read them of course, because they are redacted, not that he has seen the original uncensored (correct word in English usage) report to know that the 800 pages he has not seen are censored.

 

And then, after explaining to you proper procedure, that Davis cannot be summonsed to appear in the House, you now say that he has been 'told' to appear before the Brexit sub committee. Once again, he has been 'invited' to attend nothing more.

 

As for your question 'why would he not attend?' I am not his keeper, but I can assure you he is doing something else regarding his duties, he certainly isn't having a week at Butlins, Bognor Regis.

You wont read read it well they says it all I know its in the guardian a very liberal paper but **** still stinks whether you wipe your backside with the mirror or the times .

 

Legs gets something straight what Tony blair did was a hugh mistake despicable Ill Informed and has caused hugh problems with Iraq and the Middle East both my sons joined the navy and my eldest son was over there at the time but David Camerons war has also caused problems you defend him and say gadhaffi was a monster he was not the best but look at it now utter chaos you talk about his atrocities so when mass slaughter was going in Rwanda in 1994 not a word not a boo from our then Tory government we stood by but Libya was ok oil by any chance ! most wars are despicable evil bush sucked blair in like a baby and he fell for it fool stupid man .

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/13/david-camerons-ill-conceived-libya-war-led-to-rise-of-islamic-st/

 

 

As for David Davis he could end up in deep .... and is starting to hang himself .

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/david-davis-brext-impact-assessments-parliament-sovereignty-will-of-people-a8080326.html

Edited November 29, 2017 by big_cod

[Huge_Vitae]

We could go on discussing Military Interventions for ever and a day finding faults and failings normally caused by Politics and Politicians, you won't find me defending a toffee nosed toss pot who thought that a year or so membership of the Army Cadets qualified him to bark out orders to the Military, but again the situation in Rwanda was and has been placed entirely the fault of The United Nations and indeed to the point where the Commander of the Mission sent an immediate report fearing that a Genocide was about to occur and requested, firstly the authority to use force to defend the population and secondly; For more troops to be sent. Said letter was received by Sec. Gen. and basically ignored.

 

Now, there is a case for the Major govt. to act independent of UN but where does the line get drawn?

 

In any case, what that has to do with Brexit is beyond me so I will stop there and remind you that the diversion off topic continues to be you. We were discussing legal documents and the attempts once more to slow the Brexit process and increase the EU position and strength in the negotiations.

[big_cod]

We could go on discussing Military Interventions for ever and a day finding faults and failings normally caused by Politics and Politicians, you won't find me defending a toffee nosed toss pot who thought that a year or so membership of the Army Cadets qualified him to bark out orders to the Military, but again the situation in Rwanda was and has been placed entirely the fault of The United Nations and indeed to the point where the Commander of the Mission sent an immediate report fearing that a Genocide was about to occur and requested, firstly the authority to use force to defend the population and secondly; For more troops to be sent. Said letter was received by Sec. Gen. and basically ignored.

 

Now, there is a case for the Major govt. to act independent of UN but where does the line get drawn?

 

In any case, what that has to do with Brexit is beyond me so I will stop there and remind you that the diversion off topic continues to be you. We were discussing legal documents and the attempts once more to slow the Brexit process and increase the EU position and strength in the negotiations.

Brexit yes today we hear if correct a cash settlement has been agreed now if this is correct when finished it will actually be near on 50 billion and we will still be paying in now correct me if I am wrong was there just one word of this 50 billion we would be paying to the leave the EU before the referendum took place .

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/29/how-many-boris-buses-does-a-brexit-divorce-bill-buy-you

Edited November 29, 2017 by big_cod