Bush says London not safe For Americans! what a bitch!

[Hankaveli]

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX MON JULY 11, 2005 17:21:08 ET XXXXX

PAPER: US TELLS FORCES TO 'STAY OUT OF LONDON'

American defense chiefs faced condemnation last night for banning U.S. airmen from entering London, the Uk's DAILY MAIL will report on Tueday.

All 12,000 members of the U.S. Air Force stationed in Britain have been told not to travel inside inner London because of the risk of further bomb attacks.

The news provoked fury from British MPs who pointed out that the UK had been America's staunchest ally in the wake of September 11.

They said it handed a symbolic victory to the terrorists.

Even as news of the order emerged yesterday, President Bush was promising that America 'will not retreat in the face of terrorists', and voicing his solidarity with Londoners. Shortly after thebombings he declared in his weekly radio address: 'In this dark hour, the people of Great Britain can know that the American people stand with them.'

But yesterday U.S. officials were justifying the travel ban as a 'prudent' move. 'The security of our people is our main concern,' they said.

MPs said the spectacle of the world's most powerful armed forces being too scared to walk the streets of London was a symbolic victory for the terrorists.

The message that the city was unsafe for Americans would also have a devastating impact on the tourist industry, which relies heavily on the 3.6million U.S. visitors each year.

The order to U.S.A.F. personnel, who form the bulk of America's military presence in Britain, was issued on Friday. It applies whether they are on or off duty.

Even those with urgent business in the capital, such as visiting their embassy or the Ministry of Defence, must seek special permission.

Families and civilian staff at U.S. bases have also been 'strongly advised' to avoid London, and a number of theatre trips or sightseeing visits have been cancelled, the paper claims.

Developing...

 

[PuffnScruff]

those poor bastards,they are going to get so tied of eating burger king,going to the b/x, and the 3 month old movies.

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

Following British outrage, this order has been revoked.

It is a complete disgrace that the order was given in the first place.

How can you stand shoulder to shoulder when one side is hiding? Fucking ridiculous.

At least they've taken it back quickly though.....

 

[Little Skittle]

yea ive usually supported bush for the most part, but this shit makes me really mad. how can u just jump ship on people who been there for u? thats real gay....im still pissed about it, but it least they taken it back quickly

 

[Zero Cool]

Talk about a misleading title.

 

[Jokerman]

Bush- "I believe London is not safe for Americans because they might eat too much greasy fish and chips. Also, they speak a different language there and we don't want our people to pick up bad habits like saying "arse" instead of "ass."

 

[Tone Capone]

..."But he emphasised that the decision was taken locally in the immediate aftermath of the bombings, when many companies were telling staff to stay out of central London because of the confusion and the need to leave emergency services unhindered.

Lieutenant Gloria Smith, based at RAF Mildenhall, said: "It's just a prudent measure, it's normal procedure any time there's such an incident."

it was just a standard safety/political move.
if they hadn't made that call...and more bombs went off and american personal were killed....his head would roll under scrutiny: "why didn't you warn our personel?!" etc...

Also,
You people are acting like Lakenheath and Mildenhall are right across the street from where the bombings took place... They are over an HOUR north of London on good traffic day. What do you suggest? Should everyone stationed at Lakenheath and Mildenhall RUSH right over to ride the trains to show everyone how brave we are?!?! Use your heads.

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

..."But he emphasised that the decision was taken locally in the immediate aftermath of the bombings, when many companies were telling staff to stay out of central London because of the confusion and the need to leave emergency services unhindered.

Lieutenant Gloria Smith, based at RAF Mildenhall, said: "It's just a prudent measure, it's normal procedure any time there's such an incident."

it was just a standard safety/political move.
if they hadn't made that call...and more bombs went off and american personal were killed....his head would roll under scrutiny: "why didn't you warn our personel?!" etc...

Also,
You people are acting like Lakenheath and Mildenhall are right across the street from where the bombings took place... They are over an HOUR north of London on good traffic day. What do you suggest? Should everyone stationed at Lakenheath and Mildenhall RUSH right over to ride the trains to show everyone how brave we are?!?! Use your heads.

Companies telling their staff to stay out of central London & not to travel etc, is very different from US military personnel being told to stay out.

 

[Tone Capone]

Companies telling their staff to stay out of central London & not to travel etc, is very different from US military personnel being told to stay out.

Here's a question... WHY and for WHAT REASON would the US military rush into central London because there was a terrorist attack? That's what the London police and British military are for. I'm sure if the Brits came and said "GOd I can't handle this! Will you help us AMERICA??" (which they wouldn't do and didn't need to do) then help would have been provided. But, as soon as an attack happens, it's common to secure resources (military) until more info is known. So other than trying to bitch and moan about the US (which is a hobby for most), what real argument is there?!?!?!

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

Here's a question... WHY and for WHAT REASON would the US military rush into central London because there was a terrorist attack? That's what the London police and British military are for. I'm sure if the Brits came and said "GOd I can't handle this! Will you help us AMERICA??" (which they wouldn't do and didn't need to do) then help would have been provided. But, as soon as an attack happens, it's common to secure resources (military) until more info is known. So other than trying to bitch and moan about the US (which is a hobby for most), what real argument is there?!?!?!

When did I ever say they need to "rush into central London"?

Exactly, I didn't.

So other than trying to bitch and moan about things that weren't said, what real argument is there?!?!?!

 

[Tone Capone]

Companies telling their staff to stay out of central London & not to travel etc, is very different from US military personnel being told to stay out.

Tell me how companies telling their staff to stay outta Central London is "very different" from the US military doing the same to protect it's assets. ESPECIALLY in a country where the US military is only a guest.



If you can...

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

Tell me how companies telling their staff to stay outta Central London is "very different" from the US military doing the same to protect it's assets. ESPECIALLY in a country where the US military is only a guest.



If you can...

The US military is not a company, is it?

 

[Hankaveli]

The US military is not a company, is it?

For all intents and purposes the Defense Department sure is a Company.

 

[Tone Capone]

OH MY GOD!!! BAHAHAHA!!! You're right, it's not a "company" and they don't validate parking.

So the US military shouldn't protect it's assets in a country where they are only guests? The US military shouldn't take ANY precautions when a terrorist strike happens from an unknown source?

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

OH MY GOD!!! BAHAHAHA!!! You're right, it's not a "company" and they don't validate parking.

So the US military shouldn't protect it's assets in a country where they are only guests? The US military shouldn't take ANY precautions when a terrorist strike happens from an unknown source?

Why are you laughing? The US military is not a company & it's personnel are not civilians.

I never said they validated parking. I never said they shouldn't protect their assets in a country where they are only guests & I never said they shouldn't take any precautions when a terrorist strike happens from an unknown source.

Therefore I put it to you, where did you pull this bullshit from?

 

[Tone Capone]

Why are you laughing? The US military is not a company & it's personnel are not civilians.

I never said they validated parking. I never said they shouldn't protect their assets in a country where they are only guests & I never said they shouldn't take any precautions when a terrorist strike happens from an unknown source.

Therefore I put it to you, where did you pull this bullshit from?

Your motives in your post are very clear.

It is a complete disgrace that the order was given in the first place.

Um... why was the order a disgrace???

Companies telling their staff to stay out of central London & not to travel etc, is very different from US military personnel being told to stay out.

The US military is not a company, is it?

Why is it okay for companies to want to protect their people but, it's not okay for the US military (a guest in the UK) to protect it's people in the confusion following a terror attack???

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

Your motives in your post are very clear.

And you can tell me my "motives", can you? Ok Mystic Meg.....

Um... why was the order a disgrace???

It was the objective of the British government to keep things as normal as possible. When the US military decide that London is not safe for their personnel, how do you think the average British civilian feels? Thus, it negates the efforts of the British government.

The US military were not willing to put any of their personnel at "risk" had their help been asked. This is nothing short of treacherous since Britain has stood by America every step of the way since 9/11 & has lost a lot for doing so.

Why is it okay for companies to want to protect their people but, it's not okay for the US military (a guest in the UK) to protect it's people in the confusion following a terror attack???

First of all, again, most of these companies' staff with be made up strictlyby civilians while the US military personnel is just that: military personnel. There is a distinct difference in the responsibilities & expectations placed upon each.

You keep stressing that they were a "guest". Britain is America's staunchest ally so the US military should be doing the most it can to aid the British government, not the least. It's a particular farce when all the American government had to do was not issue that order. Had they not issued the order the message would have been simple: as you (Britain) are our ally, our resources are at your disposal in this time of need. With the issueing of the order the message was: ......*tumbleweed rolls by*........not our problem!

And you ask why it's not ok for the US military to protect it's people......you've asked me this question before & now, just as before, you have no basis for which to pose such a question. Had I said that the US military personnel should've walked into central London unnarmed, untrained & without any communicative devices then perhaps you could say I didn't want the US military personnel to be protected. As I didn't say that, your question is unfounded.

Military units of all nations are expected to put themselves in harm's way to protect civilians. Of course it's primarily to help their own, but when another country has aided you in almost every way possible, it is an act of betrayal to turn your backs on them in their time of need.

 

[Tone Capone]

And you can tell me my "motives", can you? Ok Mystic Meg.....

It's obvious that you are trying to peg the US military as cowards. For you to deny that would be laughable

It was the objective of the British government to keep things as normal as possible. When the US military decide that London is not safe for their personnel, how do you think the average British civilian feels? Thus, it negates the efforts of the British government.

No when the terror attacks first happened it was the objective of the British government to get control of the situation and find out what is happening. The decision for US forces in the country shouldn't and DIDN'T have any effect on the return to business in Lonndon. The only effect the decision had was to give people something to bitch and moan about EVEN though it made no sense at all to do so~

The US military were not willing to put any of their personnel at "risk" had their help been asked. This is nothing short of treacherous since Britain has stood by America every step of the way since 9/11 & has lost a lot for doing so.

Where exactly did you get THAT info? Number one the US WASN'T ASKED and you are NO ONE to decide what the US would do if they indeed HAD been asked.

First of all, again, most of these companies' staff with be made up strictlyby civilians while the US military personnel is just that: military personnel. There is a distinct difference in the responsibilities & expectations placed upon each.

The responsibility of the US military in the region are what?!? Protect London? Nope! And just for your info, a military base is more than just military members, it has hundreds of children, spouses and family members. Those precautions were to protect them too. Another thing is, those companies in London actually have business to take care of in London, the US military has no real business in London so telling troops "Don't go to London until we find out what happened" is the ONLY smart thing to do

You keep stressing that they were a "guest". Britain is America's staunchest ally so the US military should be doing the most it can to aid the British government, not the least. It's a particular farce when all the American government had to do was not issue that order. Had they not issued the order the message would have been simple: as you (Britain) are our ally, our resources are at your disposal in this time of need. With the issueing of the order the message was: ......*tumbleweed rolls by*........not our problem!

And you ask why it's not ok for the US military to protect it's people......you've asked me this question before & now, just as before, you have no basis for which to pose such a question. Had I said that the US military personnel should've walked into central London unnarmed, untrained & without any communicative devices then perhaps you could say I didn't want the US military personnel to be protected. As I didn't say that, your question is unfounded.

Military units of all nations are expected to put themselves in harm's way to protect civilians. Of course it's primarily to help their own, but when another country has aided you in almost every way possible, it is an act of betrayal to turn your backs on them in their time of need.

And just so you know, NO BACKS WERE TURNED. And just so you know, THE UK DIDN'T NEED ANY HELP! And also THE US WASN'T ASKED! It would have been an embarassment for the US govt to assume that their "staunchest ally" was so weak that the US should just ~step on in~.



You know, you keeping stating the same misguided crap over and over and over and over. Tell you what... how about next time there is an attack, the US govt won't take any precautions whatsoever... What is so hard to understand about that?!?!?!?

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

It's obvious that you are trying to peg the US military as cowards. For you to deny that would be laughable

No, I never said they were cowards! Treacherous does not equal cowardly. My feelings are actually quite the contrary.

No when the terror attacks first happened it was the objective of the British government to get control of the situation and find out what is happening. The decision for US forces in the country shouldn't and DIDN'T have any effect on the return to business in Lonndon. The only effect the decision had was to give people something to bitch and moan about EVEN though it made no sense at all to do so~

Who said anything about "when the terror attacks first happened", eh? You (wrongly) assumed I was talking of an instantaneous objective.

And I already explained the detrimental effect of the order.

Where exactly did you get THAT info? Number one the US WASN'T ASKED and you are NO ONE to decide what the US would do if they indeed HAD been asked.

Are you illiterate? If not then go back & read what I said.

The responsibility of the US military in the region are what?!? Protect London? Nope! And just for your info, a military base is more than just military members, it has hundreds of children, spouses and family members. Those precautions were to protect them too. Another thing is, those companies in London actually have business to take care of in London, the US military has no real business in London so telling troops "Don't go to London until we find out what happened" is the ONLY smart thing to do

Who said anything about a particular region? Yes, the topic regards London but I was making the distinction between the role of civilians & military personnel. But as you got more specific, obviously the US military have no responsibility there.....because the US government cleared them of that!

Hmm, it seems you're not quite getting the distinction I made. Military personnel, civilians, civilians, military personnel...here www.dictionary.com Look up some words & then tell me how you came to the assumption that I included non-military family members - clearly civilians - to be military personnel. If you can agree that I said nothing of the sort, then you can agree that they are to be counted as civilians. As such they are not subject to anything I've said about military personnel so there goes another argument of yours.

They have no business in London?.....hmm, you are sloooooooow.

And just so you know, NO BACKS WERE TURNED. And just so you know, THE UK DIDN'T NEED ANY HELP! And also THE US WASN'T ASKED! It would have been an embarassment for the US govt to assume that their "staunchest ally" was so weak that the US should just ~step on in~.

And the result of illiteracy continues!!

You know, you keeping stating the same misguided crap over and over and over and over. Tell you what... how about next time there is an attack, the US govt won't take any precautions whatsoever... What is so hard to understand about that?!?!?!?

Why do I reiterate the same things? Because YOU fail to grasp them the first time around.....& the second........& the third......perhaps you should be quiet now.

 

[Tone Capone]

I'll leave you to your delusions girl.