After Iraq who`s next?

Reuter · Mar 26, 2003, 07:06 PM

I agree the French made a big mistake by helping Iracq building a nuclear plant but they completely erased their mistake during the first Gulf War.

I do not believe Iracq has any of those weapons because if they had ever owned such weapons, I bet Powell would shurely have presented the evidence in the UN instead of making a complete fool of himself .

But what with Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea then?

Those countrys all have illegal nuclear weapons and even pose a serious tread to each other.

As Mr Annan has declared the US intervention as a war "waged outside the UN" and about 95% of all specialists in international law quote the intervention as illegal, I wonder how long it will take before Blair is taken to court in The Hague for crimes against humanity.

Will be a nice to see Milosovitch and Blair and maybee Powell too over there

Falstaff · Mar 26, 2003, 10:12 PM

There would be a balanced and legal approach to intervention. children wouldn't go hungry, and wouldn't become the wards of the liberators until the country was back on it's feet. And innocent civilians wouldn't be engulfed in the same conflict. But I think this transcends the legality of normal intervention, if there reaslly is a viable explanaiton for this whole war. The viability of the conflict, will be determined when the dust settles on bombed targets and those that can flee have done so...Then we will find the real threat buried in the sand. and perhaps then, those among us that wondered why so many died for the goal of liberation of IRAQ can feel some closure, but it's not going to end there. I personally feel that a monster was created when we dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, since then, even our allies have measured their support for anything we do, but fear the same thing we do, a "rogue nation" using WMD to achieve it's goals as well..That is why N. Korea figures so prominently in my mind...it has to be next..and one more thing. I hope americans don't assume with the fall of the Hussein regime, that the pursuit of a nuclear arsenal won't continue in IRAQ, it will, the seeds are planted as far as I am concerned...

Reuter · Mar 26, 2003, 11:06 PM

I hope after the Iracq intervention the US will have learned it's lesson for once and for all.
It will take years before the other nations will start to thrust the US again and I think this intervention will create a few hundred Bin Ladens in the future, sad.....

I hope Bush will come to his senses before it is to late because "dealing" with North Korea means nuclear war and Chinese involvement, resulting in WW3.
After that event we can all go to sleep peacefully and without worry, there won't be any terrorists left.....sigh

Smoothdrive · Mar 27, 2003, 09:07 AM

I disagree Reuter..many countries trust the US still, there is 30+ countries that openly support the US and there are hundreds more who may not openly agree but still do trust the US. This number will only grow once the war is done..it's harder for France to recover from their "we won't even read it we're against anyway" action....if you ask me their veto should be taken away on grounds of unreasonable use of their veto. (well all veto's should go if you ask me but no way the UN can do that).and France is doomed for sure if proof is found of the french actions in Iraq...

Reuter · Mar 27, 2003, 10:46 AM

You made a good point about the veto's.
This is exactly why the UN is working so poorly for the last 50 years.

You under estimate the situation in Europe.
European gouvernments still supporting the US are doing this out of greed while their peoples are openly against and won't forget in the next elections.

Europe does not have a patriotic press, used to brainwash the people ,instead our press is far more critical and to the point.
A few weeks ago one of the leading and most trusted magazines in Belguim called "Knack" came with an article about Powell filling his pockets and being bought out by about 20 corporations with large intrests in an eventual war.
Unfortunatly for Powell they proved their article with evidence.
Here we all see the French point of vieuw as very mature and brave.

I think the US will find mass destruction weapons in Iracq.
The question is: who will frame who?
I know they will do about anything to try to justify their war and save their political heads.

Smoothdrive · Mar 27, 2003, 11:26 AM

I am from Europe..and the handull of protestors that mainly are after rioting and plundering American shops do not represent a majority of the people in my opinion.

very ironic tough..a "peace" demonstration ending in a battle with the police..we want peace or else i'll kick your butt

You only see anti-war protestors and they claim to be a majority..well they are not i think.

The press states both sides be it a lot more against than in favour of the attacks..and off course there is plenty of dirt to find on the US..what's the news there i'ld almost say..

Still looking at reasons to go to war and not to go to war (so no dirt on the US but pure reasons against this war) i find this war unfortunatelly needs to be fought and i blaim Saddam for this.

Off course we know that America is not the clean cut freedom force they claim to be.
But the majority of the Europeans silently agree that Saddam has to go and that war is the only way to get rid of him.

anova · Mar 27, 2003, 12:06 PM

dont forget about Indonesia

Smoothdrive · Mar 27, 2003, 01:03 PM

I'm sorry..but i don't know that much about Indonesia...are you referring to the Dutch in Indonesia or the current situation in Indonesia ?

Reuter · Mar 27, 2003, 01:41 PM

Man don't you look at the polls about the war or what?
85% of European people is strongly against
That "handfull" of protestors seem to bee many hundred thousends if you ask me, and there is more to it then you think because these demonstrations are generally not "orgenised" by big political partys but are indeed a real showing of disaproof, even with their own gouvernment if necessary.

As for Saddam, we all know what kind of person he is and neighter of us like him .
But does this give us the right to wage a war on a foreign country? Make innocents suffer?Bomb this country to stonehenge ?

No way. This is far more worse then Saddam would ever do.

Truth is a highy valued thing you know.
Thats why I will try to tell you a little story.

The US depends on Saoudi Arabia and Venezuela for their oil suply.
As the events in Venezuela made oil deliverys halt, there is only one good suplyer left.

Altough S. Arabia seems to be the best of allies and they are spending millions of dollars to make believe this, it is not true and the US detected this recently with the events of 9/11.

After investigations made it seems Bin Laden's organisation is openly and highly supported by this country.
In fact you can enter almost any bank over there and make a deposit in favor of Bin Laden's organisation.
No questions asked.

Terrified, the US had to find a stable oil producing country to secure their needs but there were none available. Where to turn to? Iran?

No let's take on Saddam again.
He is harmless for us, has the needed oil, and the other Arab countrys would not protest very much and Israel would aplaud it.

And for making things even better if we could fill our pockets in the mean time as well.........

Veeoh · Mar 27, 2003, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Talicni_Tom
let me guess:North Korea,Cuba or France maybe?

Or the americans might finally bomb somebody of their own size like last big communist country China

Hopefully Turkey for fucking us around.

Reuter · Mar 27, 2003, 03:17 PM

Nah, they own Turkey already.[COLOR=deeppink]

But there is a good alternative in Asia, a little country they are all so fond of and they already been there but unfortunatly could not stay...lol

Falstaff · Mar 28, 2003, 07:05 AM

I checked, we don't own Turkey, still going through the receipts for other nations though, hahaha....come on man....sheesh, liets put some facts one the table please.......something, anything, and China? come on man....someone get a geography book please....or Time magazine, or Forbes magazine, anything with facts in it please....ah forget it, ha ha..

Smoothdrive · Mar 28, 2003, 08:21 AM

Reuter, yes i saw the polls..however the question asked in the polls is not so much if people are against an attack..the question asked in those polls is mostly like "Are you against war" well any normal thinking human is against war.

I am against war..so i would answer i am against to that question..

European press is too keen on promoting "against war" instead of getting the truth about European opinions.

If 85% of the Europeans would truly be against the attacks than surely i must have met someone who is against..i have not. And the people in my surroundings are not only higher or lower educated, not only left or right orientated politically..they are from all backgrounds except the extreme left or right.

Reuter · Mar 28, 2003, 04:39 PM

I don't want to bash you but how old are you?
I am in my late fifty's,a cyber granddad , if you wish to call me that and have heard truckloads bs already.
It was the same with Korea, the same with Vietnam and now it is no different.

Before I state something I check it out first.
The polls werent about "are you against war"
No sir, everybody knew what was meant with it.

Why would 500.000 people demonstrate In London if anyone agreed with an intervention?
Not to mention the many, many hundred thousends in other major European citys.
They all had the same message: no war for oil.

Strange thing is: no demonstrations in Holland, the gouvernment extremely carefull in what it states,low profile....

Smoothdrive · Mar 28, 2003, 06:16 PM

hmm in your 50's and still loosing your temper in debate..

and they say wisdom comes with the years.

Everyone may have known waht was meant but if you ask a person who does not follow teh conflict at all "Are you against war" than of course he's gonna say "Yes i am against"

Saw some footage on demonstration in other countries..riots and plundering of American stores..if they hate America than why steal American goods ?? 75% of the demonstrators looks like just a bunch of youngsters looking for an excuse to riot and plunder.

As for the Dutch with "no demonstrations"..check your facts i'ld say..without checking you wouldn't have heard of them.

That's not strange.. There where a few demonstrations but attended by too little people to mention and turned into riots..some peace demonstration.

We are not low profile...we just don't look for the media as much as the US, UK, France or Germany.

The idea behind 1441 (having Iraq bring the proof instead of looking for it) was first suggested by the Dutch before 1441 was made up.

The Dutch sent fully manned patriot missiles to Turkey before the UN ruled on it.

Our roads and seaports have been open to transport the US troops from Germany heading towards the gulf and the troops flying in from the US had a resting stop at our national airport.

Our government states they support the war politically but not military, and that's ok for now..this way we are about the only European country that is on speaking terms with all other countries.

What happens in other countries i can not judge, but when talking about "the Europeans" you are talking about us and judging us as well.

And i do not like it when someone states "The Europeans this and that" while this is not reflecting the truth...Europe is much much bigger than only Belgium, France, Germany, UK, Holland and Scandinavia..our American friends may also hear about the many many Europeans that do agree on the attack.

raid517 · Mar 28, 2003, 06:50 PM

I think Smoothdrive is an American (and an ultra Conservative Republican at that), or at least he seriusly wanrs to be.

Q

Reuter · Mar 28, 2003, 08:00 PM

Sorry, if it looked like I was loosing my temper, but I wasn't.
Only made things a bit harder.

I wonder if you read res 1441.
If so can you clarify the passage where is stated the US can wage a full scale war on Iraq with the consent of the UN.
I would not know myself and 95% of all specialists in international law are saying the same.
This makes the US and the UK rogue nations.
Nations you are openly supporting, you wicked one

What if France decided to nuke Israel tomorrow because of all the resolutions that weren't carried out in the past? Don't forget the Israelis do have illegal mass destruction weapons

What I mean to say is: the world is getting ruled by the law of the jungle again if the UN is getting bypassed that easily.

By the way: three big demonstrations in Belgium today, without a single riot or plunder....

First demonstration in favor of the war?
Nowhere in sight yet.
Maybe this were the handfull of protestors you were referring to?

Time for a true little story .

Me, the wife and my family went shopping last sunday.
In fact we went to Sluis,Holland to fetch some new clothing.
One of the shops had rows of pullovers with a small American flag sewed on.
To my surprise no one was buying them, they were totally ignored.

This made me wonder if the US was out of fashion or were the youngsters to ashamed to wear them?

Smoothdrive · Mar 28, 2003, 10:14 PM

Well i don't want to be a Republican..i don't even know what they stand for..not very interested in the US internal politics..Clinton was my fav US pres of the last 15 years or so...related to Dutch politics i'm a liberal actually.

When people start with "i don't want to bash you but" than they are bashing and trying to hide it..looks like loosing temper to me..if you don't want to bash than don't. If you truly want to know my age you can ask me a normal way without ridiculing my opinion in asking.

I am not claiming that the US is good, great, loved or whatever..i am not defending the US even..no way i would like to live in America or be under the control of the US goverment...I am defending an attack on Iraq, and the US action in this..people tend to forget but also the UK and Australia have forces in Iraq and over 30 countries fully support the strike...but of course the US is the easiest to bash and blaim.

You seem to see supporting the war and supporting the US as one thing..i don't

For me it's very very simple

Saddam is a bad man, slaughtering his own people, threatening his neighbours and in the possesion of very dangerous weapons.

You can look at Saddam like an underdog and feel sorry for him..well great.... tell that to the relatives of the beheaded women, the political opposers who where executed, the thousands and thousand who where killed with chemical weapons..
Any force fighting against this Tiran gets my support.

Secondary motive for me if that this man has opposed the UN for 12 years..if we let him continue to oppose the UN and do not strike him down than why would any other country in the world ever have to listen to what the UN says ?

Countries do as the UN says since they fear the consequences if they don't..not because they suddenly think that it's such a good idea.

This man has been told by the UN for 12 years to get rid of his weapons..he just mokked them, laughed in their face and didn't do a thing to comply with the UN resolutions..1441 speaks of last change and serious consequences...this can only be explained as one thing..war to take Saddam out. How else would you explain "Last change" ?

Don't bother with telling me what the US did supporting Saddam in the past..i've heard it all and it is a fair charge against the US but has absolutely nothing to do with this war.

Reuter · Mar 28, 2003, 11:15 PM

I was not bashing you, you know.
If you came to that impression it was due to my very rusty English.
Hope it will get better in the future now I'm posting so many messages.

If I wanted to get mean, man you would not believe what you were reading, but I never had the intention at all.

I do fully agree Saddam is a tyrant,killing his own people, and his son is even worse if we may believe one of the fled look alikes, sad....

I am not defending Saddam.
I certainly could not care less if he disappeared.

But wars are seldom fought for human rights and liberation of peoples.
This is what they want you to believe and beware for the loads of bs from eighter sides that will come our way in the next few weeks.

You have your point of vieuw and I have mine, so be it.

My favorite American president was Jimmy Carter.
He could sort things out in a peacefull way.

Falstaff · Mar 29, 2003, 04:57 AM

I voted for Carter, because he stumped everyone by being honest, hard working and he didn't give a damn about the money, He still makes contributions to improve peoples lives even now, He builds houses for poor people. And I think he really cares about the world that children will inherit..I wish there were more like him...

Reuter · Mar 29, 2003, 08:27 AM

Even today my esteem for Mr Jimmy Carter is still growing.
Man I wished he could be the US president right now in this strange and difficult times.

I absolutely have nothing against the American or British people.
Why should I?
There are only the good , the bad and the mislead amongst us.

I only tried to point out the very dangerous situation the American and British gouvernments have put us in.
When the two nations being the founders of the UN back in 1942, completely bypass this organisation right now, we have a huge problem.
The UN may not work that well, but this is merely a problem by the way the founders made it work from the start.But it's the only thing we do have to maintain law and order amongst nations.
I also tried to give the real reason for the intervention.

Shure Saddam is a very bad dictator, but this does not give others the right to wage a full scale war on him and his country.

As many know, Iraq is a multi racial, tribal country.
You also have the Kurds in the north who will want to found their own nation which is certainly not to the likings of Turkey and Iran.
And I think those two will do anything to prevent this.
I am very afraid there will be another genocide soner or later far worse then anything we saw from Saddam untill now.

Falstaff · Mar 29, 2003, 01:11 PM

Before Saddam overthrew Kassem, the CIA helped him do that, and another political actrivist prospered as well, Anwar Sadat, and we know what happend to him...I wonder if Hussein will feel some remorse for his part in the destruction of IRAQ, will the leaders of the Coalition, no....Jimmy Carters criticism are not a matter for public record, but he has been reluctant in the past, espcially after the ill fated hostage rescue, Ronald Reagen was elected because of I think....ah the Reagen years...

Falstaff · Mar 29, 2003, 01:14 PM

Jimmy Carter Against Iraq War
The winner of the Nobel Peace Prize would not have voted to give Bush unilateral authority to wage war on Iraq.

What would the world be like now if Jimmy Carter had not lost the presidential election to Ronald Reagan in 1980? Carter was a man with a genuine faith understanding; Reagan shamelessly exploited the religious right for his own political and ideological purposes. We probably would not have to now put up with the likes of George W. Bush and his military campaigns had Carter been elected in 1980. And we even might have had United States foreign policy conducted in such a way as not to have caused the whole Arab world to come to oppose us so strongly.

Jimmy Carter received the Nobel Peace Prize on October 11 for his commitment to peace and democracy and his work in human rights over the years. The Nobel committee used the occasion to send a sharp rebuke to the Bush administration for its aggressive policy toward Iraq. The Norwegians don't usually do this kind of thing.

Reuter · Mar 29, 2003, 01:59 PM

The sad thing is electors are forgetting so fast.
None of Carters major achievements weighted against the one and only failure he encountered during his legislation.
Imagine two people like Gorbachov and Carter meeting together to discuss the fate and future of the world.....
In any case I have the feeling the world would have become a much better place to live in and the whole Middle East debacle would have been solved for a decade by now.
Imagine, no baby Bush, no Sharon, no Saddam, no Bin Laden ........

Falstaff · Mar 29, 2003, 02:08 PM

water under the bridge.....

Mar 26, 2003, 10:12 PM	#32
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	In a perfect world There would be a balanced and legal approach to intervention. children wouldn't go hungry, and wouldn't become the wards of the liberators until the country was back on it's feet. And innocent civilians wouldn't be engulfed in the same conflict. But I think this transcends the legality of normal intervention, if there reaslly is a viable explanaiton for this whole war. The viability of the conflict, will be determined when the dust settles on bombed targets and those that can flee have done so...Then we will find the real threat buried in the sand. and perhaps then, those among us that wondered why so many died for the goal of liberation of IRAQ can feel some closure, but it's not going to end there. I personally feel that a monster was created when we dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, since then, even our allies have measured their support for anything we do, but fear the same thing we do, a "rogue nation" using WMD to achieve it's goals as well..That is why N. Korea figures so prominently in my mind...it has to be next..and one more thing. I hope americans don't assume with the fall of the Hussein regime, that the pursuit of a nuclear arsenal won't continue in IRAQ, it will, the seeds are planted as far as I am concerned... __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 27, 2003, 09:07 AM	#34
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	I disagree Reuter..many countries trust the US still, there is 30+ countries that openly support the US and there are hundreds more who may not openly agree but still do trust the US. This number will only grow once the war is done..it's harder for France to recover from their "we won't even read it we're against anyway" action....if you ask me their veto should be taken away on grounds of unreasonable use of their veto. (well all veto's should go if you ask me but no way the UN can do that).and France is doomed for sure if proof is found of the french actions in Iraq... __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Mar 27, 2003, 11:26 AM	#36
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	I am from Europe..and the handull of protestors that mainly are after rioting and plundering American shops do not represent a majority of the people in my opinion. very ironic tough..a "peace" demonstration ending in a battle with the police..we want peace or else i'll kick your butt You only see anti-war protestors and they claim to be a majority..well they are not i think. The press states both sides be it a lot more against than in favour of the attacks..and off course there is plenty of dirt to find on the US..what's the news there i'ld almost say.. Still looking at reasons to go to war and not to go to war (so no dirt on the US but pure reasons against this war) i find this war unfortunatelly needs to be fought and i blaim Saddam for this. Off course we know that America is not the clean cut freedom force they claim to be. But the majority of the Europeans silently agree that Saddam has to go and that war is the only way to get rid of him. __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Mar 27, 2003, 01:03 PM	#38
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	I'm sorry..but i don't know that much about Indonesia...are you referring to the Dutch in Indonesia or the current situation in Indonesia ? __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Mar 28, 2003, 07:05 AM	#42
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	No we don't I checked, we don't own Turkey, still going through the receipts for other nations though, hahaha....come on man....sheesh, liets put some facts one the table please.......something, anything, and China? come on man....someone get a geography book please....or Time magazine, or Forbes magazine, anything with facts in it please....ah forget it, ha ha.. __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 26, 2003, 07:06 PM	#31
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	I agree the French made a big mistake by helping Iracq building a nuclear plant but they completely erased their mistake during the first Gulf War. I do not believe Iracq has any of those weapons because if they had ever owned such weapons, I bet Powell would shurely have presented the evidence in the UN instead of making a complete fool of himself . But what with Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea then? Those countrys all have illegal nuclear weapons and even pose a serious tread to each other. As Mr Annan has declared the US intervention as a war "waged outside the UN" and about 95% of all specialists in international law quote the intervention as illegal, I wonder how long it will take before Blair is taken to court in The Hague for crimes against humanity. Will be a nice to see Milosovitch and Blair and maybee Powell too over there

Mar 26, 2003, 11:06 PM	#33
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	I hope after the Iracq intervention the US will have learned it's lesson for once and for all. It will take years before the other nations will start to thrust the US again and I think this intervention will create a few hundred Bin Ladens in the future, sad..... I hope Bush will come to his senses before it is to late because "dealing" with North Korea means nuclear war and Chinese involvement, resulting in WW3. After that event we can all go to sleep peacefully and without worry, there won't be any terrorists left.....sigh

Mar 27, 2003, 10:46 AM	#35
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	You made a good point about the veto's. This is exactly why the UN is working so poorly for the last 50 years. You under estimate the situation in Europe. European gouvernments still supporting the US are doing this out of greed while their peoples are openly against and won't forget in the next elections. Europe does not have a patriotic press, used to brainwash the people ,instead our press is far more critical and to the point. A few weeks ago one of the leading and most trusted magazines in Belguim called "Knack" came with an article about Powell filling his pockets and being bought out by about 20 corporations with large intrests in an eventual war. Unfortunatly for Powell they proved their article with evidence. Here we all see the French point of vieuw as very mature and brave. I think the US will find mass destruction weapons in Iracq. The question is: who will frame who? I know they will do about anything to try to justify their war and save their political heads.

Mar 27, 2003, 12:06 PM	#37
anova DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 10 Rep Power: 0	dont forget about Indonesia

Mar 27, 2003, 01:41 PM	#39
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	Man don't you look at the polls about the war or what? 85% of European people is strongly against That "handfull" of protestors seem to bee many hundred thousends if you ask me, and there is more to it then you think because these demonstrations are generally not "orgenised" by big political partys but are indeed a real showing of disaproof, even with their own gouvernment if necessary. As for Saddam, we all know what kind of person he is and neighter of us like him . But does this give us the right to wage a war on a foreign country? Make innocents suffer?Bomb this country to stonehenge ? No way. This is far more worse then Saddam would ever do. Truth is a highy valued thing you know. Thats why I will try to tell you a little story. The US depends on Saoudi Arabia and Venezuela for their oil suply. As the events in Venezuela made oil deliverys halt, there is only one good suplyer left. Altough S. Arabia seems to be the best of allies and they are spending millions of dollars to make believe this, it is not true and the US detected this recently with the events of 9/11. After investigations made it seems Bin Laden's organisation is openly and highly supported by this country. In fact you can enter almost any bank over there and make a deposit in favor of Bin Laden's organisation. No questions asked. Terrified, the US had to find a stable oil producing country to secure their needs but there were none available. Where to turn to? Iran? No let's take on Saddam again. He is harmless for us, has the needed oil, and the other Arab countrys would not protest very much and Israel would aplaud it. And for making things even better if we could fill our pockets in the mean time as well.........

Mar 27, 2003, 03:17 PM	#41
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	Nah, they own Turkey already.[COLOR=deeppink] But there is a good alternative in Asia, a little country they are all so fond of and they already been there but unfortunatly could not stay...lol

Mar 28, 2003, 08:21 AM	#43
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	Reuter, yes i saw the polls..however the question asked in the polls is not so much if people are against an attack..the question asked in those polls is mostly like "Are you against war" well any normal thinking human is against war. I am against war..so i would answer i am against to that question.. European press is too keen on promoting "against war" instead of getting the truth about European opinions. If 85% of the Europeans would truly be against the attacks than surely i must have met someone who is against..i have not. And the people in my surroundings are not only higher or lower educated, not only left or right orientated politically..they are from all backgrounds except the extreme left or right. __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Mar 28, 2003, 04:39 PM	#44
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	I don't want to bash you but how old are you? I am in my late fifty's,a cyber granddad , if you wish to call me that and have heard truckloads bs already. It was the same with Korea, the same with Vietnam and now it is no different. Before I state something I check it out first. The polls werent about "are you against war" No sir, everybody knew what was meant with it. Why would 500.000 people demonstrate In London if anyone agreed with an intervention? Not to mention the many, many hundred thousends in other major European citys. They all had the same message: no war for oil. Strange thing is: no demonstrations in Holland, the gouvernment extremely carefull in what it states,low profile....

Mar 28, 2003, 06:16 PM	#45
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	hmm in your 50's and still loosing your temper in debate.. and they say wisdom comes with the years. Everyone may have known waht was meant but if you ask a person who does not follow teh conflict at all "Are you against war" than of course he's gonna say "Yes i am against" Saw some footage on demonstration in other countries..riots and plundering of American stores..if they hate America than why steal American goods ?? 75% of the demonstrators looks like just a bunch of youngsters looking for an excuse to riot and plunder. As for the Dutch with "no demonstrations"..check your facts i'ld say..without checking you wouldn't have heard of them. That's not strange.. There where a few demonstrations but attended by too little people to mention and turned into riots..some peace demonstration. We are not low profile...we just don't look for the media as much as the US, UK, France or Germany. The idea behind 1441 (having Iraq bring the proof instead of looking for it) was first suggested by the Dutch before 1441 was made up. The Dutch sent fully manned patriot missiles to Turkey before the UN ruled on it. Our roads and seaports have been open to transport the US troops from Germany heading towards the gulf and the troops flying in from the US had a resting stop at our national airport. Our government states they support the war politically but not military, and that's ok for now..this way we are about the only European country that is on speaking terms with all other countries. What happens in other countries i can not judge, but when talking about "the Europeans" you are talking about us and judging us as well. And i do not like it when someone states "The Europeans this and that" while this is not reflecting the truth...Europe is much much bigger than only Belgium, France, Germany, UK, Holland and Scandinavia..our American friends may also hear about the many many Europeans that do agree on the attack. __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Mar 28, 2003, 06:50 PM	#46
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	I think Smoothdrive is an American (and an ultra Conservative Republican at that), or at least he seriusly wanrs to be. Q

Mar 28, 2003, 08:00 PM	#47
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	Sorry, if it looked like I was loosing my temper, but I wasn't. Only made things a bit harder. I wonder if you read res 1441. If so can you clarify the passage where is stated the US can wage a full scale war on Iraq with the consent of the UN. I would not know myself and 95% of all specialists in international law are saying the same. This makes the US and the UK rogue nations. Nations you are openly supporting, you wicked one What if France decided to nuke Israel tomorrow because of all the resolutions that weren't carried out in the past? Don't forget the Israelis do have illegal mass destruction weapons What I mean to say is: the world is getting ruled by the law of the jungle again if the UN is getting bypassed that easily. By the way: three big demonstrations in Belgium today, without a single riot or plunder.... First demonstration in favor of the war? Nowhere in sight yet. Maybe this were the handfull of protestors you were referring to? Time for a true little story . Me, the wife and my family went shopping last sunday. In fact we went to Sluis,Holland to fetch some new clothing. One of the shops had rows of pullovers with a small American flag sewed on. To my surprise no one was buying them, they were totally ignored. This made me wonder if the US was out of fashion or were the youngsters to ashamed to wear them?

Mar 28, 2003, 10:14 PM	#48
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	Well i don't want to be a Republican..i don't even know what they stand for..not very interested in the US internal politics..Clinton was my fav US pres of the last 15 years or so...related to Dutch politics i'm a liberal actually. When people start with "i don't want to bash you but" than they are bashing and trying to hide it..looks like loosing temper to me..if you don't want to bash than don't. If you truly want to know my age you can ask me a normal way without ridiculing my opinion in asking. I am not claiming that the US is good, great, loved or whatever..i am not defending the US even..no way i would like to live in America or be under the control of the US goverment...I am defending an attack on Iraq, and the US action in this..people tend to forget but also the UK and Australia have forces in Iraq and over 30 countries fully support the strike...but of course the US is the easiest to bash and blaim. You seem to see supporting the war and supporting the US as one thing..i don't For me it's very very simple Saddam is a bad man, slaughtering his own people, threatening his neighbours and in the possesion of very dangerous weapons. You can look at Saddam like an underdog and feel sorry for him..well great.... tell that to the relatives of the beheaded women, the political opposers who where executed, the thousands and thousand who where killed with chemical weapons.. Any force fighting against this Tiran gets my support. Secondary motive for me if that this man has opposed the UN for 12 years..if we let him continue to oppose the UN and do not strike him down than why would any other country in the world ever have to listen to what the UN says ? Countries do as the UN says since they fear the consequences if they don't..not because they suddenly think that it's such a good idea. This man has been told by the UN for 12 years to get rid of his weapons..he just mokked them, laughed in their face and didn't do a thing to comply with the UN resolutions..1441 speaks of last change and serious consequences...this can only be explained as one thing..war to take Saddam out. How else would you explain "Last change" ? Don't bother with telling me what the US did supporting Saddam in the past..i've heard it all and it is a fair charge against the US but has absolutely nothing to do with this war. __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Mar 28, 2003, 11:15 PM	#49
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	I was not bashing you, you know. If you came to that impression it was due to my very rusty English. Hope it will get better in the future now I'm posting so many messages. If I wanted to get mean, man you would not believe what you were reading, but I never had the intention at all. I do fully agree Saddam is a tyrant,killing his own people, and his son is even worse if we may believe one of the fled look alikes, sad.... I am not defending Saddam. I certainly could not care less if he disappeared. But wars are seldom fought for human rights and liberation of peoples. This is what they want you to believe and beware for the loads of bs from eighter sides that will come our way in the next few weeks. You have your point of vieuw and I have mine, so be it. My favorite American president was Jimmy Carter. He could sort things out in a peacefull way.

Mar 29, 2003, 04:57 AM	#50
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	NO WAY DUDE (alright) I voted for Carter, because he stumped everyone by being honest, hard working and he didn't give a damn about the money, He still makes contributions to improve peoples lives even now, He builds houses for poor people. And I think he really cares about the world that children will inherit..I wish there were more like him... __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 29, 2003, 08:27 AM	#51
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	Even today my esteem for Mr Jimmy Carter is still growing. Man I wished he could be the US president right now in this strange and difficult times. I absolutely have nothing against the American or British people. Why should I? There are only the good , the bad and the mislead amongst us. I only tried to point out the very dangerous situation the American and British gouvernments have put us in. When the two nations being the founders of the UN back in 1942, completely bypass this organisation right now, we have a huge problem. The UN may not work that well, but this is merely a problem by the way the founders made it work from the start.But it's the only thing we do have to maintain law and order amongst nations. I also tried to give the real reason for the intervention. Shure Saddam is a very bad dictator, but this does not give others the right to wage a full scale war on him and his country. As many know, Iraq is a multi racial, tribal country. You also have the Kurds in the north who will want to found their own nation which is certainly not to the likings of Turkey and Iran. And I think those two will do anything to prevent this. I am very afraid there will be another genocide soner or later far worse then anything we saw from Saddam untill now.

Mar 29, 2003, 01:11 PM	#52
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	And it all started Before Saddam overthrew Kassem, the CIA helped him do that, and another political actrivist prospered as well, Anwar Sadat, and we know what happend to him...I wonder if Hussein will feel some remorse for his part in the destruction of IRAQ, will the leaders of the Coalition, no....Jimmy Carters criticism are not a matter for public record, but he has been reluctant in the past, espcially after the ill fated hostage rescue, Ronald Reagen was elected because of I think....ah the Reagen years... __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 29, 2003, 01:14 PM	#53
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	What we know Jimmy Carter Against Iraq War The winner of the Nobel Peace Prize would not have voted to give Bush unilateral authority to wage war on Iraq. What would the world be like now if Jimmy Carter had not lost the presidential election to Ronald Reagan in 1980? Carter was a man with a genuine faith understanding; Reagan shamelessly exploited the religious right for his own political and ideological purposes. We probably would not have to now put up with the likes of George W. Bush and his military campaigns had Carter been elected in 1980. And we even might have had United States foreign policy conducted in such a way as not to have caused the whole Arab world to come to oppose us so strongly. Jimmy Carter received the Nobel Peace Prize on October 11 for his commitment to peace and democracy and his work in human rights over the years. The Nobel committee used the occasion to send a sharp rebuke to the Bush administration for its aggressive policy toward Iraq. The Norwegians don't usually do this kind of thing.

Mar 29, 2003, 01:59 PM	#54
Reuter DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Belgium, three feet from my monitor Posts: 55 Rep Power: 0	The sad thing is electors are forgetting so fast. None of Carters major achievements weighted against the one and only failure he encountered during his legislation. Imagine two people like Gorbachov and Carter meeting together to discuss the fate and future of the world..... In any case I have the feeling the world would have become a much better place to live in and the whole Middle East debacle would have been solved for a decade by now. Imagine, no baby Bush, no Sharon, no Saddam, no Bin Laden ........

Mar 29, 2003, 02:08 PM	#55
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	Yep water under the bridge..... __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."