aman Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 "The last time France waited for conclusive proof, it drove through Paris with a German flag." (David Letterman) Just aman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossonero Posted February 13, 2003 Author Share Posted February 13, 2003 u's are all so bias.:bs: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Who is biased? And against whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Refusing to help defend your NATO allies at greatest risk requires no bias to see wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PogoC7 Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Turkey: Muslim 99.8% (mostly Sunni), other 0.2% (mostly Christians and Jews) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 So France could just be racist against arabs.. ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PogoC7 Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Will Suddam bomb Arabs? If he does bomb turkey, it will only help the U.S. on there propaganda war in the middle east. This leader bombed his own people. Who knows? The U.S. wants to defend Turkey, but you really don't know the true politics which happen behind closed doors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Saddam HAS bombed arabs in his own country, with chemical weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PogoC7 Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Yea, but it seems to me, people forget quickly in the middle east. Plus, it's a different time. The key now is Arabs unitieing against the U.S. and the western world. If he was to bomb is own people now, it would go against what Osama and the Arab militants are preaching. And have you seen the people who formed a human shield around Bagdad. Funny Stuff. What are these people trying to promote, they arn't even Iraqi!!!! I see if they want to protect the people of Bagdad, but I doubt too many civilians will die in Bagdad. America freed Kawait and how many civilians died? Not many. These people should be protesting against Suddam because he is about to kill thousands of his own people to fight a war he can not win. Article: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030213/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_574 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 You obviously know sod all about the varying social climates, public attitudes and propaganda machines in the Middle East then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PogoC7 Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 I know that; the sooner Saddam is out of power, the better off Iraqi people will be. Saddam is a greedy bastard and he would make a better corporate leader, then a country's leader. What has America done in the past to countries which they have gone to war with (and won)? They rebuild the country. If the United States outed Saddam back in '91, then maybe Iraq would be a peaceful leader in the middle east. Corporate America, bad. What America stands for, good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossonero Posted February 13, 2003 Author Share Posted February 13, 2003 all i am saying is that there are more than one cookie to crunch in this issue. america seems to be trying to form world dictatorship more and more every day. hmmm, lets say US Secretary of State = abuses forein members of the security council because they do not want to support them in a war. If AMERICA wants to go to war with Iraq. then fine, they can. But stop dragging other countries in there own personal issues with them. so GWB should jump on his OWN banwagon and go at it alone, and leave other countries out of it. And the WWI/WWII excuse is just pathetic. Hmmmm, lets see. WWI, the USA assisted for personal gain, SUPER HIGH INTEREST RATES ON LOANS TO THE ALLIES. Geeeze, just like the US...... After world war 1, it was US President Wilsons idea to start the league of nations... New President ellected and they didnt join. There is just to much chopping, changing and backflipping in american congress. And NOW the US government is trying to butt into australian politics and lashing out at our opposition party's to the govt. well they can just leave australia alone, and worry bout there own bloody issues and take their stupid american ambassador to australia with them... we dont want him or need him here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 So you're saying countries shouldn't work together? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Originally posted by PogoC7 I know that; the sooner Saddam is out of power, the better off Iraqi people will be. Saddam is a greedy bastard and he would make a better corporate leader, then a country's leader. What has America done in the past to countries which they have gone to war with (and won)? They rebuild the country. If the United States outed Saddam back in '91, then maybe Iraq would be a peaceful leader in the middle east. Corporate America, bad. What America stands for, good. That's mostly true, but you'd have a hard job trying to convince the Iraqi people that they can make it without Saddam. The culture in Iraq is entirely different from yours. And don't forget that if the US hadn't helped put the H-man in power in the first place, none of this would be happening. I'd be interested to know which countries the US has 'rebuilt' too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aman Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Einstein in a letter to a pacifist, 1941 "If all the young people in America were to act as you intend to act, the country would be defenseless and easily delivered into slavery." These are good words for France today. Also I heard an Iraqi on a TV discussion ask "How do you expect us to be your friends if your going to bomb us?" I wish somebody would have said that when you kick the shit out of a child molester, your pretty certain to get the grattitude of the kids he's molesting. They just don't seem to get it but they will see it soon. Just aman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 The dead ones won't, or the ones who lose their homes or families or property. I think that might be the issue they have. After all, if you kick a child molester you're pretty certain you're going to hit him. If you carpet bomb a country you can be sure to pick off the odd bystander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aman Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 I hope we aren't stupid enough to just blast away. We will be asking a lot of our special forces to cut away the bad without haring the good. On another front, if N Korea launches a missle at us, I hope our defense sysem we've been testing out over the Pacific is ready for at least an attempt at intercept. This months Pop. Sci. says we're still a couple years from shooting em down with lasers. Just aman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PogoC7 Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by Rossonero all i am saying is that there are more than one cookie to crunch in this issue. america seems to be trying to form world dictatorship more and more every day. hmmm, lets say US Secretary of State = abuses forein members of the security council because they do not want to support them in a war. America would be happy to not put so much effort into problems on the other side of the world. America has it's own problems. Mexico is in horrible condition and we have crazy militants in South America. People's living conditions there can also rival middle easterns or Europes or N. Koreas. America would be happy if powers such as; Europe, Russia, Japan, China, were more assertive on threatening issues (N. Korea, South Africa, Iraq and the middle east in general). America put large amounts of money in rebuilding countries and when countries show they can handle themselves (just being aware of threats). Then America will start letting go of their grip on countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by aman I hope we aren't stupid enough to just blast away. We will be asking a lot of our special forces to cut away the bad without haring the good. No you won't. You'll be asking them to demonstrate that their training was effective, that they can use the supplied tools competently, and to justify their pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by PogoC7 America would be happy to not put so much effort into problems on the other side of the world. America has it's own problems. Mexico is in horrible condition and we have crazy militants in South America. People's living conditions there can also rival middle easterns or Europes or N. Koreas. America would be happy if powers such as; Europe, Russia, Japan, China, were more assertive on threatening issues (N. Korea, South Africa, Iraq and the middle east in general). America put large amounts of money in rebuilding countries and when countries show they can handle themselves (just being aware of threats). Then America will start letting go of their grip on countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matzi Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by fafalone So you're saying countries shouldn't work together? Not if they do not agree in an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Working together doesnt mean agreeing. When you disagree its all the more important to work together and so better understand each other and hopefuly influence each other for the better. Simply turnng away from someone you diagree with achieves nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RED FIRE COW Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 . Simply turnng away from someone you diagree with achieves nothing. [/b] Have you heard of decission by indecission. Well by turning away you might be preventing more problems. What if the other person doesent know when to give. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by RED FIRE COW What if the other person doesent know when to give. Then there's a good chance that they'll chase after you screaming and axe you in the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 'Decision by indecision.' I'm not sure if Zen Buddism works in international diplomacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now