Gringo

GABBY SUPERSTAR

Beauty DB

That's the way I see it - probably someone in his ear telling him he'd screwed up.

ref is a clearing in the woods

I don't think he moved out fast enough and he should have been aware of Keane's position. Saying that, the back four should have been too. ash had full view of play and ran out (too late) in the opposite direction of where the immediate danger was he shouldve just stepped off the pitch

Not Ash's fault - from that replay you can see their was still a direct threat on his side of the goal and he stayed to defend the line - once that was blocked he moved out.

cider boys all out for 210 (less than half way to the follow on mark) and and now 7 for 4 off 4 overs. The return of 3 day cricket.

A repeat of the first game of the season, 3-0 to the Villa.

Good substitution

Gabby off for NRC and stick J2M up behind Bent

Yes the time before where Collins lookedat fault it was walker really No, just because Walker wasn't in position that doesn't mean it's okay for Collins to wander away from their only threat at that time and allow him to get a shot in. He should have stayed with him, he ignored him, his fault.Collins was going with the player's run, he didn't know the player had fallen over.

Big Ginge

They've had the three best openings

Indeed, we shouldn't let these terrorists get away with it.

Oborne

Bahrain, Yemen, Syria (getting really bad by all accounts) are simply beyond our capability and diplomatic clout to deal with, imo. So seems Lbya, Bahrain could be captured within days with the amount of ships that NATO have nearby. If you wanted to turn the saud's noses up. Yemen nasty, Syria - interesting - I didn't mention Syria, I said Yemen, but also very nasty, My point is not the capaility, it is the will. Why Libya? Why Syria - poses a threat to Isreal - why else is it important. Libya wasn't the only option, nor the easy option, as apparently the current no lie zone isn't working. Either stay out of it or it becomes a part of the false war of terror that the west has been pursuing for 10 years now. Are there extremists? Yes? Does invading more arab territory reduce or increase the threat from extremists? 8 weeks ago, Libya and Gadaffi was our friend. From a strategic point how do these actions help reduce the threat from extremists?

Reacting to the third north African uprising and ignoring the fourth and the fifth? It's the why?

No, but if he went to skule with dvin and stevo then he probably thinks libya is a kebab shop off broad street.

Firstly - I have no interest in the UK national interest, the USA national interest or any other national interest other than the people who live in the lands - their national interest is the only moral reason that supports any armed force. Yes it's simplistic, but the nations that have suffered colonisation will understand the damaging impact the colonists have. Moving on Libya was very different from the other uprisings. The idea that 100,000s would die is western media speak. Because there was no popular uprising in Libya as there was in other countries. Libya is very different. When tunisians revolted the french foreign minister offered to send military support to the govt. Democracy Hey! When Egypt errupted the us vice president said that mubarak was not a dictator and that internal issues would be dealt internally. The libyan rebellion was very different - instead of weeks, the west were there straight away. And willing to deploy. The moves here are not about the false war of terror, it's about securing a position in the new north africa. If egypt can be turned, so can libya, and the middle east can carry on their inhumanity with impunity.

On a nationalistic scale, nothing you have said can be argued against, but on a personal level the lives of each nationality are equivalent. Yet history seems to tell us that we only fight the fights that keep the green high up on the leaderboard. The disinformation coming out of Libya since the start of the conflict is a constant in the west's wars of recent years. As DaveCam said "we can't intervene on humanitarian grounds everywhere" but we do where it serves our purpose, not the greater humanitarian need. Engaging in Libya is increasingly looking like a mistake. Civil war, partition, and a rogue leader with foreign supplied arms looks like the future for that country.

with milfner on this one. Cut your wrist off first.

That would be the war of terror then I guess?

Obviously not, as your *Was* really still is an *Is*. On any measure, from the UN, to NATO, to economic output, to military capability it still is one of the most powerful.

My understanding is it works like this: The country is officially called "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" Northern Ireland speaks for itself, Great Britain is the large island which England, Wales and Scotland are located on. England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are countries in their own right, but its more for administrative reasons than anything else. Each individual country has very little power internationally, but the combined union is one of the most powerful nations on Earth. I guess if you were trying to explain it to an American, then you would compare the countries here to individual states over there. It's not an exact fit, but its close enough.