A new world order?

The British premier, Tony Blair is being forced to retire, the American president George Bush is steadily losing favour with the American people, the 'cause' of the act of 9/11 is now realised to be Western hegemony, there is a realisation of the pointlessness of the Iraq invasion and calls to pull out any remaining soldiers.....
The list could go on, but the question is are these awakenings leading to a new world order, a true cosmopolitanism?

Originally posted by Vladamir no1
The British premier, Tony Blair is being forced to retire, the American president George Bush is steadily losing favour with the American people, the 'cause' of the act of 9/11 is now realised to be Western hegemony, there is a realisation of the pointlessness of the Iraq invasion and calls to pull out any remaining soldiers.....
The list could go on, but the question is are these awakenings leading to a new world order, a true cosmopolitanism?

Originally posted by Vladamir no1
The British premier, Tony Blair is being forced to retire, the American president George Bush is steadily losing favour with the American people, the 'cause' of the act of 9/11 is now realised to be Western hegemony, there is a realisation of the pointlessness of the Iraq invasion and calls to pull out any remaining soldiers.....
The list could go on, but the question is are these awakenings leading to a new world order, a true cosmopolitanism?

Originally posted by Vladamir no1
The British premier, Tony Blair is being forced to retire, the American president George Bush is steadily losing favour with the American people, the 'cause' of the act of 9/11 is now realised to be Western hegemony, there is a realisation of the pointlessness of the Iraq invasion and calls to pull out any remaining soldiers.....
The list could go on, but the question is are these awakenings leading to a new world order, a true cosmopolitanism?

does this ' new world order'. just let countries with wild , dictarian visions of granduer, gas hundreds of kurdish people. without lifting a finger or does it speak out first . then act.
i,m quite interested on this one, because even though mr bush or mr blair are clearly not the answer to creating a peace to the current deadlock. at least they've made a stand.
people actually hacking off innocent , neutral aid workers heads. who'm have gone to help the also innocent downtrodden peoples of whatever country you care to mention . should be dealt with, with the same unmercilless and sure action.
i would never condone violence but this ultimatley comes down to tribalism. not religion , not nationalism not even shari rule. just tribalism. the oldest instinct in man , bar making fires to keep your loved ones warm.
if a new world order grasps the justice of a situation then i'm all for it. if it merely lets a tribe do whatever it regards best without due concern . then i feel other party's should intervene.

the nato alliance is a total sham. you have countries such as france, germany amongst many others talking well but not really applying much action or belief or money, or in the end much manpower. but they would be the first to winge when things got really out of hand.

at least our country's are making a stand, or should i say our service men are. i'd like to see blair and bush in flak jackets , patroling a street though. they would surley crap themselves

DONKEYS LEADING TIGERS.

BLADEMAN 63.

Originally posted by BLADEMAN 63
does this ' new world order'. just let countries with wild , dictarian visions of granduer, gas hundreds of kurdish people. without lifting a finger or does it speak out first . then act.
i,m quite interested on this one, because even though mr bush or mr blair are clearly not the answer to creating a peace to the current deadlock. at least they've ...[text shortened]... selves

DONKEYS LEADING TIGERS.

BLADEMAN 63.

There is a new world order - one large meat feast pizza and lashings of lemonade.