Blair is on his own

[Troll]

This is the typical opinion of the USA people who think that the only possible way to bring democracy and human rights to other countries is by US intervention.

Ohhh....God bless "America"

Guess what?, there is a whole world outside the USA !

Pathetic !

Yeah there is. But you twits never really have much going on by way of action, do ya? Nope. Face it. You standback and wait to see what the US wants to do then you try to see how to work it for you. It's "Oh that could help so we support it" or "Oh taking an opposing view may help my campaign". Aside from Russia, China and most times the UK that's how it works for the rest of ya

 

[Doctor X]

Indeed.

I am beginning to fear a certain amount of racism is pervading in the US and other countries, particularly France, in which the Iraqi people are "not us" and "just don't matter."

It seems appeasers are willing to parrot anti-sanction rhetoric--"FOR THE CHILDREN"--yet, when asked to actually do something to allieviate them . . . well . . . cannot do that. Let us have more sanctions!

Let us, instead, subordinate humanity to jealously. I am afraid much of this can be understood as a "bar room testosterone fight."

Allow me to digress [When does he not?--Ed.] Put two martial artists together and they start wondering "who can take whom." They will even wonder, "I bet I could take out Tyson with my Kick of Doom! [All Rights Reserv'd.--Ed.]"

No, they cannot.

Similarly, take Australia . . . please. . . . [Stop that.--Ed.] Okay . . . another foreign country . . . is Canada a foreign country?

Right, other countries have a problem that, deep down inside, they know they cannot "win" a hypothetical war with the US. Even North Korea knows it has a bunch of nuclear weapons parked off its waters more than capable of turning it and its precious regime into glass.

Well . . . this power bothers countries.

Rumsfeld comment was apt--"old Europe" use to shake the foundations of the Earth.

France, Germany . . . heh . . . heh . . . Belgium . . . and others cannot shake a one-armed man out of a tree. The jealousy is bothersome.

Nevertheless, jealousy of American military power--and American desire to demonstrate it occassionally to see if she can still piss farther than everyone else--CANNOT detract from the real humanitarian and security threat that is Sadam Hussein.

--J.D.

 

[Supercharts]

Hillary supports Bush's policy on Iraq

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/69808.htm

"March 3, 2003 -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton "fully supports" President Bush's Iraq policy, her office said last night - on the eve of her visit today to an upstate arsenal that makes military hardware like mortars and howitzers for U.S. troops.
"Sen. Clinton fully supports the steps the president has taken to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction," said Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines."

 

[Segnosaur]

This is the typical opinion of the USA people who think that the only possible way to bring democracy and human rights to other countries is by US intervention.

Ok, just how would you bring democracy and human rights to Iraq, in a way that will reduce the number of people who die by Saddam's own government? Do you have a real solution? I'd love to hear it.

Ohhh....God bless "America"

Guess what?, there is a whole world outside the USA !

And most of that world is filled with brutal dictatorships.

By the way, I'm not in America, nor do I believe in the 'god' that will be blessing it. However, I feel that certain things (like human rights abuses, and the slaughter of innocent people) are worth standing against. For that reason, I support military action against Iraq.

 

[Q-Source]

Ok, just how would you bring democracy and human rights to Iraq, in a way that will reduce the number of people who die by Saddam's own government? Do you have a real solution? I'd love to hear it.

Why don't you give any credibility to the political parties and people that live in those countries?
Solutions have to come from within, from the own nation's population decision.

I would support any military action if the real purpose were to impose democracy and human rights. But this is not the case. But what Bush really wants is to get international political power and oil.

And most of that world is filled with brutal dictatorships.

So, our Uncle Tom is the only one who can save us ?

By the way, I'm not in America, nor do I believe in the 'god' that will be blessing it. However, I feel that certain things (like human rights abuses, and the slaughter of innocent people) are worth standing against. For that reason, I support military action against Iraq.

I also believe that those abuses should be end immediately. But, why with military action (more violence)?

Q-S

P.S. Segnosaur, please remove UCE's words in your sig. He already apologised.

 

[Kodiak]

I also believe that those abuses should be end immediately. But, why with military action (more violence)?

Great.

How would you go about ending those abuses, then Q-Source?

 

[Segnosaur]

Why don't you give any credibility to the political parties and people that live in those countries?
Solutions have to come from within, from the own nation's population decision.

Because whenever one of those political parties speaks out, they get imprissoned, tortured, or killed. Dead. Can't speak when you're dead. Unless you talk to John Edward.

That's the nature of a dictatorship. Dissent is silenced under threats from the government.

I would support any military action if the real purpose were to impose democracy and human rights. But this is not the case. But what Bush really wants is to get international political power and oil.

Blah, blah... War for oil... blah, blah.

As many people have said, if Oil were the only reason for this war, the U.S. would be much better off simply making a deal with Saddam.

So, our Uncle Tom is the only one who can save us ?

First of all, they have the desire to take risks to 'save' Iraq.

Secondly, remember, this is NOT unilateral.... there are over a dozen countries supporting the U.S. on this. (It is not just 'Uncle Tom'.)

I also believe that those abuses should be end immediately. But, why with military action (more violence)?

Umm... Because there are no other solutions which would end the abuses immediately? At least no reasonable solutions have ever been suggested.

P.S. Segnosaur, please remove UCE's words in your sig. He already apologised.

Well, a couple of points about that:
- Other people have quotes from fellow posters in their sig. Are you going to complain about them too? If you agree to write to everyone who has a quote from another poster in their sig, I will remove UCE's quote from mine.
- Although he has 'appologized' and has said he didn't really cheer, his words were really very disturbing. Should other people immediately accept his apology?
- He's made many other comments (like how Americans only understand violence) where were either disgusting, or downright boneheaded.

(Edited to fix a typo)

 

[Kodiak]

Blah, blah... War for oil... blah, blah.

If the protestors were honest, the placards and picket signs would read: "No War for Freedom"

Where were they during Haiti, Somalia and Bosnia??

 

[Segnosaur]

If the protestors were honest, the placards and picket signs would read: "No War for Freedom"

Where were they during Haiti, Somalia and Bosnia??

Probably because Janeane Garofalo said it wasn't hip.

http://www.hollywoodhalfwits.com/janeanegarofalo/index.htm

(edited to add the link)

 

[Nikk]

If the protestors were honest, the placards and picket signs would read: "No War for Freedom"

Where were they during Haiti, Somalia and Bosnia??

As far as I remember these were all "popular" wars. There were plenty of people pushing the idea of external intervention. The opposition came from the political diplomatic and military elites who feared that entanglements in these regions would be lengthy, costly in lives and money and lead to unpleasant political consequences as electorates blamed politicians if it all started to go wrong.

As far as Iraq is concerned the war seems uniformly unpopular everywhere in the democratic world (regardless of expressions of support from elected leaders) except amongst the US electorate.

There is a case to be made for war and I think Blair genuinely believes in it but nevertheless the majority in the UK and Europe are not convinced.

As regards freedom in Iraq.......well a less worse oppressive regime is probably the best that can be hoped for given the state of the Iraqi opposition.

My bet is that 18 months after the war is over, occupying allied forces will be unwelcome and largely restricted to major garrisons and heavily armed convoys in order to avoid attacks by a variety of opposition forces. Terrorist attacks against western targets will continue but at a higher level and Saudi Arabia will be looking even less stable than now. As for oil prices....... I hate to think. Meanwhile Kurdish militants will be pushing for a state of their own and giving increased problems to the Turks. I could go on. This isn't precognition. I'm just a pessimist about the Middle East.


What do you expect to happen?

Might be fun to start a thread and let people make their own predictions for say 18 months ahead.

 

[shanek]

Re: Hillary supports Bush's policy on Iraq

"Sen. Clinton fully supports the steps the president has taken to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction," said Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines."

Well, that tears it—it must be a bad idea!

Ironically, I just got finished creating a topic about Clinton supporting the National ID card. As I've said before, when Democrats and Republicans actually agree on something, watch out! Because it means our sovereign rights are in jeopardy.

 

[Guest]

I would get worried but there's womens mud wrestlying on channel 9.

 

[Guest]

I had a really funny joke about the Blair "which" project..

It was really funny, but I can't remember the punch line. Maybe I should cut back my dosage.

 

[Mike B.]

I love the mentality of Q-Source.

It is fine for someone like that to speak about how stupid typical Americans are and how they only get information from Hollywood. The ugliest ugliest stero-types are used freely.

Yet you can believe that if someone from America said the exact same things about other countries, she would be the first to scream about "arrogant" Americans.

Hypocrisy as an art form really...

BTW,
I have read the "progressive" musing of Undercover Elephant. (If you get down to it, someone who feels the death of me and my child is justified because, well violence is the only thing I understand...) He did not really apologize for what he said. He was sorry what he said was so impolitic and would lose him followers, which it did.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

Why don't you give any credibility to the political parties and people that live in those countries?

Could you name all the political "parties" (note the plural) in Iraq?

Or do you mean that since Husein got 100% of the "vote" that the people overwhelmingly love him and we must respect their heartfelt "vote" ?

P.S. Segnosaur, please remove UCE's words in your sig. He already apologised.

Could you point me to the apology -- my memroy may be faulty, but I do not recall it as being particularly . . . apologetic, as apologies go -- but I may have missed it.

NA

 

[Guest]

I have read the "progressive" musing of Undercover Elephant. (If you get down to it, someone who feels the death of me and my child is justified because, well violence is the only thing I understand...) He did not really apologize for what he said. He was sorry what he said was so impolitic and would lose him followers, which it did. [/B]

Mike.

There are many different people in America. Some of them are very reasonable human beings who I respect a great deal. Others (unfortunately quite a large number of them) are more like Jedi Knight...."US sends 60,000 more troops to the gulf...LOL!...Hey!...We gonna blow those Arabs to the moon...LOL!...Hick!."

Yet when JK comes along and makes posts like this, it seems nobody actually challenges it. This attitude is accepted. It is not something to laugh about. It's not a video game. It's the lives of thousands of Iraqi conscripts who did not choose to be in the Iraqi army. It is people with attitudes like his which drive the sort of anti-Americanism I have expressed on this board. Yet my comment, which I withdrew, continues to be repeated whilst JK goes on spouting Americanised low-IQ neo-nazism unchallenged. I think the reason for this is that even though I may have apologised there is a residual anger that anyone should have expressed such a profoundly anti-American sentiment in public - that anyone should actually think such a thing. Well get used to it. I have a life outside this board. I have spoken to quite a few people about the comment I made (about cheering the WTC attack) and the ongoing reaction of the denizens of this board. I live in a country that is supposed to be your closest ally. Not many of my compatriots would come along and post such an inflammatory comment themselves. But I think you might be surprised how many of them feel no different than I when it comes to America, the attitudes of American people, and the extent to which the 9/11 attacks were to some extent 'asked for' by the unchallenged attitudes of people like JK (and several others I can think of). In short - you can vilify me as long as you like but it won't change the fact that the sort of anti-Americanism I have expressed is becoming endemic in western Europe, even though most of them aren't stupid enough to say so in a place like this.

 

[Shane Costello]

UCE,

You must have gotten really annoyed when Chirac insulted the "gang of eight" countries that signed that letter supporting the current US stance on Iraq? I mean, French arrogance must be at least as bad as American arrogance, right?

 

[Guest]

Arrogance exists all over the place. But the answer is no - nothing comes close to what comes out of America. Maybe if France was the most powerfull country on the planet it would be abusing its position to the same extent the US does. Maybe not though. I think there are cultural/psychological reasons why its worse in America. Most countries have at some point in their history been brought down a peg or two and come out of it as a more mature society. America behaves more like an adolescent with hormone problems, too much money and and inbuilt proneness to be trigger-happy.

 

[Shane Costello]

Originally psoted by Undercover Elephant:

Arrogance exists all over the place. But the answer is no - nothing comes close to what comes out of America.

Spoken like a true Euro-dope.

Maybe if France was the most powerfull country on the planet it would be abusing its position to the same extent the US does.

France was the most powerful country on the planet for long periods of it's history, and it wasn't pretty. IMO the French are trying to restore the levels of power and influence they once enjoyed in the guise of "Europe". Anyone living in Europe needs to take notice.

I think there are cultural/psychological reasons why its worse in America. Most countries have at some point in their history been brought down a peg or two and come out of it as a more mature society.

The French have been taken down a peg or two on annumber of occasions this century, yet we see the French president regretting that his peers in Europe "missed an opportunity to shut up" and "werern't very well brought up".

America behaves more like an adolescent with hormone problems, too much money and and inbuilt proneness to be trigger-happy.

At least eight European leaders disagree. As for adolescent behaviour, what about Gerhard Schroeder, who currently is presiding over a meltdown in the German economy, but spends most of the time suing the press over speculation about his hair colour, while members of his cabinet compare Bush to Hitler. That's grown up, isn't it?

 

[Guest]

Shane,

Not sure how to respond to your post - Europe isn't perfect - nowhere is - and I never said it was.