Not my #s…
just my emphasis!
:-P
:-)
Iraq, again
-
France and Germany lead Europe. Europe, collectively, has the same weight as the United States in world affairs.
Actually it doesn’t. And the reason isn’t culture or money, and only partly military. The reason is Europe is not one state and European Countries often don’t agree with each other
Since the fall of Germany, Japan and the U.S.S.R., the world has been unipolar. Only the U.S. has the ability to truly project power. Whether it be dimplomatically, technology, military, economics, we can beat anyone anywhere at any game.
The two nations which took a nose dive to make our great world unipolar were Russia and Japan. Russia’s military went into decline, and Japan’s econmomy is doing badly As I understand it, it is not growing. Ours is growing at 3%.
NOw if you doubt me, take this scenario.
Argentina and Peru invade CHile. COuld any power other than the U.S. do anything? Say Iran and Iraq form one nation and invade Syria, or Israel. Could any nation other than the U.S. do anything?
These are extreme examples, but when we are not talking about brokering a peace between Ugandan rebels and the government, Europe often can’t cut it. We give as much money as Much of Europe combined, and we are giving what, one tenth as much of our economy.
-
France and Germany lead Europe. Europe, collectively, has the same weight as the United States in world affairs.
Actually it doesn’t. And the reason isn’t culture or money, and only partly military. The reason is Europe is not one state and European Countries often don’t agree with each other
It doesn’t yet…. but if you keep on with this kind of politcs and diplomacy, i promise we will soon.
Only the U.S. has the ability to truly project power. Whether it be dimplomatically, technology, military, economics, we can beat anyone anywhere at any game.
That is so US……
“projecting power” = “diplomacy”
this equal sign is pretty much digging your own grave.
And for the economics and techonolgy, we will see. Europe massively lacks consciousness of its own power. That is the mainy difference between Europe and the US.@Xi:
Yanny,France and Germany will lead Europe right into being Islamic nations …
They are both already Islamic hostages.So the enemy is not terrorism, or a dictator…
The enemy is Islam.
That’s i what i feared… and the seed for WW3 that will not look like a war at all.
Now art is homoerotic photos, a crucifix in urine, a line up of soup cans, elephant dung on a painting of the Madonna. I call it Shock Disart. However, their are idiots out there with money (la nuovo rich[sp.?]) who have money to burn and wanna be patron of la arts.
“Shock Disart”… is only one step away from “Disart” is only only one step away from “degenerate art”…
That makes two very frightening points in one post.
@D.S.:
Let’s not forget the fact that the overwhelming majority of Europe does support the United States proposed military action against Iraq. Just because France and Germany are thumbing thier liberal nose at us doesn’t mean they speak for Europe as a whole.
Overwhelming majority???
As far as i can remember it’s more like 10 nations supporting the US to a degree.
Well, probably the same kind of majority that voted BWB ;) :)…Honestly, I don’t give a rat’s a** what France thinks about what we want to do. Have they so soon forgotten that it was “imperialist” America that liberated their country for them?
Then i give a rat’s a** about what the US thinks about us. Have they forgotten who von Steuben was, have they forgotten about all the Nazi collaborateurs who found a new warm home in the “land of the free”?
@YB:
Germany? Last time Germany sent troops into another country was when they invaded Russia.
Last I checked Germany wasn’t allowed to have a real military since the end of the cold war. Germany and France both have the diplomatic influence in Africa and Europe which we lack. You can’t solve every problem by dropping a bomb.
Hmmm, there is no Afghanistan and no Kosovo and Macedonia?
I am glad that there are exceptions to the stereotypic US american that are shown by Xi and D:S….@YB:
Honestly, why should we care what Germany thinks? They can’t help us, and their current government main tenament is anti-U.S. sentiment. France, you elected the Facist. WHy should we care about France? Why they are at it, why doesn’t France give the Charles De Gaulle back?
Why should we care about them? Why should they care about us? Because we’re members of the same world. France and Germany lead Europe. Europe, collectively, has the same weight as the United States in world affairs. And Europe is growing stronger every day, as the European Union succeeds. It is in our best interests to see a strong Europe, and to be friends with them.
YB, you fall to propaganda as fast as you proclaim that SH is “evil”. Our german government is “anti-US”? Well, if i can’t tell a friend that he is doing a stupid mistake, then it seems he is not my friend… true.
And France nearly elected a fascist, the US on the other hand elected a not-too-smart-at-all hypocrit.
Again, i agree with Yanny, but i think for Europe to have the degree of influence as the US … “we” need to be a bit more aware of ourselves and our strengths and weaknesses.@CC:
Until this revelation, the US appeared to be one bully looking to beat up on another bully. In my mind, this is the straw that breaks the camels back.
It hasn’t changed anything for me.
I am now in support of APPROPRIATE DIPLOMATIC and military action that would result in a regime change and elimination of WMD. The French diplomat’s approach appeals to me (“The use of force can only be a final recourse,” de Villepin said. “We must move on to a new stage and further strengthen the inspections.”) and he added a strict timetable.
That’s something i supported before powells speech.
But i don’t see that Powell presented anything new: the mobile labs were known, and Iraq says they are for psticides and agriclutre, contrary to the US claims.
The telephone calls…… well, some hint that ther eis something hidden (that’s why the inspecotrs are there), others say completely nothing, or better: could be used to prove anything depending on the context and “atmosphere” they are presented in.At this point i am willing to concede that we have what appears to be proof and not simply excuses to go to war for Bush’s oil interests and attempts to prop up the economy.
“Appears to be proof”…… is not proof. I will wait and see what the councils discussion will lead to.
Two of Xi again
I think you left out Australia, New Zealand, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, Bahrain, Russia, India, Afhganistan, Pakistan, Sudan,Germany(if I remember my recent history)…I could go on, but I think you see the error of your ways. Do not stoop to saying how inconsequential some of these countries are. They are all a part of the world community that sees the importance of acting NOW.
…
France, Russia and Germany are not to be counted in the
‘honestly against the invasion’ category since
they have recently supplied Iraq with military technology
and have oil deals with the current regime.Turkey is not really on your line. Iran??? India and Paksitan wanting the same??? Pakistan ???
And well hell yeah: the government of Kabulistan of course will do anything the US says, you’ve brought them into power in that area not too long ago… but do you know who holds the power in the rest of Afghanistan??
For supplying Iraq… by that logic you must inlcude the US there.Do read the news btw? Have a look what happened for the first time in the 102 years of Australia… Seems like the support from there is only from a chosen few and not as you think.
Xi: you show a devastating non-knowledge. Plus a mindset that would let you do well in many non-democratic countries…
A last word by myself:
The Nazis had “proof” that the communists burned the Reichstag. They had “scientific evidence” that aryans were better than others, and that slavic people were less. They “a people” out of “a faith”, and declared them enemies of mankind, again with “scientific proof”… proving that the ratio of fallen jew-german soldiers was lower than the ratio of german-jew citizens in the total population… we know where that can lead to, and if i look at Xi, it has gone too far already!I am highly suspicious to these kinds of proof, and it matters only a little that it’s presented by Colin Powell (who i highly respect, but who said himself that it is “not so easy to understand” and it “took some time” for him…).
I am by no means supporting SH, but i am not supporting GWB, who does much more damage than he wants to prevent.
And why is the term “conspiration theory” reserved for private persons only? Why not for governments as well (the Third Reich started the biggest conspiration theory ever, the Iraq is just a very small thing compared to that)? -
Yawn, I do believe the main reason we won is cuza some dumb General named Washington who never won a real battle. He just tied up a lotta rented Hessian troops and cost the Brits too much money(Pounds, that is.)
Xi, wouldn’t mind if you logged in :)
George Washington did a great job as Commander in Chief of American forces. He was a true leader, who turned down being King in favor of trying to create the first real Democracy the world had seen in 2000 years.
However, the British were not just fighting the war in America. France (and later, Spain) attacked Britain proper, almost forcing a World War upon Britain. The French supplied the only real money our nation had at the time, and they were our only source for replenishment of arms and ammo during the war. Not to mention the French warfleet and army which trapped Cornwallis at Yorktown, winning the war.
No, we’d be a British colony without the French.
-
I don’t see what has changed. Iraq has WMD. Sadam is a murderer. The poop is going to hit the fan, whether we attack or not, and in case of the latter, after Sadam is dead and a crazy takes power.
Whatever happens, if it’s bad, we will get the blame.
-
Schroeder won because he was more anti-U.S. tha his opponent. YOur government is partially based on disliking us.
-
You know, he also won because he was stronger on Domestic issues and unemployment :)
-
He was losing, he started bashing the U.S., he barely pulled ahead. His opponent and him were similiar domestically.
-
YB, you fall to propaganda as fast as you proclaim that SH is “evil”.
You don’t think Saddam is evil? Is that what you’re implying…? :(
-
Schroeder won because he was more anti-U.S. tha his opponent. YOur government is partially based on disliking us.
He won also because Stoiber was a southern du*** and rac*** !
And anyway it’s the same thing for sweden.
Then i give a rat’s a** about what the US thinks about us. Have they forgotten who von Steuben was, have they forgotten about all the Nazi collaborateurs who found a new warm home in the “land of the free”?
Nazi are still welcome in the US.
Yanny,France and Germany will lead Europe right into being Islamic nations …
They are both already Islamic hostages.Do you have family with Lepen ?
Argentina and Peru invade CHile. COuld any power other than the U.S. do anything?
I’m sure you can be proud of your governement’s involvement in south america.
but i don’t see that Powell presented anything new
You’re not alone
And France nearly elected a fascist
Nearly = 20% ? Anyway you’re right, you have every reason to bash on France, here we are so jalous when we see your president, a man of high culture, of high education, the friend of social rights and of nature.
-
Schroeder won because he was more anti-U.S. tha his opponent. YOur government is partially based on disliking us.
…He was losing, he started bashing the U.S., he barely pulled ahead. His opponent and him were similiar domestically
I wonder why “pro-peace” is “anti-U.S.”……
It was PEACE that was his issue. Not anti-US.@Deviant:Scripter:
YB, you fall to propaganda as fast as you proclaim that SH is “evil”.
You don’t think Saddam is evil? Is that what you’re implying…? :(
My emphasis was in the “time-domain”…. on the “as soon as”. I just couldn’t think on anything done faster than this proclamation. I can see why you interprete my sentence differently. I apologize for forming my sentences with double meaning.
But, all in all: i think SH is a man without respect for lives, with a major sense for power… you could call that evil… but then, many CEOs are “evil” by that definition, if to a lesser degree. -
@F_alk:
Schroeder won because he was more anti-U.S. tha his opponent. YOur government is partially based on disliking us.
…He was losing, he started bashing the U.S., he barely pulled ahead. His opponent and him were similiar domestically
I wonder why “pro-peace” is “anti-U.S.”……
It was PEACE that was his issue. Not anti-US.I agree. If any other country in the world is criticized, it is not “anti-whatever”. No one is anti-Afghanistan, although they (still) have a criticizible (is that a word?) regime. Yet if someone (even a Canadian) says that they disagree with US policy, then they are automatically anti-US. This immediately makes discussion difficult, and makes a reasoner’s position look ridiculous. Afterall, how can i have anything intelligent to say about world events the America’s participation in them when i am clearly “Anti-American”? Naturally this is not true. I am really no more anti-American than i am anti-French (well, i am less anti-American than i am “anti-French” - but this is a bad example . . . :D ). At the same time am i not allowed to criticize the actions of a superpower? I am allowed to tell my best friend “hey man - toasting your girlfriend’s house is probably not the best course of actoin” - does this make me anti-my best friend? (well, his actions would, i suppose). So what say we tone down the rhetoric. This isn’t about Americans vs. US-haters - besides, America has too many of those anyway - but rather friendly nations criticizing the actions of a world superpower.
@Deviant:Scripter:
YB, you fall to propaganda as fast as you proclaim that SH is “evil”.
You don’t think Saddam is evil? Is that what you’re implying…? :(
My emphasis was in the “time-domain”…. on the “as soon as”. I just couldn’t think on anything done faster than this proclamation. I can see why you interprete my sentence differently. I apologize for forming my sentences with double meaning.
But, all in all: i think SH is a man without respect for lives, with a major sense for power… you could call that evil… but then, many CEOs are “evil” by that definition, if to a lesser degree.Touche, but not really. If a CEO does not make the difficult decisions to meet the bottom lines of the stock-holders. If they do not make the cuts where needed for many reasons, then the board of directors will find a CEO who will. (i realize that many CEO’s are making blah-million dollars whereas their workers are making less, but i’d equate this to a selfish hubris, rather than to some underlying evil that would require them to invade a country, gas millions of people, bomb Israel, etc.).
-
Argentina and Peru invade CHile. COuld any power other than the U.S. do anything?
I doubt even the US could do anything. Chile would be overrun in a matter of days.
-
Did you hear about the MI 6 dossier, the one that was explicitly praised by Colin Powell in fron t of the security council?
These 19 pages?
10 of them have been copied (identically!) from free available scientific work….
That is maybe not so bad… but:
(1)The works copied are up to 12 years old
(2) One of the copied authors (Ibrahim Al-Marashi from California) said (in the Times of Friday) that they even copied his mistakes!
(3) They pretended it was all tehir work (and porbably the best they could do)…
and (4), important only for scientists: they didn’t mark the citations as such!Makes it hard to trust “your own” secret service…
but probably not hard enough for liars like Rumsfeld, who now declared that “diplomacy has failed”. -
@cystic:
But, all in all: i think SH is a man without respect for lives, with a major sense for power… you could call that evil… but then, many CEOs are “evil” by that definition, if to a lesser degree.
Touche, but not really. If a CEO does not make the difficult decisions to meet the bottom lines of the stock-holders. If they do not make the cuts where needed for many reasons, then the board of directors will find a CEO who will. (i realize that many CEO’s are making blah-million dollars whereas their workers are making less, but i’d equate this to a selfish hubris, rather than to some underlying evil that would require them to invade a country, gas millions of people, bomb Israel, etc.).
Exactly… they will find a CEO who will…
This selfish hybris is what i would call the underlying evil. It’s an excuse (and a very cheap and cowardous one) for yourself only. It does not at all justify any actions you take.
The people who gassed millions of people, shot innocent civilians etc…
from '33 to '45 they often enough were perfectly “ordinary” people.
There are reports about these brigades, one of them, the Hamburg Police Batallion, were “mostly older family fathers”…
And you will hear often enough “if i hadn’t done it…someone else would have… and they would have had me as a target as well” (which is questionable, as there was a german army captain who just did not follow his orders to “execute” some “partisans” 8which would have been women and children… and his superior asked him (after hearing that this order had not been followed" “when will you become harder?”… his answer was “never!”.So, this “if i didn’t do it” is the worst excuse ever! This is the one excuse that allows regimes like the Nazi regime to exist!
-
but i don’t see that Powell presented anything new
You’re not alone
They weren’t asking for anything “new.” They were asking for proof. And that’s exactly what Powell gave them. Excellently I might add. :P
Did you hear about the MI 6 dossier, the one that was explicitly praised by Colin Powell in fron t of the security council?
These 19 pages?
10 of them have been copied (identically!) from free available scientific work….
That is maybe not so bad… but:
(1)The works copied are up to 12 years old
(2) One of the copied authors (Ibrahim Al-Marashi from California) said (in the Times of Friday) that they even copied his mistakes!
(3) They pretended it was all tehir work (and porbably the best they could do)…
and (4), important only for scientists: they didn’t mark the citations as such!Makes it hard to trust “your own” secret service…
but probably not hard enough for liars like Rumsfeld, who now declared that “diplomacy has failed”.Look at the more important part…was the information true? Okay, so they copied it, big deal. I could really care less. Punish them for it if you want. There’s more important things out there to consider. Look at the information that was presented, was it true or wasn’t it?
-
@F_alk:
@cystic:
But, all in all: i think SH is a man without respect for lives, with a major sense for power… you could call that evil… but then, many CEOs are “evil” by that definition, if to a lesser degree.
Touche, but not really. If a CEO does not make the difficult decisions to meet the bottom lines of the stock-holders. If they do not make the cuts where needed for many reasons, then the board of directors will find a CEO who will. (i realize that many CEO’s are making blah-million dollars whereas their workers are making less, but i’d equate this to a selfish hubris, rather than to some underlying evil that would require them to invade a country, gas millions of people, bomb Israel, etc.).
Exactly… they will find a CEO who will…
This selfish hybris is what i would call the underlying evil. It’s an excuse (and a very cheap and cowardous one) for yourself only. It does not at all justify any actions you take.
The people who gassed millions of people, shot innocent civilians etc…
from '33 to '45 they often enough were perfectly “ordinary” people.
There are reports about these brigades, one of them, the Hamburg Police Batallion, were “mostly older family fathers”…
And you will hear often enough “if i hadn’t done it…someone else would have… and they would have had me as a target as well” (which is questionable, as there was a german army captain who just did not follow his orders to “execute” some “partisans” 8which would have been women and children… and his superior asked him (after hearing that this order had not been followed" “when will you become harder?”… his answer was “never!”.So, this “if i didn’t do it” is the worst excuse ever! This is the one excuse that allows regimes like the Nazi regime to exist!
:cry: F_alk has degenerated into the hyperbolic, irrelevent rhetoric that has plagued so many on this forum’s right. You seem to consider that because people are evil, and because CEO’s have to make difficult decisions, that these people are evil and capable of Nazi-like crimes. If i worked very hard, i might see a connection, but a tenuous one. These people are hired to balance books, to increase stock value and profits, and to make decisions relating to both of these. Because of this they are like Nazi’s? Certainly people lose their jobs secondary to decisions made by CEO’s, however this is not done for the sake of starving out a family, however because much of the time it is the fiscally necessary thing to do. Also a person is being very naive to assume that they have any job security in this day and age. I have always accepted the fact that my job was less secure than the Canadian dollar. Laying off a group of employees and letting them drop into the social net for the sake of balancing the books, maintaining stability, and increasing profits looks rude, however many times it is necessary (as the company would capsize later killing even more jobs), and hardly equates to killing people for the sake of killing people. (Granted, taking multi-million dollar salaries is selfish, however that is more an issue of supply and demand anyway - performers command the higher salaries. If the salary is to high, then the CEO will not be hired, or filled by a substandard CEO).
In medicine we make decisions daily - who lives and who dies, based on a group of studies, available resources, estimates and probablilties. These decisions suck. Telling someone “i’m sorry, you’re going to die” is the suckiest part of my job. If i don’t, someone else will do it. Does this equate me with someone who would kill for the sake of killing someone? Of course not - you would never consider it. At the same time, you are doing the same with business people. This is unfair. -
CC, I think what Falk was trying to say is different. He was trying to say CEOs will screw over 50 people to increase their own paychecks. Comparing them to Nazis I admit is a bit harsh.
-
CC, I think what Falk was trying to say is different. He was trying to say CEOs will screw over 50 people to increase their own paychecks. Comparing them to Nazis I admit is a bit harsh.
that’s usually the decision of the board of directors (CEO salaries). The better the CEO/reputation, the better the salary.
-
Yanny, the U.S.could deter them with it’s great diplomatic power backe d up economically and militarilly.
And no, I am not neccessarilly proud of our history in S. America, it was just a point, that the U.S. is the only country which can balance out regional powers in the regional power’s region.
Falk, Fisternis, CC, schroder’s opponent disagreed with the U.S., Schroeder was anti-U.S.
I think that what we need to do to get the Germans and French on board is to point out that the Iraqis are Semites. :)
-
British pro-war policy has a long way to go . . .
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/08/international/europe/08BRIT.htmlthey actually included errors in magazine articles in their cut and paste jobs!!!
Suggested Topics
