Isn't it hypocritical of the US and UK to talk about about global world peace?

Question

With the actions they are carrying out in the world today. It certainly doesn't make peace a possibility if you are fighting unwinnable, disastrous wars.

Answer 1

They are doing this to whole world since last 200 years, Some day world is going reply.

Answer 2

Yes it is,but they should strive for a better world in spite of their own imperfections.Lets face it everyone and every country is hypocritical.Your a hypocrite and so am l.Humanity is rarely fair and just,but it is right to strive for it.

Answer 3

What they mean is world peace on our terms with us at the helm. The UK will find if the USA does achieve it’s goal of controlling the worlds oil, the ‘special relationship’ will mean nothing.

Answer 4

Politicians don't have that word in their dictionary.

Answer 5

Unwinnable? Has our country been taken over and I didn't know it?

Answer 6

hypocrisy is nothing new.

Answer 7

I dunno about the UK but I don't like hearing that mess here in the US

phrases like "global world peace" sound like socialism or NWO garbage--can't trust anything nowadays

Answer 8

The US and UK talking about world peace is like having Gary Glitter talking about child care - totally ironic.

It would be nice to think that the war is being won - but in the cold light of day it isn't. When you have senior officers on both sides of the Atlantic expressing concern over the viability and final outcome of a prolonged campaign then you can rest assured that all is not well, despite the armchair generals claiming otherwise.

My son has completed 4 tours and a 5th starting early 2009. This will be his 3rd tour in Afghanistan. As he says, it's just a case of going over the same ground as 7 years ago - only more dangerous because the Taliban are more organised.

They take an area, move on, the Taliban move back in. They go back, retake it, move on, the Taliban move back in - and round and round it goes in a vicious circle. If that's some peoples' idea of winning they need to do a serious re-evaluation of the term "winning"

Like Northern Ireland there will be no winners in either Iraq or Afghanistan - just a mounting casualty list on all sides until those in power reach a peace agreement with the terrorists and all the sacrifice will have been for feck all - again!!

Answer 9

It's to bad antiwar people never really see things in reality.

Answer 10

As far as winning goes, and I believe you are referring to the Afgan and Iraq wars, we are winning. You don't see much news on either, except maybe once a week or couple of weeks when there is a bombing and such. This is because of the great progress we have made. Heck, Isreal deals with bombs all the time. We, in LA deal with multiple shootings and stabbings and rapings every day. Would you say that the battle against crime is unwinnable in the cities of America? There are wars, there are those who would like to torture and kill Americans because they believe that our existence is decadant and immoral. Because we allow women to speak their minds, let alone vote, own land and such, are reasons enough for certain people to justify our complete destruction. Should we just simply give in and comply? Should we not fight back when our ships are bombed? If our embassies are bombed, as they have been since the seventies, and our citizens tortured. Are these not reasons to fight? In these countries, there are many who believe that until we put Muslem law into effect here, killing all homosexuals, beeting women who speak out of turn, exhile and even kill all non believers, our country should be attacked and wiped out. Those who do not believe this way, are simply too affraid to stand up. These all could be considered unwinnable wars or battles.

Answer 11

Because you used the term "unwinnable," your premise is false on its face.

Any conflict carries the possibility of winning or losing.  If it can be "lost," it can also be, "won."

Answer 12

Unfortunately, with all their troops being dedicated to the war on Iraq, talking is about all they can do.  It is hypocritical for them to criticize Russia for doing what it did since they are doing the same thing in Iraq.

Answer 13

I guess you thin the US & the UK enjoy sending their young men & women to die so others can be free. I guess you think we enjoy running ourselves into debit & depleting our resources @ home so others can survive where as w/ out our help w/ not stand a chance.

No, it's not hypocritical & yes we are tired of stupid rogue nations who seriously are causing the worlds problem.

Answer 14

The fact of the matter is that countries as powerful as those 2 can do and say whatever they want, and no one is going to stop them.

Answer 15

We cannot ignore Islamic extremists or countries that sponsor terrorism. We must fight evil to improve the future peace.

Police must sometimes use force to capture or eliminate criminals. Tough job but someone has to do it.

Answer 16

Ahhh, you miss Saddam? The Iraqis don't, and that's why they executed the b*****d. The Iraqis have collected HUGE profits from oil revenues (FACT), but they are still lying around letting American taxpayers finance the rebuilding of Iraq. Again, F*ck off, eurocunt. You're the one living in a fantasy world. Probably some crazy raghead living in Londonistan.

Answer 17

why dont they want democracy

Answer 18

just a tad.  (sarcasm)

Answer 19

No - they are a Superpower and an almost Superpower so their words carry weight!  Plus the US & UK (with almost NO other international help including from the UN) helped overthrow the evil, tortuous, murdering (women and children) Saddam and install true democracy in Iraq - adding to peace and prosperity there.

Peace

Answer 20

No.

They have opened up "Pandora's Box", creating a religious divide as great as the time of the crusaders.

It is going to take a global effort to just calm the divisions.

Most of the current unrest in the world is focused on religion and that is going to take the leaders of all countries to try to settle things.

Remember it isn't all one sided and mistakes have been made by both parties.

Answer 21

Sure, it is. But we have always done that. We think it works if we repeat it oft enough.

Answer 22

I think the US should tell Eurpoe, "Have at it" and let Russia & china dived em up.

EDIT: "Mayflower, where have you been in the last few years? No ones been freed by this war. That suggestion is laughable"

............You really should learn to do some research instead of listen to the blog-o-sphere. It makes you appear to be an idiot...........

-Saddam has had approximately 40 of his own relatives murdered.

-Allegations of prostitution used to intimidate opponents of the regime, have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women.

-Documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulted in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths.

-Human Rights Watch estimates that Saddam's 1987-1988 campaign of terror against the Kurds killed at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds.

Yeah no one was freed by this war....

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/...

Answer 23

"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war". - Albert Einstein

Answer 24

its so dumb it's actually funny

so..

they arm the taliban to get rid of the soviets.. now they have to fight the taliban to secure 'piece'

the arm both sides in the israeli conflict

they allow israel to commit atrocious acts with full backing

guantanamo doesnt follow the geneva convention

they are angering at present- lebanon, syria and iran, not to mention russia

they say iran cant have nukes when they ahve them themselves- are the iranians some sort of human sub race?

they pit religions whose people would normally get along in their war on terror..

anything else??

Answer 25

lol, no, the hypocrisy is the Religion of Peace that we're fighting.