 |
|
VJ
|
 |
Helsinki
Dec 2001 time: 07:37
|
|
nm...
Last edited by VJ on 18-09-2005 at 23:12
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
BlackCat
|
|
quote: Originally posted by VJ
Because the Danes are suckers who actually believed that the war was all about disarming evildoers. I believe they still do, you can still see how Winston et aliae are proclaiming their moral superiority every time the topic comes up, innocently believing that most of Europe passed Iraq because they're all cowards and Danes are bringing the glorious democracy and freedom to Iraq.
|
I haven't said anything about countries being against the war was cowards - thay all had their political reasons to stay out/not participate, but none of the reasons anything to with bringing democracy to Iraq or not.
quote:
Here's a brilliant example:
If you don't send your kids to fight a war, you're doing it just because you want to kiss French ass. Brilliant, pure gold. |
The bolded part following is a very common used argument used against supporters of the war - why shouldn't I be allowed to sink just as low when I meet it ?
quote: Originally posted by Gangerolf
it's obviuosly a combination of many factors
- right wing government
- nato
- don't know the numbers, but the contribution is small and it's focused on humanitarian stuff
- and what makes you think they didn't do it to kiss american ass? |
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Winston
|
 |
Danmark
Mar 1999 time: 06:37
|
|
I used to think VJ was such a sensible guy. Now why do you hate Denmark? 
I've never seen anyone 'proclaim their moral superiority' because their country is part of the coalition. But now that you bring it up, it's obvious there is a difference between leaders taking on a challenge such as this one, and the ones who prefer minding their own business. Whether it has anything to do with morality I think is an open question, and it probably varies depending on who you ask. But I'm fairly certain that in the case of our PM, the decision to join was mainly fueled by a strong desire to try to help advance some of the values he believes in. He's made no secret of that at any point, in fact he's stressed it time and again right from the start. He may be many things, but he's no fence-sitter.
I think it's fair to say though, that the reports of WMD (credible by any account at the time) supplied an extra, convenient pretext to join - as I think it did for most everybody.
But this is getting a bit old. Our focus now should be on who will actually stay on and help get the job done - or join in and provide support, training, getting the civilian infrastructure improved and so on. This is what amazes me, that so few countries have seemingly been able to look past their opposition to the U.S. administration - and actually start offering a helping hand to the Iraqis...
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Winston
|
 |
Danmark
Mar 1999 time: 06:37
|
|
Intelligence reports can be something other than documents and satellite snapshots, you know. The ones I mentioned - in passing, I didn't argue they were quintessential to the decision - were assessments presumably based on a number of elements beside documents and satellite shots. Not least of which were records that he had them before, used them before, refused to give them up, obstructed their inspection, and was likely to want to acquire new ones.
Now, it seems the reports were wrong about the actual presence of weapons, at least on the scale that was being suggested. But that really doesn't change the perceived level of threat at the time when the decision was made to go in.
That's all I'm saying. And again, the reports formed a convenient extra pretext for my country, it was not essential. We would likely have joined anyway for the more practical reasons of removing Saddam and starting a change in the region.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37. Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|