Wilber

We already have a blanket law, we do nothing.

They wouldn't have stayed in port and even under air attack, the RN was probably powerful enough to impede an invasion force. An amphibious assault would have been a high risk operation and even a small disruption would have been enough to delay it or irrevocably damage its prospects. But there's on;y one way to settle this: Axis and Allies!!! OK but the Allies have no airforce.

True but if the British fleet had no air support it wouldn't matter. If they stayed in port where they were in position to stop an invasion, Luftwaffe bombers could pound them to pieces at their leasure. Their dive bombers were deadly accurate if they had no air opposition. If the navy put to sea to stay out of range (something they could not do indefinately) they would not be in a position to stop an invasion and would be open to air attack for hundreds of miles before they were in a position to do so. The Washington Naval Treaty placed restrictions on the total tonnage for capital ships which affected the size and number of capital ships the navy could have. It also restricted the number and size of carriers. For instance the British needed a larger number of cruisers than other countries because of their far flung empire, which resulted in them having to build more light cruisers at the expence of heavier ships which other countries were building. The treaty gave parity to the US and allowed Japan to get closer to parity. After 1936 Japan renounced the treaty and Nazi Germany did what it wanted. Britain did not have the overwhelming naval superiority it had enjoyed for the previous 130 years.

Kids always have to learn that there are consequences to every action. If their parents cannot handle them, the State is doing them no favours by not doing anything if they get out of control. There are lots of options in between putting them in jail and doing nothing. They don't need to be the same for a 7 year old as for a 12 year old.

Part of growing up is learning there are consequences for your actions. You can't treat them as adult criminals but you can't just keep letting them off either. All that does is teach them crime does pay. Inconvenience the crap out of the little buggers as soon as they step out of line. Take away their weekends and other stuff they value for a month or so, right at the beginning before they become a real problem. Make them work off a little restitution. It won't work for all of them but I bet it will for most kids.

Maybe because Hezbollah is getting more support from outside the country than Lebanon's legitimate government, because the legitimate government does not support the foreign policy of those who support Hezbollah.

One only needs to look at Pearl Harbor, Midway, Leyte and the fate of Prince of Wales and Repulse off the coast of Malaya to see what air power can do to capital ships with no air support. The British home fleet was based at Scapa Flow in the Orkney's (a long way from the English Channel) for two reasons, to block German access to the North Atlantic and to keep it out of range of bombers with fighter escort. If the RAF had been defeated they would have been subject to air attack anywhere they could have been based which would have given them a chance of meeting an invasion, not just while the invasion was in progress. Hitler and Saddam were the government of Germany and Iraq. Hezbollah is not the government of Lebanon.

Thelonius is correct, the RAF was on its heels until the Germans switched to bombing cities. If they could have established air superiority they could have made it very difficult for the Royal Navy to stop an invasion fleet. The British Army had left almost all of its heavy weapons at Dunkirk and was in no shape to repel an invasion. It would have had a very good chance of succeeding if the Germans could have got their army across the channel. England probably could have negotiated with Hitler but as he never made a treaty he didn't eventually break, there wouldn't be much point. Morally, there was no way they could negotiate. Bombing certainly didn't break the will of either side but Allied bombing did divert a million Germans to air defense instead taking part in the ground war. Some Germans did try to do something about the Nazis but the answer is the same as to the question of why didn't Iraqis do something about Saddam?

The Center for Research on Globalization? Ah, another globalization conspiracy and after all we do know the Bush government engineered 9/11. That explains it. These people were arrested and if charged, will be tried in Britain. Unlike Pakistan and 90% of the countries in that part of the world, these people will be subject to a justice system where torture is not allowed, is not controlled by the government and in which they will have to be proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

I read the article and it is obviously an opinion piece or editorial. It doesn't claim to be straight news reporting. Did the same go for the CBC piece? I didn't see it but if they represented it as news, they are way out of line.

There are fundamentalists in every religion and while many have a somewhat narrow view of the world, the great majority do not preach violence against those who do not agree with them.

Most who use performance enhancing drugs do so along with masking agents. Maybe whatever he was using to mask the testosterone didn't work that day for some reason.

I didn't make the point that they uncovered the plot. My mistake, sorry about that.

Most military and security experts say the world is not more secure and in fact is less secure. Many of the world's terrorists are being trained now in Pakistan, a U.S. ally. And this is where Osama bin Laden is supposed to be hiding. Obviously we weren't more secure before 9/11. If we were there wouldn't have been a 9/11. Before they were being trained in Afghanistan. You made a big point about the roll the Pakistani government played in uncovering this latest plot. The Taliban government of Afghanistan was actively supporting Al Qaeda. Blaming the government and all the people of Pakistan for the activities of Al Qaeda on Pakistani soil is the much the same as blaming the government and all of the people of Lebanon for the activities of Hezbollah on Lebanese soil.

That's the question that Bush should be asked every day. Are we safer than September 11? If not, why not? Wasn't the mission to apprehend Osama bin Laden? Part of the mission in Afghanistan still is, unfortunately Bush let himself get sidetracked in Iraq. Are we safer from the likes of Al Qaeda since 9/11? Yes I think so. Is our little world a safer place? Maybe not but it never was as safe as we let ourselves believe.

Actually, the Pakistan government is the one that tracked them down. Maybe Israel could learn from them to do a better job at intelligence and not have to go bomb children. Why haven't they found Osama?

The British government did a less than stellar job ensuring that those allowed in would be citizens they'd want to have. They are not unique in that respect.

Why not start bombing London neighbourhoods then? They're bound to get a few. No need, the British government is doing their job in tracking these people down, not giving them sanctuary.

BD A question for ya. If Iran really wanted to help the people of Lebanon, why don't they do it by supporting its legitimate government or through organizations like the Red Crescent, instead of a proxy army to carry out an Iranian foreign policy that is bound to do nothing but bring the people of Lebanon grief?

Not often but how about the bombing of the Israeli Embassy and a Jewish community center in Argentina around ten years ago?

Just heard that the MOT has exempted crews from the extra restrictions. At least someone there has a brain. Hopefully the rest will figure it out.

Don't forget toothpaste. They are even removing it from crew staff. Another insanity. Many airlines do not allow their crews to check baggage. A six day trip without toothpaste or shaving cream, or are they expected to buy new stuff at each layover and throw it away the next day. It's tough to have confidence in the morons who come up with this stuff. Too bad they consider crews to be a problem instead of part of the solution. I retired just in time.

You believe that if it was possible to use one bullet strategically placed, we would chose to bomb children instead? Too expensive.

As opposed to people who just kill innocent people in order to kill innocent people.

Never seen a Kiboda but there are quite a few Kibotas around here. Maybe they spell it different in Spanish.