View Full Version : a little politics(U.S president race)
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
[
8]
9
well Teutonic_Knight i totaly agry with you :go: :go: :go:
i dont know if this is true but i herd that Russia was selling night vission gogles and anty tank missels to Iraq after the invasion started
In my opinian the U.N. stoped working a wile ago(wont explane my whole idea because english not good very(lol)) but i think that the U.N. hasnt evolved enught since it was made to tackle the problems in the modern world.
Teutonic_Knight
15-04-2004, 03:04
Well, I've not seen any "hard fact" to support the claim; however, Iraq had received anti-tank missiles and radar jamming gps equipment from Russia right up to when hostilities began. The Russian government denied that they were still selling to Iraq and the US government said they were and to stop.
And yes you are exactly right; the UN hasn't been of any relevance for some time now. In my opinion the UN should be thrown in the trash bin of history.
Dah,why people unleashe wars???
Why these Americans poke their nose into other people business?
Oh,yyyeess!Of course!They NEED oil,they need sphere of influence,they want to rule other states! There are no more minerals in USA,so they need to get them from Iraq! This is their hope,their lust. But it has a price.Huge price! Gory rencounters,people and soldiers die - that is the price!
But they must defend people from terrorists who lives in Iraq! Not all people in Iraq are terrorists.We must fight against terrorists,not against civilians.But fighting against terrorists is a very good reason to march into Iraq and it is a very good "shelter" to hide their dirty works.
IMO :cool:
Thanks for attention.:)
Kuno of Gersenau
15-04-2004, 11:44
Well my opinion is nearly the same how yours Heretic.
I said it in another tread, but I say it again, now there are more terrorists and hate against the Western Civilisation in the Arabian World than before, if George W. Bush makes a war against Iraq he should say the truth:
"Yes, we are here for taking your oil and for catching Saddam because he wanted to kill my dad. Well, Saddam killed the Iraki people during years, but this is not our problem! And yes, we search the Mass Destruibct Weapons, which we selled Saddam 20 Years ago...we have still the receipt, so don't say that you don't have them...
And finally that the rest of the world can't say that we are arrogat we try to make a bit democraty here, I mean this so: We give the Iraki people a puppet-government, which is controlled by us!"
@Teutonic Knight: In my opinion the UN doesn't work well because of the arrogance of the US-governments...
America is a super-might, so they can do things without asking the rest of the world :(:angry: So what could the UN do I ask you?
George said: "No wepons-inspectors from the UN, I'm sure they have this weapons, so go out an we can declare the war! "
What should the UN be in your opinion? a puppet of the USA? Well it's clear that America would like it if it would be so, but so it doesn't work!:angry:
Thanks for reading...
Originally posted by Teutonic_Knight
All these people saying America is protecting its interest in oil in Iraq and France, Russia, Germany and China are being “good Guys” by not supporting the war need to look into Iraq’s financial pages. Do you know who the top three trade partners of Iraq were before the invasion? I know you don’t because your argument won’t hold water if you did, and well now you will know. In order the top three trading partners in oil, oil revenue via trade deals, and trade in general are: 1) Russia 2) China 3) France. America doesn’t even break the top five...I don't say France or Germany or Russia are good guys. They have their own interests in M.E. The only diference between them and US is that they don't use war as the way how to get what they want(To be in the top5of Iraqi trade partners?to controll Iraq?). To be honest, I'm sure that if France/Russia/Germany/UK is as military powerfull as USA is now, they will push their interests and desires by war too, as they did in history. I'm simply against war. Maybe it's because I'm not from powerfull naton whoch can afford pulling it's desires by war, but I am against it.
so I ask you who is protecting whose oil interests?EVERYBODY is protecting his own interests in M.E., only US government and islamic fundamentalistic terrorists are pushing it by violence and war. I know that it's unjustifyable to resist against cultural preassure of western civilisation by violence, but the only thing I know is, that in this unequal struggle Democracy and Freedom can't win. Either terrorists or originaly-democratic-free-states can win, but those states will be no longer democratic and free. Terrorism can be stopped by spies and agents and policemen and soldier everywhere. Maybe it was already asked, if not, it will come once that some national leader(president/prime minister) tell his people: "You must decide between freedom or security." Everybody will chose security.
Without Saudi oil what will most of the world do? If the United States really wanted Iraq for oil then why in the hell would we want a Democratic country in place where we can actually be shut out of trade, why not deal with one all powerful person in form of a dictatorship because it will be a lot easier to broker a deal by catering to that persons ego?as I said before. US government didn't try it becase then only czech and Poland's government will follow them. Public in UK was slightly for or against this war "justified" as defence of UK against Saddam's mass-destruction-weapons, Tony Blair won't risk his chair to defend American interests.
Did you know that the Saudi government actually tried to kill Osama Bin Laden in 96?Heard about it and also heard thet US government refused this offer.
I'm sure they knew about them, but do you think they could stop them?Even if can or cannot, they didn't want, so this question is irrelevant.
Further more your point initially was that America was the main supplier of arms and money which wasn't true at all, not even close. Did Germany, Russia and the other countries that supplied arms to Iraq stop because they were dealing with Sadaam? Certainly not, then why is it fair to try twist and contort facts to blame America when we didn’t even supply a tenth(1/10) of what Iraq had?I don't know the numbers, maybe ¨'m wrong, but I'm not sure about power of German military industry after WW2. As long as German own army vas very weak with american troops there, I don't know if they did some significant export. But as I said, I don't know exact facts
I don't think GHB not taking Iraq out has any relevance on what’s going on now. Remember it was the United Nations who said that the only thing the coalition was to do was push Iraq out of Kuwait. Then you have the same people who say GHB should have taken Sadaam out the first time and screw the UN, are now saying we should have listened to the spineless UN and not go into Iraq!I didn't tell that. I only think, that if it should have been done, it should have been done at once. IMO GHB might got UN mandat more easily in 1990's after Saddams aggresion than GWB in 2003. And for more with reason like never-yet-found weapons of mass destruction able to attack UK in few minutes.
You don't think Democracy can work in the ME, you think everybody should be under the heel of a dictator, or a pitiful Monarchy? I think Democracy can work as shown by Turkey and it's just a matter of time before it happens. If I had to make a choice as to who would likely be next I would say either Egypt or Iran. [B] Yes, you are saying it. It takes time. But not 1 or2 years. It needs at least 2or3 generations.
You have no experience with it, but I live in post-communist country. When "absolut" democracy was built here in my country in 1918, our president Masaryk "asked the history for 50!! years of peace to build free system of democracy as is in traditional democracy countries like UK and USA were. And czech society was part of western culture with it's values!!! Now, after 40years of totality comunist regime t's very "messy" situation here. Only after the people born after 1989 will educate their own children, that generation (so2010's) can be clear democratic (if the democracy here would stay.
Turkey even now is a mixture of islamic and democratical systems with not main, but significant role of army (until 1982 it was military dictature "such as Iraq"), and "democracy" started there in 1920! Egypt or Tunisia are the most liberal muslim countries, Iran was before islamic revolution and it seems that students and many people there are prepared for democracy, but democracy needs not less than 1/10 population to be democratic, butmore than a half!!
Originally posted by Heretic
Dah,why people unleashe wars???
Why these Americans poke their nose into other people business?
Oh,yyyeess!Of course!They NEED oil,they need sphere of influence,they want to rule other states! There are no more minerals in USA,so they need to get them from Iraq! This is their hope,their lust. But it has a price.Huge price! Gory rencounters,people and soldiers die - that is the price!
But they must defend people from terrorists who lives in Iraq! Not all people in Iraq are terrorists.We must fight against terrorists,not against civilians.But fighting against terrorists is a very good reason to march into Iraq and it is a very good "shelter" to hide their dirty works.
IMO :cool:
Thanks for attention.:)
that is so stupid!!! if they want mineral and resources they can get from Canada next door with tuns of resaurces its like Siberia.
Originally posted by Havoc
that is so stupid!!! if they want mineral and resources they can get from Canada next door with tuns of resaurces its like Siberia. They can, but it's not enough for the strongest world economy. Canada has not enough resources to satisfy US needs.
Originally posted by Elewyn
They can, but it's not enough for the strongest world economy. Canada has not enough resources to satisfy US needs.
can i plz get some kind of facts plz
This is probably not enough....http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/topworldtables3_4.html
Also there are many oil exporters/resources around the world http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/rankings/totimportsby_country.htm So find numbers of US import (all resources together) and Canadian export. I don't know exact numbers, but be sure that american import is far higher tha canadian export.
How can a land of less than 30 millions of populatoion satisfy itself whole country with over 260 millions?
Hm,Havoc will be kicked to that war-camp!!!Yessss,I dream they'll kick you to Iraq!Then we will see,you will change your stupid opinions.:cool:
Stop foolish online fighting, guys n' girls:)
Originally posted by Heretic
Hm,Havoc will be kicked to that war-camp!!!Yessss,I dream they'll kick you to Iraq!Then we will see,you will change your stupid opinions.:cool:
well lady you are a $TUP!D little !@#$%^&*() i want to see you B:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: in H:angry: :angry: :angry:
hmmmm... is this how a honorable knight behave to a lady? :nono:
Kuno of Gersenau
15-04-2004, 21:53
Well, I don't want to put more oil in the fire, but one point of Heretic's message is right. Most of the people who support war don't know how war really is!
And Havoc, look at your words...:nono:
But I think this discussion could go on without insults and fool statements...
Originally posted by Elewyn
hmmmm... is this how a honorable knight behave to a lady? :nono:
im no knight im a 15year old kid with full acsecc to any thing i want: drugs, vodka, guns, etc the west is a crazy place a school can provide you all of that and Hereic just hates me
Teutonic_Knight
15-04-2004, 23:55
I don't say France or Germany or Russia are good guys. They have their own interests in M.E. The only diference between them and US is that they don't use war as the way how to get what they want(To be in the top5of Iraqi trade partners?to controll Iraq?). To be honest, I'm sure that if France/Russia/Germany/UK is as military powerfull as USA is now, they will push their interests and desires by war too, as they did in history. I'm simply against war. Maybe it's because I'm not from powerfull naton whoch can afford pulling it's desires by war, but I am against it.
Why would America want to upset the apple cart in the ME? We are fine the way it was before the Iraqi invasion. We got very little oil from Iraq and what we did get even if it went away would be noticed very little and it were we could get more from other countries to subsidize it. There is nothing wrong to be against war, but one must remember it is a necessary tool.
EVERYBODY is protecting his own interests in M.E., only US government and islamic fundamentalistic terrorists are pushing it by violence and war. I know that it's unjustifyable to resist against cultural preassure of western civilisation by violence, but the only thing I know is, that in this unequal struggle Democracy and Freedom can't win. Either terrorists or originaly-democratic-free-states can win, but those states will be no longer democratic and free. Terrorism can be stopped by spies and agents and policemen and soldier everywhere. Maybe it was already asked, if not, it will come once that some national leader(president/prime minister) tell his people: "You must decide between freedom or security." Everybody will chose security.
What interests are we protecting? We have very little interests in Iraq, the one thing Iraq has we don't get enough of to go to war over, and what we do get we can get from somebody else.
You are right though; terrorism can only be stopped militarily at first. Terrorism is a weapon and a "weapon" can't really be defeated, it would be like saying WW2 was a war on tanks. Terrorism thrives in places where people are generally in poverty and ignorant.
The first thing that has to be done is destroy by force any place that allows the ideas of terrorism to flourish and spawn, then one must educate the people that what they are doing is wrong and this is done basically by allowing them to see unbiased views of the ones that are the targets.
Religion is what makes terrorism such an effective tool because these people have been taught that it's their religious duty to carry out these attacks. If true Islam can be introduced to those people and allow these same people to see an untainted view of the West then a lot of terrorism will stop.
Think about it, if I were to take a boy or a girl at the developmental age of 8-10 and indoctrinate him to hate the Swiss and controlled everything he or she saw about them as bad and evil. Then anything, I mean anything bad that ever happened to him or her tie it to the Swiss then as an added measure throw in religion and tell them that it is their divine right to kill the Swiss. Let this fester for about 3-4 years and at the time of adolescence guess what, I have a teenager that WILL mindlessly kill Swiss people, men, woman or child without a thought one about the consequences.
This same thought is being cultured around the world, blame anything and everything upon the American government. Anytime something goes wrong it is bound to be the Americans.
as I said before. US government didn't try it becase then only czech and Poland's government will follow them. Public in UK was slightly for or against this war "justified" as defence of UK against Saddam's mass-destruction-weapons, Tony Blair won't risk his chair to defend American interests.
Why would anybody risk political suicide to back Americas "interests" in Iraq? Like I have said before America had very little interest financially in Iraq and that the countries that had the most money tied in Iraq, through deals with Sadaam, were those who opposed the war.
Have you ever wondered why sometimes governments of a particular country go against the majority of people to do something unfavorable? I would say it has something to do with intelligence and things that are on a need to know basis. Example, the UN security council, with the exception of Syria, voted unanimously that Iraq had or at very least was trying to produce and/or acquire WMD, this includes France, Germany and Russia. The reason they came to this conclusion was because of intelligence supplied from all intelligence agencies involved DGSE, CIA and MI6 along with others.
Heard about it and also heard thet US government refused this offer.
I think you might be talking about the Sudanese offering to hand over Bin Laden to the US and Clinton refusing. The plot I'm talking about was a Saudi SS plan to assassinate Bin Laden because the Saudi's feared his influence might bring about turmoil and problems in Saudi Arabia.
Even if can or cannot, they didn't want, so this question is irrelevant.
Exactly, but you had said that America were the ones who made the Iraqis attack Iran while funding and arming them as well.
I don't know the numbers, maybe ¨'m wrong, but I'm not sure about power of German military industry after WW2. As long as German own army vas very weak with american troops there, I don't know if they did some significant export. But as I said, I don't know exact facts
The German arms production has been in full swing for sometime now and is just as good as they were in Germany's glory years.
Here is a good link http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/
I didn't tell that. I only think, that if it should have been done, it should have been done at once. IMO GHB might got UN mandat more easily in 1990's after Saddams aggresion than GWB in 2003. And for more with reason like never-yet-found weapons of mass destruction able to attack UK in few minutes.
You didn't say that exactly, but you did say that Bush should have went in and the UN is exactly why he didn't do it. Intelligence suggested otherwise about WMD not just American, but French, British etcetera.
You must also acknowledge that most of what goes wrong in the world the first thing people say is where are the Americans, or why did they not do enough. Suppose the United States did nothing with the information we had regarding Iraq and WMD and let’s say for whatever reason Sadaam detonated a bomb or a chemical attack in Berlin, Vienna, Paris or Madrid I wonder what people would say. I know what would be said; those damn Americans knew Sadaam had this potential why did they not do anything they must have not done anything because they feared that their oil would be cut off because Iraq is only good to them for oil. This is the type of complex problem every American administration has come across after WW2.
Yes, you are saying it. It takes time. But not 1 or2 years. It needs at least 2or3 generations.You have no experience with it, but I live in post-communist country. When "absolut" democracy was built here in my country in 1918, our president Masaryk "asked the history for 50!! years of peace to build free system of democracy as is in traditional democracy countries like UK and USA were. And czech society was part of western culture with it's values!!! Now, after 40years of totality comunist regime t's very "messy" situation here. Only after the people born after 1989 will educate their own children, that generation (so2010's) can be clear democratic (if the democracy here would stay.
Turkey even now is a mixture of islamic and democratical systems with not main, but significant role of army (until 1982 it was military dictature "such as Iraq"), and "democracy" started there in 1920! Egypt or Tunisia are the most liberal muslim countries, Iran was before islamic revolution and it seems that students and many people there are prepared for democracy, but democracy needs not less than 1/10 population to be democratic, butmore than a half!!
I agree 100%, you all from the Eastern bloc have made great strides and I have no doubt that if people such as yourself rise to leadership you all shall learn and love Democracy, while we may disagree I still think you are an intelligent person able to seek out the truth and stop perpetuating hate and problems.
I know Turkey has had problems I also know that they are not a true "Democracy" but rather a Parliamentary Democracy which is still Democracy and far better than a Monarchy or Dictatorship.
Teutonic_Knight
16-04-2004, 00:07
Why these Americans poke their nose into other people business?
Because when we don't were always second guessed as to why we didn't and when we do we get bashed for doing it, its kid of like damn if we do, damn if we don't.
Give some examples as to where we "poked" our nose into somebody else’s business that we weren't asked to.
Oh,yyyeess!Of course!They NEED oil,they need sphere of influence,they want to rule other states! There are no more minerals in USA,so they need to get them from Iraq! This is their hope,their lust. But it has a price.Huge price! Gory rencounters,people and soldiers die - that is the price!
Nothing personal but that’s the funniest thing I have read. Have you read anything that’s been written? We get less than 5% of our oil from Iraq and could do just fine without it why would we go to war to get something we already have and don't really have to have it from them?
But they must defend people from terrorists who lives in Iraq! Not all people in Iraq are terrorists.We must fight against terrorists,not against civilians.But fighting against terrorists is a very good reason to march into Iraq and it is a very good "shelter" to hide their dirty works.
Makes sense, why kill the civilians who are not terrorists, but why would terrorists kill civilians that aren't in the military or are there making sure food, medicine and basic services can be set up? What are the dirty tricks you speak of?
Teutonic_Knight
16-04-2004, 00:58
said it in another tread, but I say it again, now there are more terrorists and hate against the Western Civilisation in the Arabian World than before, if George W. Bush makes a war against Iraq he should say the truth: "Yes, we are here for taking your oil and for catching Saddam because he wanted to kill my dad. Well, Saddam killed the Iraki people during years, but this is not our problem! And yes, we search the Mass Destruibct Weapons, which we selled Saddam 20 Years ago...we have still the receipt, so don't say that you don't have them...
And finally that the rest of the world can't say that we are arrogat we try to make a bit democraty here, I mean this so: We give the Iraki people a puppet-government, which is controlled by us!"
What kind of propaganda are you listening too? Did you know that President Clinton had plans of invading Iraq in 1998, look it up and read up as to why. As far as selling him WMD, what exactly did we sell him Mr. Flash of brilliance? If you can't or don't know I can tell you exactly who sold Iraq what I bet you will be surprised that there are more countries in it than you could imagine.
Also you never answered a previous post as to how did America put Sadaam in power?
Teutonic Knight: In my opinion the UN doesn't work well because of the arrogance of the US-governments...What should the UN be in your opinion? a puppet of the USA? Well it's clear that America would like it if it would be so, but so it doesn't work
You know what its that kind of slanted statement that makes me not even want to debate with somebody that so caught up in blinded ignorance.
How did the United States act so arrogant? Because we actually enforced what the United Nations had already mandated. I could reverse the situation and say, because the French said that no matter what they would not approve of war event hough the UN security council had already approved it earlier. How does that make the UN look? Lets see, we’ll tell a country to do something, vote on it, agree to it and when the country doesn't do it, then just sit and do nothing such as in a lot of other incidents.
Let’s look at how the UN works shall we. All the councils have revolving membership’s which rotate heads of certain divisions within the UN like the Humanitarian and Human rights division. Which I might add was just lead by Libya who has one of the worst human rights records on file. Lets look at the Disarmament committee who was the leader of that; Iraq!
For a body of nations to hold themselves subservient to an entity that has more despots and dictatorships in them than elected officials is freaking mind boggling.
Look at the record of the UN and who foots most of the UN bills and still gets the biggest ration of crap. The United States foots the majority of the bills, soldiers and materials to most UN sanctioned things, but yet gets bashed every time we do something whether through the UN or not, Somalia anybody.
Look at Bosnia a great UN debacle what did it take for Milosivic to stop? It wasn't the UN who was yet again toothless it took a determined Clinton to threaten unilateral action if the UN didn't do something more. The UN did NOTHING, Clinton undaunted went to NATO and bypassed the UN then bombed the piss out of Milosivic thus effectively stopping him. Koffi Annan is an imbecile who know looks like he and his son are going to be brought down because of, shock of shock, embezzlement and I believe Sadaam is going to slam him for the Oil for Palaces program they had running.
Another part of the problem is that the UN can't decide on anything if it does it's usually too little too late. Look at this shinning example of the great bastion of freedom called the UN.
Kofi was interested in having more of a U.N. response to terrorism, but ... the Organization of Islamic States vetoed it. They said they would not go along with any resolution against terrorism unless it said terrorism for bad causes is bad, but terrorism for good causes is good," (emphasis added -ed) Muravchik said.
Look at the other shinning moments of UN debacles
Sudan
Congo
Indonesia
Haiti
Cambodia
Rwanda
Now tell me again why in the hell is the UN important? Oh I know why, so a lot of European nations can maintain very small armies and rely on America to do the dirty work while they sit on their hands griping about how we do nothing but cause trouble.
If the UN is ever disposed of these same countries who do little and gripe loudest would then have to put up or shut up, and I would personally love to see it.
Originally posted by Teutonic_Knight
Why would America want to upset the apple cart in the ME? We are fine the way it was before the Iraqi invasion.If you are, you won't change it, don't you? Why change something you're fine with? I know, you probably meant oil situation. But as I said, It's better to controll potential 3rd world's producer(after SA and Russia). Invasion was also meant as part of War on terrorism, but as many of us know-Iraq was hard dictatorship, but Lay, as ireligious as islamic state can be. Saddam'S image of Saladin is already gone-it was made to get support of islamic states in 1990's. One or two attacks on Israel? a dictator must show his people he's fighting aggainst enemy (and you don't need to be islamic fundamentalist to dsagree with Islael's policy (however it's more justifyable than Palestinian terrorist way!).
What interests are we protecting? We have very little interests in Iraq, the one thing Iraq has we don't get enough of to go to war over, and what we do get we can get from somebody else.I'm sure it's not the only reason. But as said many times. Today's oil need not to lead to war, but future can. Other reasons and interests? I don't know. MWD for surebut it's very difficult. Better intelligence services may had proved that he has everything what he need, but... strict controlls found nothing :( Import of democracy? Possible reason, but by arms as I said the best way how to make muslims hate America more and more. Dictatorship? there is many autoritative rulers allaround the world. Why Iraq, which has most oil reserves? why not some of African states, where situation of people is even worse. I'm not telling you to invade every dictatorship by force, I only ask why Iraq. For revenge? To prove some effects of anti-terrorism war? to use weapons and start up economy in depression after 9/11? (It's very effective, as Hitler proved in 1930's!)
You are right though; terrorism can only be stopped militarily at first.I'm not sure about this. Really. I'm not sure if you red carefully my previous posts. in war democracy vs. terror democracy necver will be the winner because to defeat evil you must use evil, what means the end of Freedom. But maybe it's the only way to secure world :(
Your "Swiss example" is right. I only think they use little older guys (start in 10-12 and final step is in 15-18). Young people want whole world absolutely Good world and they are able to use almost every way. Demagogy is their way, but I don't think that western youth which sympathise with buddhism, islam, hinduism, postmodernity or fanatical christianity(jehovists?) etc. instead of christian-rationalism represented by, sorry, USA and it's government ("God bless America!") shows that it's only one of ideologies and not sure the best. Islam has some ideas we forget to believe, the same with other. And people need to believe. And money, wealth and comfort are not enough for young people (for most-masses-it is, but not for many humanitary students, future social elity). And this is represented by America, by hollywood, by McDonnalds, by GWB. People who want Values turn out of those representants, so that means America in eyes of European, Asian, Russian or Islamic people. The only thing is that they disagree with your way. But the only way how to stand up those "american values" is to complain. But when somebody complains to you, you automaticly see i that he doesn't like YOU, which is not true.
Your government organises coures for Europeans to explain them their statements and to listen their arguments. The main (hidden) question is "why do you dislike us when we are bringing the good?" The answer is that the rest of the world may see the Good little different. European national cultural market is not as large as american, so more expensive. Then Hollywood bracks(you may disagree, but it is MY opinion) are played in Czech TV instead of good czech movies which had also some "ideas" inside. Terrorists are extreme fighters aggainst this, dou you understand? Europeans try to discuss, because in their opinion it's decadence of their civilisation. But for muslims it's expansion of western decadence, many o them got lost there and Bin Laden "offeres" him solution.
Originally posted by Teutonic_Knight
Why would anybody risk political suicide to back Americas "interests" in Iraq? Like I have said before America had very little interest financially in Iraq and that the countries that had the most money tied in Iraq, through deals with Sadaam, were those who opposed the war.The war is the way how to get involved there more instead of France, Russia and Germany. This is what Poland and other countries want too, so they went with you. Because they saw economical profit. But they are smarter than you, sorry. You use military ower, czechs sent there field hospital and anti-chemical troops-supported invasion, but not by arms, only diplomatically, and for pople of Iraq we are those who is trying to help them. Train the police (Germans, Italians). I know, you did it too, but those eople of Iraq will see you for long time as invadors who are exporting their vaues (sorry, but that's true-sudden export of democracy is invasion of alien political system to traditional muslim society).
Exactly, but you had said that America were the ones who made the Iraqis attack Iran while funding and arming them as well.no. They only made pushed their exporters and allies to "gave" Saddam enough weapons to made him feel he's strong enough to stop iranian islamic revolution on his borders. Sure he and all M.E. states feared of it. It's better to make Iraq's dictator fight instead of Americans (Europeans are trying to do this now), Iraqis die instead of Americans, Sauds, Kuwaitees, French...
You last note about attacks in Europe is right. After Madrid 3/11(I'm sure you noticed it) Europe discuss very hard how to deal with this pproblem. Everybody, including France!, stand with Western values (but as I said Europe has little different Western values than US-less McDonnalds, less Hollywood...). No more appeacement like in 1930's, but still defend european interests before american! No agreement with Al-Qaeda, but still having their own view of Iraq, their own view of cultural mixture.
We are the west the EU and it's satelites as well as USA and Canada, everybody with his own face, little diferences predefined by history. USA is better in one case, France in other. But I'm not sure if you can acknowledge that France can be better than you in some case, as they can. That os your mistake. Regard the fact that you are not the perfect representant of Good and everybody who's not with you is the Evil. this is way of demagogs like Hitler, Stalin and Osama Bin Laden were/is. We, Europeans are affraid that GWB is very close to it (after 9/11: "who doesn't support attack on Afghanistan, supports terrorism!!!!" it really was said and I was very scared of it-my country fall under both Hitler and Stalin and I don't want to hae another experience like this)
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.