Understanding American English
-
Well said, are you reading my mind? but I think American and british armies are having hard time there dont you think?:) La ILah Ila allah Mohamed Rasoul Allah
Samer12 wrote: I think American and british armies are having hard time there dont you think? Yes they are in trouble because Iraqis are violating the law of war[^] :-D :-D :-D Are there any ethics of war or everything is fair in war? IMO everything is fair in war, because war is a war ..
-
Samer12 wrote: I think American and british armies are having hard time there dont you think? Yes they are in trouble because Iraqis are violating the law of war[^] :-D :-D :-D Are there any ethics of war or everything is fair in war? IMO everything is fair in war, because war is a war ..
Are there any ethics of war or everything is fair in war? IMO everything is fair in war, because war is a war .. in my opinion there are ethics in war ,but is it ethical that the US is fightinig Iraq ? why? it is an armed robery so every thing is allowed,CNN is a huge liar see CNN and BBC then compare,see aljazeera,USA is always blind when it comes to it self-when it comes to Israel too- :) La ILah Ila allah Mohamed Rasoul Allah
-
Samer12 wrote: I think American and british armies are having hard time there dont you think? Yes they are in trouble because Iraqis are violating the law of war[^] :-D :-D :-D Are there any ethics of war or everything is fair in war? IMO everything is fair in war, because war is a war ..
John-theKing wrote: violating the law of war War has rules? *Yeah, I know about the Geneva convention, etc/blahblah*
Bruce Duncan, CP#9088, CPUA 0xA1EE, Sonork 100.10030
Blackadder: Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?
Baldrick: Yeah, it's like goldy and bronzy only it's made of iron. -
John-theKing wrote: violating the law of war War has rules? *Yeah, I know about the Geneva convention, etc/blahblah*
Bruce Duncan, CP#9088, CPUA 0xA1EE, Sonork 100.10030
Blackadder: Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?
Baldrick: Yeah, it's like goldy and bronzy only it's made of iron.Bruce Duncan wrote: War has rules? Apparently back in Roman times there was this particular "game" which was popular. The slaves would be set loose on each other, permitted to do anything to win the fight, but no weapons were involved. The only rule was that you weren't allowed to pop your opponent's eye out. Which is where we get the saying "It's all fun and games, till somebody loses an eye" Now if only I could store useful info in my brain... :rolleyes:
I may try to delete my CP cookies. But its almost like tossing the keys of the appartment into the river. - Andreas Saurwein
-
Yeah, as I said in my post above, no use getting into technicalities now. War is dirty, and all sorts of pressure tactics will be applied by both sides to reduce the morale of the troops and exert political pressure at home (US). And just to make my position clear, I was not bashing the US. I was merely asking a question. There are a lot of things I like about the US, and very few things I don't agree with, but let's not go there. As for the reasons behind the war, I would be naive if I thought it was just because of the fact that Iraq needs to be liberated, or that it is a threat to the US, or that it's just about oil. Every nation acts in its own best interest. All of them, US, UK, France, Germany, Russia. Even my own country, India. So bashing someone because they are acting in their own interest is like the pot calling the kettle black, IMO. A president has to think about the people of his country, millions of them, who chose him as their leader. No time to play the moral high ground. Justifications may be given for any thing, but that is only to take everyone along. Nothing wrong about looking after your interests as far as I can see.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
...celebrating Indian spirit and Cricket. 8MB video, really cool!
Rohit Sinha wrote: No time to play the moral high ground. So you think the lack of time is to blame for their blindness on international law and human sufferings?
-
Rohit Sinha wrote: No time to play the moral high ground. So you think the lack of time is to blame for their blindness on international law and human sufferings?
Fazlul Kabir wrote: So you think the lack of time is to blame for their blindness on international law and human sufferings? :) No, that's not what I meant at all. What I meant to say was that the highest priority of a President was to look after the interests of his people. And that every single country does it. As a nation, no one can always be right. And they all act in their own best interest, and later justify it with reasons of all sorts. I was merely trying to explain it, not justify it. Please don't take my statements out of context.
Regards,Rohit Sinha
...celebrating Indian spirit and Cricket. 8MB video, really cool!
-
Well said, are you reading my mind? but I think American and british armies are having hard time there dont you think?:) La ILah Ila allah Mohamed Rasoul Allah
Not really. Yeah, we've lost about 40 men, but in the process we've taken the entire country with the exception of Baghdad. Its interesting to contrast how we treat their POWs and the Iraqis treat ours don't you think? We give them food, water, and medical treatment. The Iraqis shoot our guys in the head. BTW, you can shove that smiley up your a$$. You supporters of Saddam make me want to go inlist and I'm not a violent person.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi -
Not really. Yeah, we've lost about 40 men, but in the process we've taken the entire country with the exception of Baghdad. Its interesting to contrast how we treat their POWs and the Iraqis treat ours don't you think? We give them food, water, and medical treatment. The Iraqis shoot our guys in the head. BTW, you can shove that smiley up your a$$. You supporters of Saddam make me want to go inlist and I'm not a violent person.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiI did not really want to take it here. :( But, why is middle-east the most troubled area? My answer is oil. Every super-power took turns to screw up the place by supporting and installing dictatorships. ...and would Israel be getting the kind of attention that it gets now, if it had not been for its strategic location in the area. IMO, it would have got the same kind of treatment as Kashmir, if it had not been for oil. I am happy that India does not have any big reserves of oil; otherwise my country would also have been screwed up. This war may not be for oil; but all the causes of this war stem from the oil-related foreign policies of the current G8 countries including Russia or erstwhile Soviet Union. So, when you talk about freedom, liberation and other things, please understand that these places were under British occupation until the start or middle of the 2oth century; and then installed with dictators and kings, leaving not much choice for the people there. ...and the people there are not willing to forget the past, just like US is not willing to forget Pearl Harbour and Adolf Hitler. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Not really. Yeah, we've lost about 40 men, but in the process we've taken the entire country with the exception of Baghdad. Its interesting to contrast how we treat their POWs and the Iraqis treat ours don't you think? We give them food, water, and medical treatment. The Iraqis shoot our guys in the head. BTW, you can shove that smiley up your a$$. You supporters of Saddam make me want to go inlist and I'm not a violent person.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiOk man,you are chalenging me,I am not a violent person ,I dont want american young men and women in that army to die or get injured ,you got me all wrong You supporters of Saddam I did not say that ,the only thing I admit that sadam must be out of Iraq BY THE IRAQI PEOPLE ,still this is an armed robery your army is trying to rob Iraq,they have no good intention,this does not mean that all AMerican people are bad ,mI disagree with the government Its interesting to contrast how we treat their POWs and the Iraqis treat ours don't you think? this is not true ,or your army also treat POw good and pamper them in camp xray....... you are decived by the media do not belive all you hear The Iraqis shoot our guys in the head also not true and the Iraqi prisoners are shown on tv as long with those in xray camb who are treated like animals you can shove that smiley up your a$$. typical American language:cool: La ILah Ila allah Mohamed Rasoul Allah
-
I did not really want to take it here. :( But, why is middle-east the most troubled area? My answer is oil. Every super-power took turns to screw up the place by supporting and installing dictatorships. ...and would Israel be getting the kind of attention that it gets now, if it had not been for its strategic location in the area. IMO, it would have got the same kind of treatment as Kashmir, if it had not been for oil. I am happy that India does not have any big reserves of oil; otherwise my country would also have been screwed up. This war may not be for oil; but all the causes of this war stem from the oil-related foreign policies of the current G8 countries including Russia or erstwhile Soviet Union. So, when you talk about freedom, liberation and other things, please understand that these places were under British occupation until the start or middle of the 2oth century; and then installed with dictators and kings, leaving not much choice for the people there. ...and the people there are not willing to forget the past, just like US is not willing to forget Pearl Harbour and Adolf Hitler. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Thomas George wrote: and would Israel be getting the kind of attention that it gets now, if it had not been for its strategic location in the area. Israel is located where it is because that's where the Jews originated. Its not because of British mandate. BTW, the Israelis formed their country in opposition to the UN in 1948. Thomas George wrote: So, when you talk about freedom, liberation and other things, please understand that these places were under British occupation until the start or middle of the 2oth century; and then installed with dictators and kings, leaving not much choice for the people there. ...and the people there are not willing to forget the past, just like US is not willing to forget Pearl Harbour and Adolf Hitler. Why hate the US then?
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi -
Ok man,you are chalenging me,I am not a violent person ,I dont want american young men and women in that army to die or get injured ,you got me all wrong You supporters of Saddam I did not say that ,the only thing I admit that sadam must be out of Iraq BY THE IRAQI PEOPLE ,still this is an armed robery your army is trying to rob Iraq,they have no good intention,this does not mean that all AMerican people are bad ,mI disagree with the government Its interesting to contrast how we treat their POWs and the Iraqis treat ours don't you think? this is not true ,or your army also treat POw good and pamper them in camp xray....... you are decived by the media do not belive all you hear The Iraqis shoot our guys in the head also not true and the Iraqi prisoners are shown on tv as long with those in xray camb who are treated like animals you can shove that smiley up your a$$. typical American language:cool: La ILah Ila allah Mohamed Rasoul Allah
Samer12 wrote: Ok man,you are chalenging me,I am not a violent person ,I dont want american young men and women in that army to die or get injured ,you got me all wrong Maybe you should watch what you write (or how you place your smileys). Maybe your not good with English, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Samer12 wrote: sadam must be out of Iraq BY THE IRAQI PEOPLE Do you think they want him out? Samer12 wrote: they have no good intention Apparently you've been watching too much Arab TV. We've been avoiding civilian casualties to a point that our troops are being jeapordized! Samer12 wrote: this is not true ,or your army also treat POw good and pamper them in camp xray....... I'd say they're pampered! They have nice clean clothes, good food, copies of the Koran, they even have prayer mats!!! Samer12 wrote: also not true and the Iraqi prisoners are shown on tv as long with those in xray camb who are treated like animals Not true??? Did you happen to see the video that was plastered all over Aljazeera? At least 3 of our men had bullet holes in their foreheads. Those were point blank wounds, assassination style. See above comment about camp xray. Did you ever think that your state run media or aljazeera would be biased at all? Perhaps you should watch the BBC or CNN so you could get an American or British point of view? Samer12 wrote: typical American language I don't normally use that language, you just made me angry. You wouldn't ever actually hear me say it.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi -
Samer12 wrote: Ok man,you are chalenging me,I am not a violent person ,I dont want american young men and women in that army to die or get injured ,you got me all wrong Maybe you should watch what you write (or how you place your smileys). Maybe your not good with English, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Samer12 wrote: sadam must be out of Iraq BY THE IRAQI PEOPLE Do you think they want him out? Samer12 wrote: they have no good intention Apparently you've been watching too much Arab TV. We've been avoiding civilian casualties to a point that our troops are being jeapordized! Samer12 wrote: this is not true ,or your army also treat POw good and pamper them in camp xray....... I'd say they're pampered! They have nice clean clothes, good food, copies of the Koran, they even have prayer mats!!! Samer12 wrote: also not true and the Iraqi prisoners are shown on tv as long with those in xray camb who are treated like animals Not true??? Did you happen to see the video that was plastered all over Aljazeera? At least 3 of our men had bullet holes in their foreheads. Those were point blank wounds, assassination style. See above comment about camp xray. Did you ever think that your state run media or aljazeera would be biased at all? Perhaps you should watch the BBC or CNN so you could get an American or British point of view? Samer12 wrote: typical American language I don't normally use that language, you just made me angry. You wouldn't ever actually hear me say it.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiDid you ever think that your state run media or aljazeera would be biased at all? Perhaps you should watch the BBC or CNN so you could get an American or British point of view? I realy dont have aljazeera at home,I have CNN but I have news paper radio london,I am telling you CNN is un true ,and about camp xray the families of the people in there know better and this is not true they are being tortured ,humiliated , dont belive the media man:rose: La ILah Ila allah Mohamed Rasoul Allah
-
Did you ever think that your state run media or aljazeera would be biased at all? Perhaps you should watch the BBC or CNN so you could get an American or British point of view? I realy dont have aljazeera at home,I have CNN but I have news paper radio london,I am telling you CNN is un true ,and about camp xray the families of the people in there know better and this is not true they are being tortured ,humiliated , dont belive the media man:rose: La ILah Ila allah Mohamed Rasoul Allah
Samer12 wrote: about camp xray the families of the people in there know better and this is not true I'm not a big fan of sending people to camp x-ray without due process of the law. However, what do you propose we do with them? IF we let them go, they will most likely try to kill us.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi -
Jon Sagara wrote: According to CNN, the difference (albeit a small one) is that the Iraqi soldiers shown on TV were in the process of surrendering, and therefore not technically POWs. Ah, yes, I remember seeing it on TV how the Iraquis were standing waving a white flag and then were "frisked" and all for hidden weapons, bombs etc. So yes, technically they were not POWs yet. I agree. But I also saw lots of Iraqui soldiers in uniforms sitting in rows. Probably they were companies who surrendered. Now I don't exactly remember if they were POWs or just Iraqui soldiers. But that wasn't on CNN. It was an Indian news channel. Wonder where they got that footage from, though. Anyway, no use getting into technicalities now. :)
Regards,Rohit Sinha
...celebrating Indian spirit and Cricket. 8MB video, really cool!
The actual violation of the Geneva convention is that the prisoners were forced to give interviews to the media - pictures of the prisoners is not against the Geneva Convention. Dave Huff Igor would you give me a hand with the bags? Certainly - you take the blonde and I'll take the one in the turban!
-
Thomas George wrote: and would Israel be getting the kind of attention that it gets now, if it had not been for its strategic location in the area. Israel is located where it is because that's where the Jews originated. Its not because of British mandate. BTW, the Israelis formed their country in opposition to the UN in 1948. Thomas George wrote: So, when you talk about freedom, liberation and other things, please understand that these places were under British occupation until the start or middle of the 2oth century; and then installed with dictators and kings, leaving not much choice for the people there. ...and the people there are not willing to forget the past, just like US is not willing to forget Pearl Harbour and Adolf Hitler. Why hate the US then?
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiI don't want to get into the Israel history. All I said was, Israel would NOT have got the same amount of attention that Kashmir gets now, if there was no oil in the region. US is hated mostly because they are seen as a biased mediator in the Israel-Palestine issue. When you are aiding one side militarily, your credibility tends to get affected. Moreover, the people in the middle-east see US installing and removing dictatorships and kings for their selfish interests; and wonder how they would feel, if it was done to them in return. For US citizens, removing a democratic government in Iran and installing Shah was just another incident that should be forgotten as a byproduct of the cold war. But, for the Iranian people, their fledgling democracy of 2 years was overthrown by CIA and British Intelligence - and replaced by a dictator - and then by an Islamic fundamentalist revolution. Now, they are isolated and is a part of the "axis of evil" - and the people are rising up again slowly for their rights. How can the people in Iran ever accept United States or Britain as a friend - when they started almost 50 years of oppression from the time Mossadeiah (i believe that is the correct spelling) was overthrown because he nationalized oil and threw out US and UK companies, and his decision was upheld in the world trade court or something like that. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
I don't want to get into the Israel history. All I said was, Israel would NOT have got the same amount of attention that Kashmir gets now, if there was no oil in the region. US is hated mostly because they are seen as a biased mediator in the Israel-Palestine issue. When you are aiding one side militarily, your credibility tends to get affected. Moreover, the people in the middle-east see US installing and removing dictatorships and kings for their selfish interests; and wonder how they would feel, if it was done to them in return. For US citizens, removing a democratic government in Iran and installing Shah was just another incident that should be forgotten as a byproduct of the cold war. But, for the Iranian people, their fledgling democracy of 2 years was overthrown by CIA and British Intelligence - and replaced by a dictator - and then by an Islamic fundamentalist revolution. Now, they are isolated and is a part of the "axis of evil" - and the people are rising up again slowly for their rights. How can the people in Iran ever accept United States or Britain as a friend - when they started almost 50 years of oppression from the time Mossadeiah (i believe that is the correct spelling) was overthrown because he nationalized oil and threw out US and UK companies, and his decision was upheld in the world trade court or something like that. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
I would rather see the US butt out of other people's business, until we are directly affected. I don't know the history of Iran, or our involvement in its history, but I do know they threaten us with terrorism now. Whether its our fault or not, doesn't matter to me anymore. As an American citizen, I want to be safe. We cannot change what happened in the past, so we have to live and deal with the consequences and learn not to make the same mistakes again.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi -
I would rather see the US butt out of other people's business, until we are directly affected. I don't know the history of Iran, or our involvement in its history, but I do know they threaten us with terrorism now. Whether its our fault or not, doesn't matter to me anymore. As an American citizen, I want to be safe. We cannot change what happened in the past, so we have to live and deal with the consequences and learn not to make the same mistakes again.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiThe terrorism from Iran is IMO, not supported by the general population in Iran. I foresee another war in future between Iran and US to remove the regime there, because of terrorist links. But, looking at it from an Iranian common man (You are a US common man, who cannot decide US policy. He cannot decide Iranian policy even to the extent you can influence US policy), he sees the new war also as a byproduct of the actions of US and Britain. The trouble is they see no justice in this - because they are in 50 years of oppression because of US and UK; and now they will be in a war. As an Iranian citizen, he wants to be safe. We cannot change what happened in the past, so we have to live and deal with the consequences and learn not to make the same mistakes again. I don't think that the US administration has learned anything from the past. For starters, they should withdraw from being a mediator in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and get some truly neutral mediator (someone like Norway who mediated the current truce between LTTE and SriLanka). Since I got into this debate with you, I want to make it clear. I have no particular allegiance than to my motherland, which is India. So, I say things the way I see it. It have no special love or hate for US, Russia, Israel, Palestine, Iran, Iraq or any other country. The whole world order is run by the "law of the jungle" - and it is a world order created by the West. It is obvious when Syria is voted into the UN security council ahead of India (which has been a stable democracy for the past 50+ years, after the British left), and US has always opposed a permenant seat for India in UN security council. UN was an attempt at civilization, but gets bypassed by selfish interests way too often. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
The terrorism from Iran is IMO, not supported by the general population in Iran. I foresee another war in future between Iran and US to remove the regime there, because of terrorist links. But, looking at it from an Iranian common man (You are a US common man, who cannot decide US policy. He cannot decide Iranian policy even to the extent you can influence US policy), he sees the new war also as a byproduct of the actions of US and Britain. The trouble is they see no justice in this - because they are in 50 years of oppression because of US and UK; and now they will be in a war. As an Iranian citizen, he wants to be safe. We cannot change what happened in the past, so we have to live and deal with the consequences and learn not to make the same mistakes again. I don't think that the US administration has learned anything from the past. For starters, they should withdraw from being a mediator in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and get some truly neutral mediator (someone like Norway who mediated the current truce between LTTE and SriLanka). Since I got into this debate with you, I want to make it clear. I have no particular allegiance than to my motherland, which is India. So, I say things the way I see it. It have no special love or hate for US, Russia, Israel, Palestine, Iran, Iraq or any other country. The whole world order is run by the "law of the jungle" - and it is a world order created by the West. It is obvious when Syria is voted into the UN security council ahead of India (which has been a stable democracy for the past 50+ years, after the British left), and US has always opposed a permenant seat for India in UN security council. UN was an attempt at civilization, but gets bypassed by selfish interests way too often. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Thomas George wrote: I don't think that the US administration has learned anything from the past. For starters, they should withdraw from being a mediator in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and get some truly neutral mediator (someone like Norway who mediated the current truce between LTTE and SriLanka). We are bound to protect Israel, so I agree that we should not be a negotiator since we are biased in that regard. However, if we gave up that role, the president would never hear the end if it form the left wingers. Thomas George wrote: "law of the jungle" - and it is a world order created by the West. No, I disagree. The West is no different than the rest of the world. No matter who was the super power, the l"aw of the jungle" would still be in order. It human nature that is the problem. Thomas George wrote: US has always opposed a permenant seat for India in UN security council I thought the US and India were friendlier than that? I, and I'm sure most Americans have no problem with Indians (heck, most of our Doctors are Indians ;) ) and would rather see you on the Sec. Council rather than Syria. BTW, the UN is a joke, IMO.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi -
Thomas George wrote: I don't think that the US administration has learned anything from the past. For starters, they should withdraw from being a mediator in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and get some truly neutral mediator (someone like Norway who mediated the current truce between LTTE and SriLanka). We are bound to protect Israel, so I agree that we should not be a negotiator since we are biased in that regard. However, if we gave up that role, the president would never hear the end if it form the left wingers. Thomas George wrote: "law of the jungle" - and it is a world order created by the West. No, I disagree. The West is no different than the rest of the world. No matter who was the super power, the l"aw of the jungle" would still be in order. It human nature that is the problem. Thomas George wrote: US has always opposed a permenant seat for India in UN security council I thought the US and India were friendlier than that? I, and I'm sure most Americans have no problem with Indians (heck, most of our Doctors are Indians ;) ) and would rather see you on the Sec. Council rather than Syria. BTW, the UN is a joke, IMO.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiUN is certainly being made a joke. There are very few people, who want it working - and that is why it is not working. When I say that the current world order is created by the West, I do not imply that it would have been better if someone else created it. I just mean that there is no point whining about UN and France and Germany and Turkey and all. After all, the current world order was created by the victors of WWII. Regarding India's position historically and now: Indian freedom movement supported British Army in WWII - against Hitler. From a common enemy perspective, India should have been rooting for the Axis forces, because Britain was occupying India for the past 150 years suppressing many freedom movements by force. At that time, Pakistan and India were not partioned - so the stance was a Pakistani one as well (supported by the Muslim League) Now, India is not liked by the major powers to be in the UN sec council because it opposes an arms-control regime that allows the major powers to proliferate weapons, while not allowing others. They want it to be applied to everyone on the same level. They have not signed NPT because of this position; and Pakistan has not signed because India has not. Also, I do not support the Indian position in Kashmir. I would rather like an autonomous and demilitarized Kashmir combining the Indian and Pakistani parts, and protected by a four-party non-agression/defense agreement by its major neighbours - India, Pakistan, Russia and China. IMO, it is ego and politcal fallout to the major political parties and rulers on both sides that prevents such a solution. Both sides will have a hard time explaining why so many people died over the years over Kashmir, if this is all it takes to solve it. Like many people have said before, no one is perfect. But, unless nations are willing to do an introspection of their policies; and what have been the fallout of those, we can never expect peaceful co-existence. I would ideally love to see the super-powers do that, because they have the most influence on world affairs. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Bruce Duncan wrote: War has rules? Apparently back in Roman times there was this particular "game" which was popular. The slaves would be set loose on each other, permitted to do anything to win the fight, but no weapons were involved. The only rule was that you weren't allowed to pop your opponent's eye out. Which is where we get the saying "It's all fun and games, till somebody loses an eye" Now if only I could store useful info in my brain... :rolleyes:
I may try to delete my CP cookies. But its almost like tossing the keys of the appartment into the river. - Andreas Saurwein
Ta, I learn something new everyday :) Megan Forbes wrote: Now if only I could store useful info in my brain... If you discover the secret let me know. ;) For some wierd reason, I have knack for remembering IP numbers, but not telephone numbers. :rolleyes:
Bruce Duncan, CP#9088, CPUA 0xA1EE, Sonork 100.10030
Blackadder: Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?
Baldrick: Yeah, it's like goldy and bronzy only it's made of iron.