 |
| |
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Willem
Bush has this distinct knack for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. Same with Rumsfeld. If the two of them had been the least bit adroit at dealing with other nations throughout this situation, they wouldn't find themselves in nearly as big of a mess as they are now. Much of the resistance from other nations has more to do with the way they've handled things, than with the issues themselves. |
To some extent, I agree with you. Bush started this with the simple statement that he had decided the Iraqi regime had to go. At that time, he hadn't presented any evidence of Saddam's continuing WoMD programs other than his expulsion of inspectors.
He should have started with a demand that the inspectors return with a toughened mandate. That would have be universally supported, I beleive. Saddam then would have pissed the world off with his defiance. France would have then been leading Europe to ask the US to lead a coalition, etc., to disarm Saddam.
Yeah, it could have been handled better.
The more Bush listens to Blair and to Powell, the more effective he is.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Willem
|
 |
Canada
Dec 2001
time: 00:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
To some extent, I agree with you. Bush started this with the simple statement that he had decided the Iraqi regime had to go. At that time, he hadn't presented any evidence of Saddam's continuing WoMD programs other than his expulsion of inspectors.
He should have started with a demand that the inspectors return with a toughened mandate. That would have be universally supported, I beleive. Saddam then would have pissed the world off with his defiance. France would have then been leading Europe to ask the US to lead a coalition, etc., to disarm Saddam.
Yeah, it could have been handled better.
The more Bush listens to Blair and to Powell, the more effective he is. |
My point exactly. If he wouldn't have started rattling the sabres right off the bat, and instead increased the presssure over time, then the other nations would have been much more willing to go along. And he certainly hasn't helped matters any with his "you're either for us or against us" rhetoric. Essentialy there's no disagreement, Saddam must be dealt with. No one's really arguing that point. It's just a matter how.
But to give him credit, he was kind of forced into the situation. And you're right, he is getting better at it. I'm glad he's not getting all ballistic about NK. But I don't think he'll ever be a good diplomat. Both he and Rumsfeld should just shut up and let Powell do the talking.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sabrewolf
|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002
time: 06:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Now, others here have said that these demostrations do not reflect the opinion of the average German or Frenchman. But even if that were once true, it seems that it no longer is true. It appears the average German or Frenchman has a strong dislike for the current Republican president.
What this means is that anti-Republicanism has spread beyond the far left. |
oh, yes, you're right. it's waaaay beyond our far left disliking your current president. mainly due to his actions and words, but also because of the -from european view- idiotical administration:
- ashcroft seems to be a cristian fanatic who forces his people to pray with him every morning. he also is ready to give up some of the points on your bills of rights... scary to me to be honest.
- cheney brings up this energy plan which seems very very suspicious that he's just supporting the energy industy (drill up whole of alaska for oil. same in the national parks and reservoirs. build loads of nuclear power stations.). imho he'd like to claim antarctica and drill there too...
- rumsfeld is saying some things about germany and france which you just shouldn't say. only because germany doesn't support the war, you shouldn't go comparing it with lybia and cuba. we don't compare america with the taliban regime... and both use the death penalty... (someone in germany on the right wing actually recently said that they are worried that something's not right with his head  )
i don't remember back so far to ike, richie and gerald. but i do remember daddy bush and RR in his 2nd legislature. both were criticised here too, but nothing like W has to hear.
maybe we've all shifted to the left, maybe you've all shifted to the right, or maybe dubya is doing something really wrong
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Thorn
|
 |
Asheville, NC
May 1999
time: 00:25
|
|
Ming told me I could post this, since he closed my thread days ago:
quote:
The US is wrong to be pushing so aggresively, and is acting in its own interests to be able to control the middle east. But that doesn't give nations in Europe the right to force the US to act alone and destroy the UN in doing so.
The United Nations was made for one purpose alone, to secure international security, much like the League of Nations before it. It is designed to prevent world powers from starting a World War.
I know it is popular in Europe to hate the US, I know the US behavior is somewhat erratic, but international community depends on the UN being supported by the Superpowers.
I fear for a world where the US, China, Russia, Britain, and even Germany can do what they want to other countries in unilateral action with no check by the UN.
I think some of you got the wrong idea about my views in Iraq. I support a war in Iraq, as long as it is done quickly, effectively and without risking war in North Korea by making them feel insecure (ie: like they are next in line to be invaded). I am confident in Colin Powell and Rumsfeld to fight a war that gets over quckly and has clear objectives that will not lead into another Vietnam War for this country. I think this war will be a war unlike the world has ever seen, technology, and strategy will overpower the Iraqi forces. The US is going to Blitz Iraq with overwhelming force.
The risk for Iraq is if it does have chemical and biological weapons and decides to use them, (granted if they do everything the Europeans moan about national soverinty will go down the drain as well as their defense that Iraq does not have these weapons). I just hope they are not used, it could be a disaster for the whole world.
Europe cannot understand the US, imagine having 3000+ of the economic leaders in your country wiped out in a blast and have national fear overwelm your country all by the actions of a few radical groups in the middle east. Your people are going to demand that these groups be removed from being able to do that again. What better way to secure this reality then by controlling the middle east and preventing these groups from keeping and gaining power. That is the United States purpose in Iraq. Oil and arrogence by the leadership are side incentives, they are wrong, but the main objective justifies the action.
Europeans have never experience an attack like September 11th, you don't know what it is like for your economy and national security to go down the drain in a single day. Furthermore you don't understand the kind of paranoia immediately put in place inside the government.
If the trade centers weren't enough. A plane acually crashed itself in the center of the command of the most power military machine in the world in the capitol of the superpower. If that wouldn't make someone insecure think what would?
With the people in office (Especially Bush) it is lucky that entire middle east hasn't been invaded already.
I worry about the North Korea threat a lot, and how it can and will drag China into the mix. The "Axis of Evil" comment was the biggest diplomatic blunder I've ever heard of a US president doing in the history of this nation. He hopefully won't get re-elected and right now it seems like him being relected is starting to become unlikely, to the benifit of the entire world.
The paranoia in the government doesn't justify the psychotic behavior of the justice department. America demands security not a police state that takes away our liberties, we do that and the terrorists have suceeded in destroying us by causing us to destroy ourselves from within. The public is starting to realise the extend that this blank check to the Justice Department is putting us at risk, and there will be a push for a halt of this behavior.
Things can improve slowly for the US and it's allies, or go down the drain in such a way that has never been seen before in the history of the world. The UN will decide this, so I pray they make the right choice.
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sabrewolf
i don't know if you read michael moore's "stupid white men". it's a very extreme point of view and only considers one side of the truth (imho there are 3 truths: one side, the other side and the real truth:somewhere in the middle).
but he shows in one of the (statistical based) facts, that being in the democrat party doesn't mean that you vote democrat. e.g. senator zell miller, GA voted 100% of the time with the republicans and didn't vote for democrats. in the house, ralph m. hall, TX (80%), ken lucas (75%), jim traficant (70%) and so on, voted against the democratic party principles and for the republicans.
i don't know why. either they are in the wrong party or they just worry about their votes and don't care about their political stance. in both cases i think this is the worst possible. i prefer a racist who admits it than a racist who pretends to be tolerant.
so to me it doesn't mean much, if a democrat sais something. you saw it with the patriot act. far more than half of the democrats hadn't been allowed to investigate the act, but all except one (who was considered as anti-american) voted for it.
sorry... but i expect my representative at least to READ what he's voting about, otherwise it's not worth having someone.
even though the democrat party is nearer to the european point i have even less respect of them than of the republicans. in my opinion the republican have the wrong point of view. but at least they are honest about that. |
Many of the democrats who support Bush on IRaq oppose him on other issues, Hillary among them. Tehy just dont share your viewpoint thats all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Andrew1999
|
|
quote:
Asked about the distinction bin Laden appears to make between the Iraqi government and the Iraqi population, CIA director George Tenet told a Senate committee that such distinctions blur "very, very easily."
"It's a distinction that people have tried to make, particularly in the terrorism world, which I don't think very much of, to tell you the truth," Tenet said.
|
Our modus operandi for as long as I can remember is "We're at war with the government, not the people. We're actually here to save the people from their government." Is the CIA director publicly proclaiming this to be bull****?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
I vote for branching threads
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
 |
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:25
|
|
I didn't have the energy to read this whole thread, so forgive me if I repeat what other have said.
I have thought about this whole scenario and what is happening.
First of all, I think we can't solely put the blame on Iraq, Europe or the US. We are all guilty of being jerks right now. We should really think about the other sides too in allied side that is. Even if the war is not about oil, many Europeans thinks it is so. It's not useful to argue about it, what the US needs to do now, is to really make sure Europeans don't think this way. Many in the US thinks Europeans is being just anti-US and don't want to work with them because they are Americans. Europeans should really work to get this one done and send clear messages this is not about it. Everyone should look in the mirror and think 'have we really done enough?'.
We really have to realize that our mindsets are different, and they are pushing our motivation, beliefs etc.
Europe: We think that the US is not in real danger because of Iraq. This is something the US might not understand. We don't think Iraq is a REAL threat to us, and not to our friend behind Atlantic Sea, even further away. We DO NOT love Saddam, we think he's evil and it would be better to topple him. But we need a good solid proof before doing it, because we can't go and do what ever we like, that would send message to the world that if you have power, you can do what you want. This is also why Europeans want these things to be agreed in UN, and thinks it's very important. There is no question that Europe would not help the US if it was in fact attacked by Iraq. We just don't agree the US is in great danger.
The US however thinks mostly, that Iraq is direct threat to the US, and maybe to other parts of the free world too. I'm not saying the US or Europe is right, just what they mostly think. So, they wonder why Europeans are slacking, not contributing to the common threat. What kind of allies are these? Not helping when danger is there... So both are kind of thinking that the other side is just being stupid now. You really have to put yourself in others shoes, and think about it. Both sides makes sense. And it makes the other side look stupid.
However one thing is clear to both of the sides and it is that Saddam is the bad guy. We really should not waste our time picking on each other, since we are the good guys and have the same enemy. We just have little differencies in opinions and this can be sorted out and played so, that we can both have the good things out of this, and not be small and say stupid things, only hurting transatlantic relations, which should be valued and never broken. And the US often forgets, that Europe is VERY versatile, and we fight each other all the time, and are on opposite sides in little things, that it's just stupid. It rarely makes it to the US press though, and it has no reason to make headlines. Small people just acts like children when they don't get what they want.
We have to realize, that the enemy is SADDAM, and international terrorism and the likes. Terrorist are winning everytime we talk bad about each other. We can't let that happen!
And the fact is, Europe is not SO unified yet. Especially in military aspect.. we are so different with different values and possibility to fight and equip ourselves, it's not even funny. It's like from horror movie.
We should really focus on the enemy and remember it.
Europeans do not understand 'you are with us or against us' rhetorics. We think it's bullying. Even if we are with you, we could think that with that kind of speaking, we don't want to be with you. We think there are other ways, and every country do what they want to do, and they don't have to be categorized as 'with, or against'. That is how Europeans think. The US thinks, that if you are not playing the game, you are on the opposite side. And that causes unnecessary tension between us, for no good reason what so ever.
Also Europe gets angry sometimes, that the US press plays hardball. But we Europeans should remember the way US press works. It's nothing new, they are also for entertaining and they are getting lots of money. We shouldn't get provoked by harsh words, and obvious overreactions. Our press plays this game too sometimes, so it's not like we don't do the same thing. This only gets people mad, for no good reason, and the only ones who wins is press, and the terrorists. The media needs to create big news if there is none available, or if the news are repeating themselves. They need something fresh. It's always good to report about Europe and their bad behaviour, or the US and its behaviour. They have to much influence to our opinions of each other etc. They have much to gain, and too much to lose. I'm not saying the report lies, but they really can put a certain light to anything if they want to, just to make it more interesting.
Also, Europeans don't sometimes understand, that the US needs to push their policies sometimes the way they do. We, Europeans, are not in the same positions as they are, so we can't really know what it's like. So we can't say 'you guys are not in the position you say you are', because we just can't know. Also the US shouldn't get angry because of it, it is something we can't understand always.
And what is the most important thing to me is that we, Europeans, can't really complain what the US does. They play for their people, and it's all good. As long as we don't have decent military, as long as we can't do the same if needed, we don't have a say in it! When we have decent military, the US takes us more seriously and puts more effort in diplomatic way. Also then we can push our agendas too. There will always be Saddams and Osamas, always, and we can't let the US do all the job, because then we can't have a saying in it. We just are too idealistic, pushing utopias that will never become reality. There's nothing wrong with it, but it's stupid when we don't have decent military to back it up!
Instead of *****ing, what we need to do is get more power to ourselves and start thinking about the whole world, and not just 'Europe is safe, we don't have to do anything'.
What I'm saying is basically that if you're not a player yourself, you can't join the game.
But we really should not fall into easy traps and blame each other, we should always remember who the REAL enemy is, and work to further our relations more, not hurting them. It leads to nothing good. Just my thoughts.
edit: and IF Europe had great military, it would get its way too. They could say to the US 'lets investigate more and give more time' IF they would actually do the job after that, and let the US be the audience. But now, the US has to do the majority of the job, so we can't really wonder why they want to go their own way.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25.
Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-02-2003 08:36
ACK!
You walked right into it and wham!
). but do we really think the Philipinos are lying????
|