Coalition grows. Old Europe still pouting. - Page 7

Willem · March 23, 2003, 01:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker

Yes we left them hanging but now we are making up for this mistake.

And don't blame sanctions on the US (other countries are doing sanctions, not just the US by they way), blame them on Saddam who built many multi-billion dollar palaces instead of feeding his people.

I'm not blaming anyone, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of the US position. Sorry if we don't buy the altruistic motives of this campaign. It's not like your country has a very good track record on the issue after all. Why should we suddenly start trusting you, especially after seeing your president give us the finger on treaty after treaty since he's come to power?

"By their examples shall ye know them."

Nubclear · March 23, 2003, 01:20

i cant blieve that people are still debating this topic.

This thread needs to be closed.

Ted Striker · March 23, 2003, 01:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

I'm not blaming anyone, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of the US position. Sorry if we don't buy the altruistic motives of this campaign. It's not like your country has a very good track record on the issue after all. Why should we suddenly start trusting you, especially after seeing your president give us the finger on treaty after treaty since he's come to power?

"By their examples shall ye know them."

When you're the top dog you're going to do things and people aren't going to like them.

"You can please some people part of the time and you can please everybody some of the time, but you can never please everybody all of the time."

OR

"It's easy to be a hater WHEN YOU'RE NOT IN THE GAME."

Drake Tungsten · March 23, 2003, 02:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Molly Bloom
Because it wasn't good for business.

Same deal with grotesque regimes like Ceaucescu's Romania- western nations cuddled up to the 'friendly' Warsaw Pact dictator for business, and because it was thought he could be a chink in the Pact's armour. Too bad about the Securitate, and those murdered inhabitants of Timisoara, bulldozed villages, etc, etc.

The latter reason was infinitely more important to Western leaders than the former, IMHO. I think your contention that America supported dictators during the Cold War because it was "good for business" is completely off-base. We supported them because of a justified (although sometimes paranoid) fear of the threat of global communism and the Soviet Union. Anyone who thinks otherwise might want to lay off the Chomsky...

Lincoln · March 23, 2003, 09:31

Quote:

Originally posted by molly bloom

Oh lor' luv a duck an' lawks a mercy, guv'nor, you are a smooth talkin' Yanqui, an' no mistake!

Me so horny, me love you long time....

Leaving aside the small matter of your being unable to read my mind, I have shown my love for various American creations and artists and places time and again, in various other threads- so don't bother with the predictable, petulant footstomping, it just won't wash.

George 'Mini' Bush is not America, neither is his cabinet, nor the Republican Party. Simply because I disagree with the professed reasons/reasoning behind this war does not make me any more anti-American than it makes me pro-Saddam. But then, when all else fails an ad hominem attack is always an easy reach, I suppose...

Oh good. Thanks for clearing that up. At least you don't think all of the scenery is evil.

Willem · March 23, 2003, 11:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker

"It's easy to be a hater WHEN YOU'RE NOT IN THE GAME."

Why is it that you pro-war people automatically assume we hate the US just because we speak out? It's very simple really, WE DON'T TRUST GEORGE W. BUSH. We don't have a beef with America, or it's people, it's you're leader we can't stand. He's been an arrogant ***** to the rest of the world ever since he came to power. Maybe if he would have shown even the slightest inclination to compromise, we'd now have a "Coalition of the World" instead of a "Coalition of the Willing". Many of the people protesting the war don't object to the ultimate goal, it's just the way it's been handled that we find so offensive. If you think the world hates you, you can place the blame squarely on his doorstep, and those of his cronies.

And yes we are in the game. It's our world too, something your leaders seem to have forgotten. We're going to have to live with the mess they're creating for years to come. Hopefully things will work out for the best, but there's a strong potential that it won't.

ranskaldan · March 23, 2003, 12:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

Why is it that you pro-war people automatically assume we hate the US just because we speak out? It's very simple really, WE DON'T TRUST GEORGE W. BUSH. We don't have a beef with America, or it's people, it's you're leader we can't stand. He's been an arrogant ***** to the rest of the world ever since he came to power. Maybe if he would have shown even the slightest inclination to compromise, we'd now have a "Coalition of the World" instead of a "Coalition of the Willing". Many of the people protesting the war don't object to the ultimate goal, it's just the way it's been handled that we find so offensive. If you think the world hates you, you can place the blame squarely on his doorstep, and those of his cronies.

And yes we are in the game. It's our world too, something your leaders seem to have forgotten. We're going to have to live with the mess they're creating for years to come. Hopefully things will work out for the best, but there's a strong potential that it won't.

The past two years of American foreign policy makes it nearly impossible to believe that America even cares about the outside world.

Hence, reasons like "we are there to liberate their people" sound hollow and insincere. People hardly think that's the real reason - they look for other reasons, like oil (which I don't really agree with that much), or world domination, or containment of Arab countries, and the like. They also look for ways to discredit both the "liberation" and the "WOMD" arguments - not very hard, in fact.

(People don't object to the actual liberation - but they do object because they believe that this is NOT the reason why America is doing it, and the real reasons endanger the power and freedom of their own nations.)

The thing is, people no longer trust the motive of American foreign policy. If America wants to continue dominating the world, this is not an environment that you'd want to be working in.

Kramerman · March 23, 2003, 18:26

Quote:

The past two years of American foreign policy makes it nearly impossible to believe that America even cares about the outside world

would you care to elaborate?

Ted Striker · March 23, 2003, 18:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

And yes we are in the game. It's our world too, something your leaders seem to have forgotten. We're going to have to live with the mess they're creating for years to come.

Yeah right.

USA and UK are doing all the heavy lifting in this one. With an Aussie assist.

Everyone else's exposure to the whole situation is minimal on the periphery.

"Live with the mess."

whatever.

ranskaldan · March 23, 2003, 18:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Kramerman

would you care to elaborate?

Yes I would.
Let's begin with Kyoto, the ABM treaty, the international court, the landmine treaty, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

We might also want to touch on America pulling out of peace talks in both Israel/Palestine and Korea.

Yes, of course there're other reasons behind all of these... and many other countries aren't angelic either.

But America is in an especially precarious situation. It is, quite simply put, the most powerful country in the world. Such countries are usually ganged up against, and it is a miracle of American foreign policy that other countries haven't yet. Now this miracle is cracking.

I don't exactly care if you are pursuing the right or wrong cause. The important thing is that the utter stupidity, tactlessness, and suicidal nature of current American policies are astounding to watch. I don't exactly want the Pax Americana to end either - but it sure shows signs of doing so.

In Kosovo you didn't even need to ask the UN. In Iraq you backed away from embarassment in the UN. Reaping what you sow, I see.

Pekka · March 23, 2003, 18:50

Well we are not old europe, and we are not new europe.. I guess we are forever europe then. Plus no EU country can ever challenge us without facing certain destruction MWAhahahahaha!

Ted Striker · March 23, 2003, 18:57

Like I said you smacked around Soviet ass a few times.

Viking Eurocom is stronger than Cossack.

Not as strong as Prussian Eurocom but still very strong.

(Prussian Eurocom is strongest, but unfortunatley in retirement).

Kramerman · March 23, 2003, 19:14

Quote:

Let's begin with Kyoto, the ABM treaty, the international court, the landmine treaty, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

We might also want to touch on America pulling out of peace talks in both Israel/Palestine and Korea.

kyoto - US industry losing billions becasue of international environmental constraints put on by the treaty. Does this make dropping this treaty justified, not in my eyes, but im a pseudo-environmentalist. Bush obviously thought it is in the US's best interest to no longer abide by the treaty, and pulled out.

ABM treaty - a treaty made with a regime no longer in existance, thus nullifying it. If russia wants to continue it, then they should initiate negotiations for a new treaty. The US voluntarily abides by the limitations on nukes, only the part of the treaty that prohibits an anti-ballistic missile shield does Bush wish to ignore.

international court - the US rejected it immediately, for fear that the US enemies (ie practically the world) might actually abuse it to hurt the US by unfairly convicting various US officials on trivial or exagerated matters.

landmine treaty - right now a massive minefield and 37000 troops seperate North Korea and South Korea. If the US were to agree to this treaty, then those landmines would have to go bye-bye. This would put the defensive position of US troops and South Korea at an even larger disadvantage in the prospect of a north korean invasion. The US depends on landmines in certain situations as this, and it would just be plain stupid to not utilize them in these situations, regardless of how bad land mines are.
IIRC, the US does have a doctrine to only use landmines defensively as in Korea, if that is any consolation.

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty - would have illegitimized any development of an antiballistic missile shield. Again, this treaty would only have harmed American defense interests, so Congress rightly did not ratify it, IIRC.

Only the kyoto agreement did the US pull out of, the ABM being void by virtue of the USSR no longer in existance. The other treaties the US never even agreed to to begin with, becuase they woudl only have been adverse to american interests.

I fail to see how refusing to agree to treaties that not just dont further your interest, but actually harm them make a country untrustworthy

.

As far as Israel, the US is and has benn pushing for an independent Palestinian state, but with comprimise. Many Palestinians however are refusing to compremise.

When did the US pull out of peace-talks with korea? last I checked we were negotiating aid shipments again if they would stop their nuclear research...

Kman

Lincoln · March 23, 2003, 19:47

There are two ways to look at the hate-America thing:

1. America is hated because we do not bow down to the demands of an envious world that would like to see us humiliated. (Just as many here would dance in the streets if we lost this war.)

2. America is hated because we are evil. There is no way you can seperate the people from the current administration. Seventyfive percent of the people here approve of what he is doing.

We were attacked about a year and a half ago. There was no warning and the weapons used were available because of our open society. We can either give up our open and free society or we can go on the offensive like we are doing now. If you don't live here then you really do not have a voice in the matter. After it happens to you then let's see what your nation decides to do about it. Will you do nothing because France or some other nation refuses to go along? Bush is not Bill Clinton. Get used to it.

Willem · March 23, 2003, 19:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Kramerman

would you care to elaborate?

Rejection with no consultation whatsoever of:

- The Kyoto Protocols
- The ABM treaty and development of an anti-missile shield
- the International Criminal Court (my favourite)
- concessions of patent rights for anti-AIDS drugs for third world countries

I'm sure others can add a few more things to this list. Even this conflict with Iraq was started not by going to the UN and discussing it first, but flat out calling for a regime change. Not to mention comments like "You're either for us or against us."

Willem · March 23, 2003, 19:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Kramerman

I fail to see how refusing to agree to treaties that not just dont further your interest, but actually harm them make a country untrustworthy

.

But in all those things you've mentioned, did Bush even once offer to discuss it with other bodies? No. Maybe there were some valid reasons for not going along with them, but there was never any attempt to gain concessions and compromises that might might suit all parties involved, just a unilateral refusal to abide by them. In the case of the land mine deal, I'm sure if they had agreed not to use them in future campaigns that you wouldn't have had to dig them up in Korea.

ranskaldan · March 23, 2003, 20:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln
There are two ways to look at the hate-America thing:

1. America is hated because we do not bow down to the demands of an envious world that would like to see us humiliated. (Just as many here would dance in the streets if we lost this war.)

This is ridiculous.

We are the ones being humiliated. We are the ones being reminded of how weak we are. We are the ones being told, again and again, that America don't really need us at all, that we are just minions to its cause.

Quote:

We were attacked about a year and a half ago. There was no warning and the weapons used were available because of our open society.

Yes, the world showed its sympathy. But that sympathy was squandered.

Quote:

We can either give up our open and free society or we can go on the offensive like we are doing now. If you don't live here then you really do not have a voice in the matter. After it happens to you then let's see what your nation decides to do about it. Will you do nothing because France or some other nation refuses to go along?

I'm not talking about doing nothing. I'm talking about the tact that goes into it.

Quote:

Bush is not Bill Clinton. Get used to it.

That is the tragedy of your country and of the Pax Americana.

Drake Tungsten · March 23, 2003, 20:03

Quote:

We are the ones being humiliated. We are the ones being reminded of how weak we are. We are the ones being told, again and again, that America don't really need us at all, that we are just minions to its cause.

This is ridiculous.

Ted Striker · March 23, 2003, 20:10

Quote:

Bush is not Bill Clinton. Get used to it.

That is the tragedy of your country and of the Pax Americana.

Yes, it was under Clinton's watch that terrorists built up their infrastructure. It was Clinton who eroded international support by firing off cruise missles after getting a blowjob.

It was Clinton who gave Al Queda confidence by failing to go after the terrorists and using half measures.

Bush may be abrasive but he is the right man for the job.

Lincoln · March 23, 2003, 20:10

Bush is no diplomat but he gets the job done. France tried to humilate the US. That is their problem. While Bush was sending diplomats all over the world to get the required votes France was calling all nations to support their threatened veto regardless. France is just as guilty as Bush. But you cannot expect the United States to be held hostage by a vindictive nation that is fueding with the US.

Willem · March 23, 2003, 20:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
This is ridiculous.

Not at all, this is how many people are percieving the signals being sent by Washington. You just refuse to acknoweldge it. Your administration seems to just need the rest of the world in order to provide a market for your goods and services. Anything else is irrelevant.

Lincoln · March 23, 2003, 20:17

Actually I think you will see Bush softening his tone after this war.

Willem · March 23, 2003, 20:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln
Actually I think you will see Bush softening his tone after this war.

I'll believe it when I see it. I'm not holding my breath though.

Drake Tungsten · March 23, 2003, 20:19

Quote:

Not at all, this is how many people are percieving the signals being sent by Washington. You just refuse to acknoweldge it.

I know many people perceive the situation in that way. It doesn't make it any less ridiculous, however.

Ted Striker · March 23, 2003, 20:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln
Actually I think you will see Bush softening his tone after this war.

I agree.

ranskaldan · March 23, 2003, 20:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

Not at all, this is how many people are percieving the signals being sent by Washington. You just refuse to acknoweldge it.

I know many people perceive the situation in that way. It doesn't make it any less ridiculous, however.

So what? Your country is the greatest proponent of democracy and mass media. Well, guess what? You failed to use these correctly and now they're working against you.

Drake Tungsten · March 23, 2003, 20:32

It's not our fault most of the world's population is ignorant...

ranskaldan · March 23, 2003, 20:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
It's not our fault most of the world's population is ignorant...

So what? They exist. We're working on them. Are you?

Ted Striker · March 23, 2003, 20:47

How are you "working on them?"

ranskaldan · March 23, 2003, 20:48

You mean you haven't noticed yet?

Oh yeah, the Security Council approved the war on Iraq 15-0! Yeah, I forgot, sorry.