Rumsfeld Praises Austria in Senate!

Comrade Tribune · February 15, 2003, 13:10

He said we hinder US deployment by not allowing them military transit through Austria.

Super.

Eli · February 15, 2003, 13:19

The day will come, and all the eurocom countries will be paying for this. Methinks Bush is very serious here, more wars will come and you have a lot to lose by trying to prevent them.

Comrade Tribune · February 15, 2003, 13:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Eli
The day will come, and all the eurocom countries will be paying for this. Methinks Bush is very serious here, more wars will come and you have a lot to lose by trying to prevent them.

The day might come, and the US oil lobby and Israel will be taken to account for their warmongering.

DinoDoc · February 15, 2003, 13:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
The day might come, and the US oil lobby and Israel will be taken to account for their warmongering.

This is the type of person I was talking about in another thread.

Comrade Tribune · February 15, 2003, 13:34

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
This is the type of person I was talking about in another thread.

Can´t read all the threads to know what you are talking about. And, frankly, I don´t care *THAT* much (even though you are mildly amusing, at times.)

Wernazuma III · February 15, 2003, 14:19

Comrade, I've brought that up in the "Rumsfeld - diplomatic genius"-thread.

Comrade Tribune · February 15, 2003, 14:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
Comrade, I've brought that up in the "Rumsfeld - diplomatic genius"-thread.

Can´t find the thread, but good you brought it up.

I like Rumsfeld. There hasn´t been such a large demonstration against the US in a decade. The guy is great!

Ted Striker · February 15, 2003, 14:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune

The day might come, and the US oil lobby and Israel will be taken to account for their warmongering.

How does this differ from the French and Russian oil lobbies?

It's all about Eurocom oil.

**** you Europe. Get the hell out of the way.

Comrade Tribune · February 15, 2003, 14:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker How does this differ from the French and Russian oil lobbies?

In that the French and Russians don´t start wars of aggression against countries half a world away?

Ted Striker · February 15, 2003, 14:51

Of course they don't when they have oil companies in that country.

It's all about oil.

What is that free Slobo crap in your signature?

Comrade Tribune · February 15, 2003, 14:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Of course they don't when they have oil companies in that country.

It's all about oil.

What is that free Slobo crap in your signature?

Exactly what it says. He is not guilty, and should be released immediately. And Bush put into a hole, and indicted for preparing to start a war of aggression, which is against international law. The guys at Nuremberg were hanged for that.

Ted Striker · February 15, 2003, 15:00

Well you should add free Saddam to your list if you are that clueless.

Comrade Tribune · February 15, 2003, 15:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Well you should add free Saddam to your list if you are that clueless.

You forget he *is* free.

Ted Striker · February 15, 2003, 15:09

No sh1t Sherlock.

By the way, being from a country that is "neutral," do you always stand back and whine while everyone else makes the important decisions?

Does Austria stand up for anything? Other than having no spine?

Oerdin · February 15, 2003, 15:10

Just like France & Britain started a war of aggression against your fellow Austrian, that fine Hitler chap? Of course their actions, nor today’s actions, had any thing to do with morality.

In no way is French opposition motivated by the monopoly on oil field development Saddam gave Totalfina so that France might play Judas. Nor by the $25 billion Saddam still owes France for selling it Plutonium producing reactors, Jet fighters, and artillery in the 1980s. No, no. The French are just kind heartedly protesting on behalf of their peace loving friend Saddam.

St Leo · February 15, 2003, 15:50

Just like France & Britain started a war of aggression against your fellow Austrian, that fine Hitler chap?

They were kinda allied to Poland and had to do it.

Exactly what it says. [Slobodan] is not guilty, and should be released immediately.

You are an idiot.

The guys at Nuremberg were hanged for that.

For some odd reason, the guys at Versailles weren't. Oh, yeah, I remember. They didn't engage in systematic genocide.

In no way is French opposition motivated by the monopoly on oil field development Saddam gave Totalfina so that France might play Judas. Nor by the $25 billion Saddam still owes France for selling it Plutonium producing reactors, Jet fighters, and artillery in the 1980s. No, no. The French are just kind heartedly protesting on behalf of their peace loving friend Saddam.

Uh, yes, they are. People don't protest in the streets because they secretly want their government to get money that's owed to it for some power plant. That's not something they would care about enough to participate in demostrations.

KrazyHorse · February 15, 2003, 15:56

Does Oerdin think that a change of government is going to result in default on the money owed?

Drake Tungsten · February 15, 2003, 16:00

Quote:

Does Oerdin think that a change of government is going to result in default on the money owed?

It will if France doesn't step into line real soon...

DinoDoc · February 15, 2003, 16:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
Does Oerdin think that a change of government is going to result in default on the money owed?

Well the Iraqi oppossition group most likely to have a role in any new government (the Iraqi National Congress) has said that it will review any and all oil contracts signed under Hussein and offer less attractive terms. Make of that what you will.

Oerdin · February 15, 2003, 16:05

Quote:

Originally posted by St Leo
Just like France & Britain started a war of aggression against your fellow Austrian, that fine Hitler chap?

They were kinda allied to Poland and had to do it.

It was a retorical question meant to anwser Comrade T's assertion that countries should only go to war if [b]they themselves[/bold] are attack. This show's that there are cases where it's ok to join wars even if you yourself aren't attacked.

BTW could you please seporate my quotes from the ones CT made. I don't want people being confused and thinking I said or agree with what he said.

KrazyHorse · February 15, 2003, 16:08

Oerdin: if the US does that it's going to bite them in the ass real quick...

Half the countries in Africa, SA and Asia change their governments violently every decade or so. And most of them owe the US a bunch of cash...

Oerdin · February 15, 2003, 16:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
Does Oerdin think that a change of government is going to result in default on the money owed?

I actually think it will. There will most likely be calls by the new Iraqi government protesting how it shouldn't be forced to repay money Saddam squandered on his war machine and then there will most likely be a repudiation or a negotiated reduction of the out standing amount.

We'll see in the future if this happens.

KrazyHorse · February 15, 2003, 16:09

Read my post above. Out of all the countries in the world the US has the biggest interest in not legitimising such arguments...

Sandman · February 15, 2003, 16:11

Old Europe strikes again.

Oerdin · February 15, 2003, 16:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
Oerdin: if the US does that it's going to bite them in the ass real quick...

Half the countries in Africa, SA and Asia change their governments violently every decade or so. And most of them owe the US a bunch of cash...

I agree it would be problematic but I could see Bush and/or the new Iraqi regime doing it to stick a thumb in the eye of the French. A parting "Next time be more loyal" type thing. Bush tends to hold grudges so it may well happen.

We'll find out if countracts start getting "renegotiated" or if debts start getting repudiated.

Oerdin · February 15, 2003, 16:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
Read my post above. Out of all the countries in the world the US has the biggest interest in not legitimising such arguments...

I agree with you kitty. I just think Bush might do it any way.

KrazyHorse · February 15, 2003, 16:17

Oerdin:

If the French just care about their contracts and could avoid losing them by playing ball, then why would they be doing what they're doing now?

As a matter of fact, by your arguments they're taking a stand against their own interests.

Drake Tungsten · February 15, 2003, 16:19

Kitty's wrong. Countries have been allowed to default on past debts before and it hasn't set a precedent. Iraq would be no different. These decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, so America has little reason to worry. We have a much greater ability to defend our interests than France does.

Velociryx · February 15, 2003, 16:22

Nahhh, if/when the fit starts to hit the shan, I'm betting we'll see French Units participating in some form or fashion (in a "let's kiss and make" up maneuver that Bush will prolly present a cold shoulder to).

Odds are that one way or another (barring a TOTAL reversal on Saddam's part and sudden, unequivocal cooperation), this thing's going to happen, and when it does, everybody will jump on, lest be shut out entirely in terms of what happens after.

The so-called Paris Pact was an effort, on the part of the governments participating, to attempt to illustrate that the USA is not the only "superpower" out there. My hunch is, their effort will not succeed. Could be wrong, but that's my hunch.

-=Vel=-

DinoDoc · February 15, 2003, 16:22

As an aside, Is there any credence to the French assertion that the recent movement of the Charles de Gaulle has nothing to do with the recent "international situation?"