Jump to content

Nato rift deepens over Iraq


Fractux
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Are these politically incorrect?:

Soldier of Surrender

UN

From the same site:

"BY THE WAY  DID YOU KNOW THAT 

 French companies are reported to have $60 billion dollars worth of undisclosed oil contracts with Saddam Hussein. And the anti-war crowd says that its BUSH that wants to go to war over oil? France wants to allow a brutal and dangerous dictator to go unchecked  and its all because of oil." - Boortz

AND

"THE UNITED STATES DOESNÔÇÖT CARE ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS

Speaking of SaddamÔÇÖs buddy Nelson Mandela, (yes, Phil .. heÔÇÖs a jerk), letÔÇÖs consider his stated charge that the United States doesnÔÇÖt care about human beings. You will remember that MandelaÔÇÖs asinine statement was made just after President Bush pledged $15 billion (thatÔÇÖs with a ÔÇ£BÔÇØ, Nelson) of American taxpayersÔÇÖ funds to fight AIDS in Africa. Well, if we donÔÇÖt care about human beings, I want my share of that $15 billion back.

Something else Mandela may want to consider ÔÇô if he still has the capacity to consider ideas, that is. Just why is the U.S. contemplating putting American soldiers on the ground to deal with Saddam Hussein?

The United States has the power and the ability to remove the threat presented by Hussein without ever putting one American footprint on Iraqi soil. You want a scenario? OK, try this one. The American Military removes the Iraqi city of Basra from the map. Basra  gone in a matter of hours after a massive bombardment with cruise missiles, high-flying bombers and American fighter and attack aircraft. We then announce that Baghdad is next if we are not presented with the body (dead or alive) of Saddam Hussein within 24 hours. Than .. if necessary  level Baghdad. To put it bluntly, the threat from Iraq can be eliminated by making Iraq a wasteland.

So  whats the trouble with this approach? Obviously, it would result in the death of perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis  including women and children. Now the Palestinians and their radical Islamic friends may revel in the deaths of innocents .. but the United States does not. Thats the reason  really the only reason  we are going to put boots on sand. That George Bush that is being damned by Nelson Mandela will be the same George Bush who will send American men and women to their death just to save the lives of Iraqi citizens.

HowÔÇÖs that for not caring about human beings, Nelson? You anti-American blowhard. "

For the rest of his rants go here:

Nuze

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God what a left wing whacko site.

There is so much leftist drivel in it, it is hard to get to any facts.

The patriot act and the homeland security act are BOTH constitutional, until the ussc strikes one or both of them down.

Neither of them effects me in any way shape or form.

what a psycho website.

By the way, Turkey will get it's protection, and NATO is going to be revamped.

The EU is going to have it's own military, they don't need NATO anymore, NATO has become like the UN, IRRELEVANT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It beats the crap out of FOX news.

Yeah we know Jag.as long is it doesn't affect your tiny piece of the world it doesn't bother you....until it does, then youll call it a liberal conspiracy...even when it's clear your appointed president and his neofascist crew of corporate pawns are selling out everything this country used to stand for. Unfortunately, the specter of an overtly totalitarian bureaucracy is no longer a threat that justifies unilateral American action. Just wait until your green washed and deregulated political economy continues to threaten peace and sustainable growth. I have to hand it to our one party. They really are making a third choice very attractive for many people.

The world may be drawing a line and they arent wrong for doing it. After the brutal attacks of 9/11 this administration opportunistically used that good will to secure economic resources in the most haphazard and destabilizing mannerthen had the nerve to cite humanitarian concerns, after arming all the forces that we now fighting while continuing to support oppressive regimes around the world. Well at least HollowBS industries have received the contact to support U.S. troops in the Mid East (so at least Cheney is profiting). The hypocrisy has to end some time.why not now?

ÔÇ£Old EuropeÔÇØ should stand up and take the lead in world affairs. Their nations are not perfect but they most certainly set the standard when it comes to taking care of their people and applying thought and reason to delicate situations. Seriously, the responsible thing to do is to fill the leadership void when the confidence is gone and the stakes are so high.

I love this country, but Bush II and his corporate cronies need to go back to the country club so we can get our house in order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go live in Europe then Lotharr, it is obviously your dream. The EU is a socialist nightmare, and getting closer and closer to oblivion every day.

Yeah, they take care of their subjects all right, they take as much money from those that produce as possible and give it to those that don't.

Pretty soon Lotharr, you get too many nonproducers, and not enough producers to support them.

You are a short range thinker, just like most liberals.

You need to get a clue, because there is a reason we are going after Iraq, that is to keep a mushroom cloud from going up in a city near you.

Don't think it will happen? Yep, you be clueless then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Go live in Europe then Lotharr, it is obviously your dream. The EU is a socialist nightmare, and getting closer and closer to oblivion every day.

Yeah yeah...you cornered the market on what it is to be an American. I guess Hitler did win the war. Save your jingoistic nonsense for the pea brains that believe every problem can be solved with a few hundred tons of HE. (you know the boards IÔÇÖm talking about)

The sad fact is America is the one going down hill. You think that having several hundred more millionaires is progress while several hundred thousand starve....while several million don't have healthcare...and why another several million don't have jobs because your third base hero's see more profit in allowing American corporations to leave this country and take the jobs with them while writing off citizens who canÔÇÖt find work BECAUSE THE JOBS DO NOT EXIST. You need to wake up to the fact THIS country is going down hill and is in no way a model for how another country should live.

quote:

Yeah, they take care of their subjects all right, they take as much money from those that produce as possible and give it to those that don't.


Subjects...right...your the one who goes from job to job believing your serving the greater good.pure blindness.all workers deserve security and a living wage.

They pay more taxes but have a cleaner, safer, healthier society....they don't use their people as wage slaves and they don't rape and kill each other on any level near what we can boast about.

You need to check your rhetoric....none of the founding fathers would sell us out to corporations and nepotistic aristocrats that you believe in.

To the rest whatever....we need to generate a policy for the future from a position of courage rather than from the fear and selfishness that has crippled our economy that you support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When on earth did the government go from being the Protector of the people to the provider for the people?

I am seriously interested on how this ideology got itself so engrained into the ideology of what a government is to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eclipse,

to answer your question, it has been slowly happening over the last 50 years or so.

Lotharr is just a very small example of this silly and ridiculous thinking.

They think the constitution says something that it doesn't.

It's quite sad reaaly, and will be the destruction of what makes this country what it is.

We are THE superpower, but when kids like Lotharr grow up and come into their own, if thier attitudes aren't changed, we will NOT be a superpower, but a has been like the European nations are.

Sad, hopefully, we can get some sense into these kids before then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I'm concerned if you have a political process that is dominated by wealth then the wealthy will prosper...and they do...greatly. If, like in all other industrialized democracies, workers are free and encouraged to unionize (and in that respect they are the people not the government) then the wealth is shared and everyone benefits. In this country unions are all but illegal and can be trumped at anytime by the wealth that controls the political process that in turn makes the rules on what is considered legal economic participation. You can believe that the government has the right to deny citizens to form real labor connections but then you have just violated the rule that the government should not interfere with economic matters.

But all that aside. If the people get together and demand something they will have it. If you deny the people the avenues of self determination by a gross distortion of what is considered "legal" then you have broken the social contract and government has no legitimacy.

One person one vote.

Free press unfettered by aggregations of wealth and the inherent interest that renders them little more than propaganda outlets.

Rights for people -- not phantom organizations that exist to funnel the wealth to a small circle who enjoy their positions mostly by the accident of birth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

We are THE superpower

Superpower....right...that's why we are being told to be scared all the time and we have to lash out foolishly.

Obviously this country is not responsible enough to lead the whole world...or we would be.

Everything changes....you can't stay on top forever...and if you think we are on top now than the only criteria for that assessment is how rapidly we can project force and destroy....big deal...I have met some very large and very ugly individuals that could give me a good beating....but that sure as hell doesn't mean I want to be them....and sure doesn't give them the right to beat the crap out of anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Posted by Lotharr

Rights for people -- not phantom organizations that exist to funnel the wealth to a small circle who enjoy their positions mostly by the accident of birth.


You sound like another historical figure that I have studied.

His name was Lenin, he created the USSR, that then killed about 5% of the population, and then Stalin came to power and killed even more.

You are down right scary Lotharr, how many people will die when your dream comes to fruition? How many Lotharr? How many people will lose ALL that they have worked for because you don't think it's fair, because of their accidental births?

How many Lotharr, I know how many Lenin and Stalin killed, how many will your ideas kill, wanna go for a new record? We have MUCH bigger weapons now, it would only make the world a fairer place right?

Yes, Lotharr, you sound just like Lenin, and Stalin and others that I could name. It's called class warfare, and it does nothing but destroy, it is never constructive, NOR fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HA HA! Yeah.....anyway....if you can answer the argument do it....otherwise try not to black list me if you can't find an answer to a good question....

How does it go.....if I give a starving person a meal I am a saint....if I ask why people starve I'm a communist....

Get over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then give me something to argue against.

Your opinions are patently ridiculous. You have not studied enough to really know what you are talking about.

I advise history first.

Look at the soviet Union, then China, then try North Korea, all of them had your grandiose fairness doctrine down to a fair thee well.

Look at what has happened and has happened and continues to happen in those countries.

Yeah, your idea work REALLY, REALLY well.

Yeah, right, sure, come back to me when you have a workable idea. Because the one you have has been tried, and it FAILS, EVERY TIME!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I started this thread just to let everyone know what was hapenning, even though you guys are probably following the news.

First, I only put up the 3 big mass media links to BBC, CBC and CNN. Just so that people would read their stories and see what points of view each one pushes more than the other.

I did not put up Guerrilla news because as soon as those links fly, people whip back with some other site that has some radical opinions as well. However, I would hardly call GNN entirely left wing propaganda. Go rad all of their article, there are some really good ones in there.

To take a source of information and say it`s better than any other is absolutely wrong. All media, and all history is biased. That`s a fact.

The mass media we get here in North America is heavily controlled by government and corporations, and I KNOW everyone realizes this. So you have some people saying all corporations are evil, and others saying that the former are blind idiots who have no clue how the world works.

The fact is, that the world is a shitty place. Most people want to be good decent people, and want everything to be fine and dandy. However, being part of the world today, as it has evolved, automatically puts on our heads the actions of those in the past. So people in some country may still hate me for what my people did 30 or 100 years ago.

So, as people we stay angry, and we are selfish. Even if I don`t always realize it, or don`t want to realize it, me sitting ere typing away at my computer, while I do term it progress, has also been the cause of a lot of suffering.

While I make this realization, it is UNREALISTIC to think that I could have it any other way.

HOWEVER, it is our jobs to ensure that, despite the errors of the past, we strive to change things for the better.

All I`m going to say is that look at what`s going on in the world right now, and look who is doing what. Are things getting better now, or are they looking worse?

I think everyone has to agree that the latter is true. Even if you support the war, you`d have to be crazy to actually WANT a war. If the American goverment did not WANT a war, none of this would be happening. Because frankly, look at the world stage and you`ll see the Americans pushing for war, their allies reluctanly supporting them, for the most part, and the growing opposition.

I was reading the news yesterday and what I read was quote along the following lines that The American Government will go on with its plans regardless of NATO support or not. What does that say to you? And what does it say when the American government says that the weapon inspections are useless, and that they need to go to war now?

And the fact is that there are a lot of Americans who see it too, so I`m not pointing a finger at the american people, but rather at their government.

I`m not going to say that ANY government around the world is great, as they all work for their own interests, some more than others. Right now, the American Government is showing how blatantly they are willing to use their power sttus to get what they want, and are saying to hell with whatever morals our people have.

The American Government is very smart indeed, it`s just sad they are using all that brainpower for war, and not to make things better.

--EDIT--

Oh yeah, and by the way, I was also saddened that this post had to develop into a series of insults flung between individuals. You can`t debate a subject by telling your opponent he`s an idiot and that everything he says is wrong. Listen and read, and don`t get offended. Put down your counterargument and keep the debate going. How the hell can we influence eachither`s thoughts if all we want to do is beat eachother with a mallet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

So you have some people saying all corporations are evil

The institution reminds me of something Soviet. Without countervailing force the greed runs rampant and the greater good is not served. Unless you are a Thomas Friedman believer and in that case you probably make more then 100,000 a year or want to, false consciousness is an amazing thing.

quote:

So, as people we stay angry, and we are selfish. Even if I don`t always realize it, or don`t want to realize it, me sitting ere typing away at my computer, while I do term it progress, has also been the cause of a lot of suffering.

As to the nature of man, anthropologists agree that hunters and gathers lived in peaceful and egalitarian societies. I don't buy the lie that man is selfish and this is actually a good thing....I know the counter intuitive notions of truth are appealing for people but it is only a belief and a spurious one in my opinion.

quote:

Oh yeah, and by the way, I was also saddened that this post had to develop into a series of insults flung between individuals

I don't respond well to aggressive and ridiculous statements. If I'm not provoked I don't reciprocate. I will say I can get emotional but I don't aim at any one person....unless of course I'm singled out. I meet the standards demonstrated.

[ 02-11-2003, 02:42 PM: Message edited by: Lotharr ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you have some people saying all corporations are evil

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The institution reminds me of something Soviet. Without countervailing force the greed runs rampant and the greater good is not served. Unless you are a Thomas Friedman believer and in that case you probably make more then 100,000 a year or want to, false consciousness is an amazing thing.

I never said there were not corporations that were evil, nor that corporations don't exploit and try to controll people. IN re-reading what i had written [so you have some people saying all corporations are evil, and others saying that the former are blind idiots who have no clue how the world works.] I can see how it could be misinterpreted as to what I was trying to say. My intent was to state to two far-sides of the argument: 1. that all corporations and capitalism are evil and 2. that all corporations and capitalism is necessary. I was not intending to sate that I agree with one, or both of these statements.

quote:

As to the nature of man, anthropologists agree that hunters and gathers lived in peaceful and egalitarian societies.

From the anthropology classes I have taken, this is most definitely not true. Even in primitive societies, there are conflicts. I have never read of, or heard of a society that existed without either internal or external conflicts. Excuse my ignorance in this matter if i am wrong.

quote:

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh yeah, and by the way, I was also saddened that this post had to develop into a series of insults flung between individuals

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't respond well to aggressive and ridiculous statements. If I'm not provoked I don't reciprocate. I will say I can get emotional but I don't aim at any one person....unless of course I'm singled out. I meet the standards demonstrated.


It was not my intention to single you out, I was just stating what I saw going on in the posts.

Oh yes, and TAC, that was a really good find.

Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Lotharr:

How does it go.....if I give a starving person a meal I am a saint....if I ask why people starve I'm a communist....


I have no problems with private charity, in fact I would encourage it. I get concerned when people try to turn the government into a public charity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God, I've tried to keep out of this, but I've got to comment on this one thing.

Elitism exhists in our country, trust me. Do I disagree with it? In some circumstances I do. I live in a place called St. Simons Island, GA. We have two of the wealthiest locations in Georgia located here. Sea Island and Jekyll Island, GA. Out of the people I know who live there, most all of them are relentless to the poor. Nearby these 3 islands, right on the mainland is Brunswick, GA. It is one of the poorest places in Georgia. Granted, many of the people in the projects should get jobs, and there are city ordanances that you cannot live in the projects for more than one year, but people still don't get jobs. Why? Simple, there are none. A good amount of the people living on Sea Island and Jekyll, as well as St. Simons refuse to hire these people because of their social status. Yet our economy doesn't suffer too much. Hell, the prices around here for domestic items are much higher than in most places in Georgia.

Where am I getting with this? Too many people in the world are consumed by greed. Just look at Enron, had the economy been completely free they might possibly have gotten away with what they did. This is why we have limits on the economy.

As for charity. Its sad we even have to force people to give money for charity. The truth is that many people in the United States, including big business workers, don't look past their own life, and how it is. They don't think about how there could be people just 2 miles away bundled up with no home. Tell me people, when was the last time you gave to charity by yourself? I mean large amounts too, over $100 (Government charities don't count). Exactly, very few. Would you give to charities if you didn't have to pay government charities? Well, your complaining about being forced to participate, chances are you wouldn't give money to charities at all. Your greedy, most of America is. There are exceptions. This isn't a matter that goes on the political continuum either people, there are conservatives, heavy conservatives, who feel that government charities are a good thing, and the opposite for radical liberals as well. No people, this is a matter of greed. Get out of your shell people, and I mean every goddamn one of you. Personally, I feel we should have required community service in this nation for younger people as well, perhaps that would lighten their outlook on the situation of our country as well.

Now then, for some Bush bashing. At this point, I say we go to war full on. We can't really back out now, its too late, but while I like Bush for taking the initiative to ignore the bloody french and their white flags, I think some of his other foreign policies are total shit. The AIDS campaign for example, doesn't need to happen. If anything, it should be for Americans, we need it more than anything. It needs to be for research of even better medications to help us, or to help lower the medications that currently exhist.

Finally, the french. I say that NATO has been dead for years now. The french are a bucket of crap if you ask me. They're only concerned about their oil treaties with Iraq, nothing else. Here we have greed again, its making me sick. Germany is fine though, their minister got elected on a anti-war campaign, he's pretty much stuck on to not go to war, even if he really does.

Oh and yea, the one point I agree on with you Jaguar, we are a Superpower, but if you remember back in the Cold War, the only real reason that the US and USSR were superpowers were because of the massive amounts of nukes we had. We had the power to destroy anything in the world with a touch of a button. We need to settle everything on the homefront before we go riding into battle with our swords drawn.

Oh, but I do have to say you disgust me how you never can seem to keep a discussion going without sending your "your a damn bloody liberal and your going to end this country" bit to anybody who opposes you, its getting old.

EDIT: LMAO!!! Thats great SC!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite interesting developments.

For some of the veto holding members of the UN to tell the USA "hold up wait a minute; let's look at this" is fine.

But, for Turkey to ask for help as provided for in the NATO agreement (right?) and have the decision for help and/or a review held up is something else entirely.

Turkey is sitting there quietly supporting the US against Iraq. Of Course Turkey is worried about a retaliatory strike against them. Now Turkey calls on NATO to defend Turkey per the agreement and other countries (specifically France) suddenly hedge on the agreement.

Do I have this right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well From what I've read in the articles and media stories it's more like this.

The US wants to uses bases in Turkey, and even possible get Turkish forces involved when/if they attack Iraq. Now, since the US wants to use Turkey to aid in their military campain, Turkey has to be in a good position to defend itself because they will be a military target.

So to make it clear, the US wants Turkey to have these defenses because it aids in the plans they have for attacking Iraq. Turkey invoked Article4 which the news sources says: "when in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the parties is threatened".

So, in the case of a war, and in the case that Turkey is helping the United States fight this war, their territory could be threatened.

Because right now, Iraq isn;t going after Turkey, so this is the only way that Turkey's "territorial integrity, political independence or security" could be threatened. But it "could" be if Iraq takes on the US's policy of "preemptive strikes" and hits Turkey where it hurts so that the Americans can't use them to aid as fully in their war effort.

They're just trying to find a way to get around the veto that was made by France, Belgium, and Germany by doing this. Read a transcript of the first media conference that was given by NATO Secretary General when this was first happening:

TRANSCRIPT

In some places he manages to say alot, without really saying anything of importance at all. It's very obvious in some places, and rather hilarious too.

Other info at: NATO.int

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:


That's why I'm happy NOT to be a french, but french-canadian. We might not actually won a war (we mostly did supportive roles, we DID invade a beach in ww2 and canadian pilots flew among the british air force), but we didn't lose one either (unless you consider the pre-canada invasion of the british on the french colonies of america part of canadian history (which BTW we lost BECAUSE France thought we weren't important and didn't bothered to send any reinforcements ... chicken shit army didn't wanted to fight the mightly imperial navy))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...