Some truth behind Europes lack of balls, against

[Guest danielisthor]

All alone

Written by: Oliver North

 

 

Washington, D.C. -- "If Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass

destruction were such a big threat, our 'European Allies'

and 'friends in the region' would be with us -- and they

are not. Therefore, we must not attack Iraq."

 

That's a pretty close paraphrase of what we've been hearing

for more than a month from the State Department, retired

officials of former administrations, foreign heads of state,

and now the Saudi royal family's personal emissary, Prince

Bandar bin Sultan, when he visited President Bush in Crawford,

Texas, this week. What prompts such an outcry? It's called

fear.

 

Europe's pusillanimous response to the prospect of renewed

military action against Iraq is actually easy to understand.

Visit any "NATO capital," and you'll find a place overrun

with refugees from former colonies, pervasive political,

economic and spiritual exhaustion, government beset by

internal European Union bickering, and fragile left-of-center

political coalitions agreeing on little other than curbing

U.S. influence.

 

Euro-business leaders are afraid of losing their exclusive

"Axis of Evil" cookie jar, where they operate sans American

economic competition. "Nobody in Germany or Continental

Europe agrees with Bush," Holger Friedrich, a fund manager

for Frankfurt-based Union Investment GmbH, said recently,

as his firm purchased Iranian bonds that will fund the

radical Islamic theocracy in Tehran. Britain's Aberdeen

Asset Management Trust has invested in Iraqi and North

Korean debt. "It's toxic stuff," admits Colm McDonagh, an

Aberdeen fund manager, "but when it moves, it really moves."

 

In 1997, Total SA, a French oil company with permanent

suites at the Al-Rasheed Hotel in Baghdad, struck a $2

billion natural gas contract with Iran. On the occasion,

then-Premier Lionel Jospin applauded this triumph of French

enterprise. "American laws apply in the United States," he

sneered. "They do not apply in France."

 

The timorous grandchildren of those who tried to appease

Hitler have other worries. They do not savor the prospect

of U.S. intelligence teams roaming at will through the

records of Saddam's WMD -- weapons of mass destruction --

factories and exposing Europe's complicity in building

these arsenals. After the first Gulf War, Kenneth Timmerman

chronicled in "The Death Lobby" Saddam's success in gaining

the help of foreign corporations and governments in

building his storehouse of ABCs -- atomic, biological and

chemical weapons.

 

Little has changed. French engineers helped build the Iraqi

nuclear reactor at Osirak, which the Israelis destroyed in

1981. To this day, the French hold $4 billion in unpaid Iraqi

debts. German firms specialized in providing poison gas and

missile technology. W. Seth Carus, a senior research professor

at the National Defense University, noted a decade ago,

"Everything that showed up in Iraq -- chemical, biological,

nuclear -- had a German element in it." And Saddam's "Super-

gun," the long-range, nuclear-capable cannon that was almost

operational during the Gulf War, was produced by companies

from seven different European countries.

 

More ominous than Europe's craven response to Baghdad's

acquisition of more weapons of mass destruction is the

stunning reaction of Saddam's very vulnerable neighbors.

This is dangerous -- for we can succeed against Iraq's

damaged military without European help. But we can't do it

without access in the region. Once again, fear is a factor.

 

The region's leaders have a well-founded apprehension that

any or all of them could go the way of Anwar Sadat -- in a

hail of gunfire from radical Islamic extremists. In Saudi

Arabia, the House of Saud has sought to prevent just such an

outcome by dancing with both the West and radical Islam --

devising an Arabian version of economic liberalism and

political repression similar to that in communist China. The

limitations of Riyadh's political polygamy were demonstrated

last Sept. 11, when 15 children of middle-class Saudis trans-

formed themselves into suicide hijackers and murderers.

 

Regimes throughout the rest of the region -- whether friendly

or not to the United States -- equate political freedom with

instability. They are dominated by political systems typified

by military coups, oil-saturated oligarchies and events like

Gen. Pervez Musharraf's recent unilateral revision of

Pakistan's constitution. And yet this is the neighborhood

in, around and over which we must operate to prosecute a war

against Iraq. The leaders of the neighboring governments

have no great love for Saddam. But they have even less

affection for the United States bringing about a democratic

transition in Iraq. After all, if "free and fair elections"

work in Baghdad, they will also work in Amman, Riyadh,

Ramallah, Damascus and Cairo.

 

Saddam Hussein continues military rearmament, while

simultaneously seeking to forestall American intervention.

The Europeans and Hussein's neighbors have demonstrated

that they are more likely to take offense at U.S. action

against Iraq than to join us in a military offensive.

 

There can be no doubt that getting rid of Saddam is indeed

in our own best interest. We must be sure that Iraq becomes

a "nuclear-free zone." But we also must do all we can to

promote the tranquil transition to democracy in the rest of

the region. And that won't be easy. In such a case, "going it

alone" is not just the price of global leadership; it's also

the stuff of which courage and statesmanship are made.

 

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

 

basically it comes down to that European businesses have huge amounts of money invested in Saddam and Iraq and are actually helping the bastard develop his weapons of mass destruction. Nice to know who our ALLIES really are.

 

Liberals point to Europe and say "geez, they practically have a perfected system over there, why aren't we like them." Obviously, just like here in America, the corporations have say in the policies of the government.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

The column is correct, but I wish someone else had written it. I get annoyed enough over the fact that I have to share the state with this scumbag.

[Guest DeputyHawk]

They do not savor the prospect

of U.S. intelligence teams roaming at will through the

records of Saddam's WMD -- weapons of mass destruction --

factories and exposing Europe's complicity in building

these arsenals .....  basically it comes down to that European businesses have huge amounts of money invested in Saddam and Iraq and are actually helping the bastard develop his weapons of mass destruction. Nice to know who our ALLIES really are

 

what utter bullshit. of course western business & government have been unintentionally implicit in helping 'evil' regimes come to power, unfortunately that is just the way things happen. if the implication here is that europe alone are responsible for the middle eastern armament we now see, and that we're secretly in league with iraq against america, well then north has his head further up his ass than even i imagined, and marney i'm disappointed you put your stamp of approval on this horsecrap.

 

The timorous grandchildren of those who tried to appease

Hitler have other worries ..... Saddam Hussein continues military rearmament, while

simultaneously seeking to forestall American intervention.

The Europeans and Hussein's neighbors have demonstrated

that they are more likely to take offense at U.S. action

against Iraq than to join us in a military offensive.

 

yes, our forefathers did try to appease hitler. as dr tom says ad nauseum, evil prospers when good men do nothing. well, guess what - you did and it did. so take a bow for the holocaust, you hypocrites. britain at least tried to stop the man straight off the bat instead of sitting complacently for years with its thumb up its ass. the uk (although now relenting, having finally been shown actual evidence) and the rest of europe are not hanging back on iraq due to fear of the discovery that we are really the power behind the throne there - the implication is laughable and offensive - but the fact that the bush administration has continually kept us in the dark about its plans for overhauling the area with or without UN approval, which is collectively seen as "a bit funny". no one's going to run blindly across a minefield for you if you don't tell them what to look out for, you fool. if you show us some respect, then we'll show you some solidarity.

[Guest danielisthor]

Actually, Britian didn't do anything about Hitler until he ran through Poland along with Stalin. Had Britian and France not had a treaty with Poland, they would of probably never been drawn into the conflict. Hitler's plan was always eastward expansion torwards Russia. Only after Britian and France declared war on Germany did he basically kick the living crap out of the French and fortified his rear, while continued his eastward advance.

 

 

History note: germany always kicking the crap out of France.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

When did Britain try to stop Hitler prior to Germany's invasion of Poland. The rest of Europe let Hitler get away with taking Austria, the Sudentland, and Rhineland. It was nothing but words, and that pussey Neville Chamberlin saying "There will be peace in our time".

[Guest Dr. Wrestlingphysics]

I think the "shock" in finding out the level of Eurpoean involvement in Iraq from the 1980's in terms of Iraqi weapons, and infrastructure just shows how selective the US's memory is.

It was the USA who helped install Saddam as Iraqi leader as at the time, he was the most pro-American Arab leader in the area. Throughout the 80's the US encouraged investment in Iraq from Europe and took the side of Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war (seeing Iraq as the more progressive western style country against the repressive regime of the Ayatollah in Iran). It was only the invasion of Kuwait that turned US, and world policy against Saddam, so when Europe is being demonised for having invested in Iraq in the 1980s, certain posts seem to be giving the impression that the US was always against him whilst Europe was handing him cash.

The facts are that the whole of the western world saw Saddam as the "good guy" of the region (or at least the best of a bad lot), so the whole of the western world (USA included) invested in the area and supplied arms to Saddam (either directly, or indirectly).

Any imlication that Europe was giving anything to Saddam whilst the USA saw him as evil is wrong, once world opinion turned against Saddam when he invaded Kuwait, the investment stopped from all sides.

[Guest DeputyHawk]

everything dr wrestlingphysics said. that was the point i was trying to make before i got sidetracked with the, admittedly tenuous, hitler link. it was just words to begin with, true, but it always pisses me off tremendously when the u.s. tries to take the credit for the whole war and dismisses the efforts of those who fought & died against the nazis for many long years before japan finally bumped them into action. a huge, huge part you played in defeating the germans during WWII, yes, but a soliloquy it was not.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

and marney i'm disappointed you put your stamp of approval on this horsecrap.

If you're going to place such great value on my opinion, you might want to ask for an explanation before trotting out your exhibitionist disappointment.

 

of course western business & government have been unintentionally implicit in helping 'evil' regimes come to power, unfortunately that is just the way things happen. if the implication here is that europe alone are responsible for the middle eastern armament

Just the way things happen. How convenient. No, it's really not "just the way things happen (emphasis added);" it's the way they happen when the arms industry and so-called European "statesmen" decide to make a quick buck and ignore what little conscience they ever had. For the last four decades, European firms have disproportionately subsidised Middle Eastern nuclear and chemical ambitions with the support of the government because that's where their oil comes from. They don't buy anywhere near as much as we do from Russia despite the logistics being much, much easier. Nor do they buy from Venezuela or Canada. Britain's FCO has predicated its entire geopolitical strategy on supporting the PLO against Israel in order to maintain the farce of "friendly relations" with the Arabs.

This is what the Europeans do. They aren't strong enough or self-sufficient or moral enough not to do it. Hell, even Russia is putting nuclear technology back on the table for Iran right fucking now.

 

take a bow for the holocaust, you hypocrites.

I have to pause here for a moment to say this:

 

Fuck you.

 

Americans didn't kill one single Jew. You Europeans have been killing them and each other for millenia. News of the Holocaust was slow to leak out, in large part because the Europeans didn't want to believe it.

But before I forget, how's that National Holocaust Memorial Museum doing in Edinburgh? Pulling in the crowds, eh? "Never again!" - my word, you chaps certainly learned your lessons well. By the way, I must admit, old fruit, we've had quite a little rash of synagogue firebombings here in the States recently. Perhaps you should send a few of your people over the pond to teach us some tolerance, eh? We could learn so much from you. Pregnant Jewish women get beaten in our streets with baseball bats every day, and the gendarmes - oh, sorry, the coppers - no, no, I mean the police officers! - they just sit on their bums, and not a single broadsheet - I mean newspaper - reports it.

My word, I did get just a tad muddled back there, didn't I?

 

Oh wait, no, I'm afraid I've been rather muddled all along.

 

The National Holocaust Memorial Museum is in Washington, DC, not Edinburgh.

The synagogue firebombings occur regularly not in Los Angeles or Philadelphia but in London and Paris.

Young Jewish couples expecting children aren't beaten up on American pavements, they're beaten up on British cobblestones.

Our police officers devote every resource at their disposal to the investigation of anti-Semitic crimes. Our mainstream non-Moslem religious establishments denounce such acts as one. It's your gendarmes and coppers that sit around with their thumbs up their arse, to borrow your ever so charming phrase. And it's your broadsheets that don't report it.

And it's the fucking EUROPEANS who STILL support suicide bombers in Israel. You tried to stop the man off the bat? Well la de fucking da, here's a goddamn cookie for carrying on his work today. You seem to be okay with killing the Jews by the dozens every week instead of tens of thousands in a day. You're doing it by proxy and you're being a bit quieter about it; I suppose that's progress of a sort.

 

Don't you ever dare to preach to America about the Holocaust, you bastards. We set up the fucking Nuremburg trials and we had to twist your skinny little arms completely out of their sockets to even get you to recognise conspiracy to commit genocide as a goddamn crime.

 

Anyway, now that that's out of my system, let's continue with supporting evidence for that piece of shit North's column, who unfortunately continues to be correct.

 

Something he didn't mention is the fact that European countries have a sizeable, unassimilated, and rapidly growing Moslem population. France doesn't dare to stir the pot not only for fear of endangering oil supplies and back payments, but because they're scared of their domestic Moslems - both Arabs and blacks burn the Jewish flag in "solidarity" parades and throw rocks at Jewish businesses and temples and no one is willing to take the risk of stopping them. Norwegian women, after being raped, are told that they have to show "sensitivity" to "Islamic norms," and stop dressing in a way that would be considered "provocative" by Moslems. Excuse me?! Whose country is NORWAY supposed to be again? Who should be doing the assimilating? Why the hell are we excusing crimes on the basis of culture? Well, because in 20, 25 years, at current demographic rates, Norway will be 70% Moslem and the Scandinavians will be the strangers. And the women had better just get used to being raped, since, well, it really isn't much of a crime in Islam.

I wonder which of you will be the first to institute Shariat law?

 

North is also completely right when he says that liberating Iraq will have repercussions in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, "Palestine," Syria/Lebanon, and Egypt, and those countries are scared shitless by the idea. (Not to mention Iran.) Since they're scared, so are the Europeans. The tyrannies which dominate the region don't want someone shaking the Scrabble board, because they're quite happy with their gold-plated toilets and they can't really understand why big mean old America gets so worked up things like "justice," "liberty," and "democracy," not to mention three thousand dead Americans. It's so unfair! - Iraq only has twenty-three million people, and Saudi Arabia has twenty-two million, but there are almost two hundred and eighty-eight million Americans. Surely a few thousand deaths can't really be noticed! Isn't this a bit of an overreaction? Why can't the United States let people like Hussein and bin Laden kill a few thousand of her citizens (or the occasional Jew - I mean Europe doesn't care!) from time to time, if it brings some small joy to a multi-billionaire's heart?

 

Ahem.

 

I think I've adequately defended my reluctant agreement with the column of this traitor, liar, convicted felon, and utterly miserable excuse for a human being. I just have to address one final thing you said.

 

if you show us some respect, then we'll show you some solidarity.

No, I have a better idea.

First, why don't you show us why we need your precious support. (I won't say "solidarity." Reminds me too much of the Palestinians and the filth who "support" them.) I see absolutely no value in it at the moment, other than to make YOU feel good and look slightly less pathetic.

Second, give it to us without any preconditions, because we're not doing this just for ourselves, and you've grown fat, complacent, and porcine under our protection. Sacrifice as much as we've sacrificed. Stand on your own feet for a change. Do what's right because it's right, not because it's in your interests.

Third, Jesus wept! - stop bitching and moaning and whining all the time. You sound like a bunch of three year-olds.

 

Do it. All of it. Don't demand anything from us, just do it. And then, maybe, just maybe, you'll earn back a tiny bit of our respect.

[Guest EricMM]

what did oliver north do??

 

must've been pretty bad

 

I'll look him up but if you want to help me out please do

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Lied to Congress, took bribes, and smuggled arms to our enemies. And then had the incredible brazen gall to run for the Senate from MY state.

 

I despise him.

[Guest EricMM]

ewww ran for senate? what scum!!

 

I guess even criminals can be right sometimes too

 

was he ever put in jail?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

No. The conviction was overturned on appeal because of a series of ridiculous technicalities. First, he was allowed to give "privileged" testimony to the Committees, which meant that it could never be used against him, and then, the testimony he had given under oath, with his own lawyers present, was ruled to have "contaminated" evidence brought against him in trial. It was a farce.

[Guest DeputyHawk]

Fuck you.  Americans didn't kill one single Jew.

 

that was never my implication. i phrased it churlishly, i accept that, but the original suggestion that the brits were tacitly responsible for hitler and the spread of naziism by attempting to appease him is one of those rare things that genuinely captures my capra, so to speak. we tried to hold off what we knew would turn into the senseless slaughter of millions as long as humanly possible by pursuing diplomatic routes. when that failed, we fought. when it became 100% clear that hitler was not even remotely interested in negotiation, america still refused & refused & refused to get involved, and knowledge of the holocaust was there, if not to the degree that eventually became apparent, so claiming ignorance over what happened doesn't give anyone the right to pass blame onto an ally for no apparent reason other than to be a dick. for a lying sack of shit like ollie north to throw out accusations of tacit responsibily to us just seems pretty fucking rich and unnecessary. or were we supposed to be secretly involved in arming the nazis to overthrow america the whole time, just like we're secretly involved in a plot to help the middle-east destroy the menace of capitalism so we too can return to stoning our criminals and raping our women in the name of allah? WE'RE ON YOUR SIDE, stop being so fucking paranoid. just because we want to exhaust every possibility of saving as many lives as we can in bringing around the same end result which you crave does not make us bad people, it makes us better people than the warmongers who care not a jot for the consequences of their skewed idealism.

 

The National Holocaust Memorial Museum is in Washington, DC, not Edinburgh.

 

to use one of your own condescending phrases, would you like a cookie? you remember the holocaust, see, you have a museum. wow. that doesn't take back the fact it happened though, does it? mad props for the nuremburg trials, but what's the point in denegrating the brits for failing to prevent what you also failed to prevent? a terrible, terrible thing happened. the u.s didn't do it, the u.k didn't do it, the nazis did it, so what's the point of arguing over who didn't prevent them doing it more than the other? i include myself in this criticism btw, but the untruthful man with the big ears pushed my buttons.

 

And it's the fucking EUROPEANS who STILL support suicide bombers in Israel. You tried to stop the man off the bat? Well la de fucking da, here's a goddamn cookie for carrying on his work today. You seem to be okay with killing the Jews by the dozens every week instead of tens of thousands in a day. You're doing it by proxy and you're being a bit quieter about it; I suppose that's progress of a sort.

 

could you give me some facts or figures about this? i'm not remotely disputing you, cause i know you're not one to make up crap, i'd just be interested in the info for when my misplaced sense of patriotism dies down a little, and i can get back to being critical towards my little tony.....

 

Something he didn't mention is the fact that European countries have a sizeable, unassimilated, and rapidly growing Moslem population. France doesn't dare to stir the pot not only for fear of endangering oil supplies and back payments, but because they're scared of their domestic Moslems - both Arabs and blacks burn the Jewish flag in "solidarity" parades and throw rocks at Jewish businesses and temples and no one is willing to take the risk of stopping them.

 

i'm with you 100% on this. having spent much of the last year living in paris, i saw first hand just how disgustingly ambivalent the french police can be. however, i also saw first-hand just how assimilated the vast majority of french moslems are, and how outraged they are by their more extreme elements. again you tar all moslems with the same brush in the borderline racist way you often do. luckily, saying that no one is willing to take the risk of stopping them is simply wrong, parisian students of all creeds and colours protest injustice on the streets hard and often. it takes time but assimilation is happening.

 

The tyrannies which dominate the region don't want someone shaking the Scrabble board, because they're quite happy with their gold-plated toilets and they can't really understand why big mean old America gets so worked up things like "justice," "liberty," and "democracy," not to mention three thousand dead Americans.

 

well, i think they're mad because from their perspective iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, and you're gunning into their very fragile region without much justification to kick-start a situation which could have quite catastrophic consequences for all involved.

 

Isn't this a bit of an overreaction?

 

yes it is, you've hit the nail right on the head. your beef is with terrorist organisations, not nations. when you show us conclusive proof that iraq is effectively a terrorist organisation which is directly threatening you and your allies, resistance will not be quite so heartfelt. but the world waits for that evidence. and waits. and waits.

 

First, why don't you show us why we need your precious support ..... I see absolutely no value in it at the moment.

 

well, how about the fact that most of the world seems to hate you at the moment, and britain is your last chance to regain credibility in the eyes of your allies, who have seen you completely disregard the notions of democarcy you claim to fight for in ignoring their protocol in your quest for vengeance. if you don't see the value of not having the whole world turn against you for your borderline illegal actions, i guess there really is no point in trying to help you dig yourselves out of the hole you're in. america is in the right here, but you simply can't enforce international laws when you turn around and break them yourself. play by the rules, and reasonable nations will not oppose you. your belligerence is clouding the larger issues at stake.

[Guest big Dante Cruz]

I'm going to back Marney up on the Europeans supporting suicide bombers in Israel thing. Have you ever happened to watch a newscast about one of those stories critically? Not a report on a bombing, but a report on the Israel/Palestine conflict. I have never seen such a biased position on something of that size. European countries dared to criticise (sp) Israel over retaliating at a rash of suicide bombers? And what the hell would you do in that situation.

 

What would you do in that situation...

 

Hey, on September 11th, 2001, weren't there some suicide bombers? Didn't they destroy an American landmark? The World Trade Centers, right? So, let's see, what happens? We went after Al Qaida and the Taliban for housing/financing the bastards. Now we find out about people making very direct threats at us, possibly with nuclear, chemcial or biological weapons? Or all three? I go to school in Richmond, Kentucky. The Bluegrass Army Depot ring a bell? Let's just say that the nerve gas that was such a threat in "The Rock" was basically what we have housed not ten miles from where I'm typing this. So, guess what? If the depot gets attacked and the gas released, we've just liberally let the entire easter half of the US to get very blatantly screwed. If we're going to take the route of defense, what's the best defense? A good offense. That's why Bruce Lee named his fighting system after a strike called the "intercepting fist." You see them coming to hit you? Hit them before they can and their shot doesn't land.

 

Okay, hopefully that rant wasn't garbled too badly...

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Didn't North run against another crook?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

america still refused & refused & refused to get involved...

(Americans are) warmongers who care not a jot for the consequences of their skewed idealism.

I'd like an explanation of how you can rationally accuse us of refusing to get involved in a war and being imperialist warmongers at the same time.

 

The fact is that America is a pacifist country. We DON'T like war. We have a long history of refusing to get involved in wars. It took Pearl Harbor to get us into WW2, for chrissakes. The American people have always hated war. We just don't shrink from it when we finally accept that it's the only recourse left.

 

just because we want to exhaust every possibility of saving as many lives as we can in bringing around the same end result which you crave does not make us bad people, it makes us better people

No, it makes you cowards. You know what has to be done. Stop trying to wriggle out of it.

 

what's the point in denegrating the brits for failing to prevent what you also failed to prevent?  a terrible, terrible thing happened.  the u.s didn't do it, the u.k didn't do it, the nazis did it, so what's the point of arguing over who didn't prevent them doing it more than the other?  i include myself in this criticism btw, but the untruthful man with the big ears pushed my buttons.

You started it. That "take a bow for the Holocaust" line was obscene and absolutely indefensible. I've always thought the British were magnificent during the War, but you pushed my buttons too. No matter what sent you off the deep end, I'm still annoyed with you about that one.

 

could you give me some facts or figures about this?

It actually isn't something you need my sources for; it's a matter of public record. Check your equivalent of the GPO. Direct EU donations to the so-called PA are in the billions. Pretty much all of the buildings in Ramallah were built with French money, and British taxpayers contribute approximately $100 million a year (through the terrorist fund UNRWA) to a so-called "refugee camp" which has been shown on film to be entirely an explosives-manufacturing operation. Granted, we also give Arafat money, but at least we send a few billion to Israel as well. The last time the Europeans supported Israel in any way was... well... never.

 

i also saw first-hand just how assimilated the vast majority of french moslems are, and how outraged they are by their more extreme elements.  again you tar all moslems with the same brush in the borderline racist way you often do.

No, you're wrong. Take a stroll through Birmingham sometime, or Bradford, or pretty much anywhere in eastern London. Moslems by and large do NOT assimilate into Western societies. Some do, yes, but as a religious/ethnic group they do not, and it shows. Ask Will Cooling. He's seen it firsthand too.

 

luckily, saying that no one is willing to take the risk of stopping them is simply wrong, parisian students of all creeds and colours protest injustice on the streets hard and often.

This is a complete non sequitur. It's the European politicians and the European police who are passively complicit in the firebombings. I couldn't care less if a bunch of ignorant young French kids "protest injustice" every once in a while. Their idea of sound economic policy is bulldozing a McDonald's. Their opinions on justice are at least as worthless.

 

they're mad because from their perspective iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, and you're gunning into their very fragile region

Fragile region? Don't make me laugh. The Middle East isn't fragile enough. Those same corrupt tyrannical families have been in power for generations, and it's long past time to shake things up. Even if Iraq weren't involved at all in funding 9/11, they're involved in funding terrorists in Israel. $25k per suicide bomber? That's more than enough justification to invade. Hell, on that basis we should invade Saudi Arabia too. I'd welcome it.

 

a situation which could have quite catastrophic consequences for all involved.

Let's go over the list of who's involved again. Mubarak, the Council of Guardians, the House of al-Saud... catastrophic consequences, eh? Sounds great to me.

 

Isn't this a bit of an overreaction?

yes it is, you've hit the nail right on the head. your beef is with terrorist organisations, not nations.

Bullshit. Our "beef" is with any nation anywhere in the world which supports terrorism in any way. That's what the Secretary of Defense said: We must "drain the swamp they live in." The terrorists are small targets. They can't do much by themselves. Furthermore, getting them one by one will take time, and as long as they have support networks, funding, and safe havens, a dozen more will crop up for every one we arrest or kill. Going after evil regimes is the best, most efficient, and most effective way of eliminating terrorism.

 

how about the fact that most of the world seems to hate you at the moment

At the moment? No, I think it's always been that way. We've never given a damn before; we aren't going to start now.

 

britain is your last chance to regain credibility in the eyes of your allies

Our allies are worthless.

 

you completely disregard the notions of democarcy you claim to fight for

This is where you Europeans completely miss by the proverbial country mile what America is all about.

 

This isn't just about democracy. Democracy is ONE of several principles that make us what we are. We are fighting to bring about democracy in tyrannised countries, but we don't have to and shouldn't take a vote on it. It's the right thing to do. Democracy, yes. But equally:

Liberty, justice, truth, and the American way.

These principles are non-negotiable. They are not on the table. You do not get to argue. You do not get to voice an opinion. Your vote is irrelevant. We will not debate them. Antithetical to your religion? Anathema to your culture? Tough. They're not "just a point of view." They're absolutely universal.

 

Change or die.

 

you simply can't enforce international laws when you turn around and break them yourself.  play by the rules

We make the rules. We always have. We always will.

 

Get used to it.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Didn't North run against another crook?

He was running for Congress, so that's practically guaranteed.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Liberty, justice, truth, and the American way.

These principles are non-negotiable. They are not on the table. You do not get to argue. You do not get to voice an opinion. Your vote is irrelevant. We will not debate them. Antithetical to your religion? Anathema to your culture? Tough. They're not "just a point of view." They're absolutely universal.

 

Change or die.

How democratic.....

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Like I said, democracy is one of a plurality of virtues that makes America what she is. It doesn't supercede the others; it complements them.

 

Not everything is up for a vote.

[Guest DeputyHawk]

Liberty, justice, truth, and the American way.

These principles are non-negotiable. They are not on the table. You do not get to argue. You do not get to voice an opinion. Your vote is irrelevant. We will not debate them. Antithetical to your religion? Anathema to your culture? Tough. They're not "just a point of view." They're absolutely universal.

 

Change or die.

I think this is the sort of thing people mean when they accuse you of being a troll. I don't think you're a troll, I think you make extraordinarily compelling arguments, but then you discredit them by switching yourself into derranged zealot mode. I'm not sure whether you think offering 'no compromise' finality and death threats makes your arguments more convincing, but really you do yourself far more harm than good with it.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Only two people have ever called me a troll: Cletus the Bloody and EricMM. That even they didn't really believe it is attested to amply by the fact that they subsequently responded to me in other threads. Real trolls are ignored.

I'm not a deranged zealot, and the finality in my arguments is an integral part of them. I truly believe that the world outside the borders of the United States has reached a point where argument is useless and force is the only reasonable solution to its myriad ills. We must temporarily impose our will on others in order to allow people to be free.

 

If my arguments were only convincing when the actions I advocated had no cost, they would be worthless. You must see clearly that remaking the world does have a cost, and for us to shy away from even acknowledging that cost while claiming to uphold principles for which we're not prepared to make sacrifices would shame us beyond description.

The truth may be a harsh mistress, but she is also just and fair, and I shall take no other.

[Guest DeputyHawk]

::puts marney back on christmas card list, not that she'd care either way::

 

I truly believe that the world outside the borders of the United States has reached a point where argument is useless and force is the only reasonable solution to its myriad ills. We must temporarily impose our will on others in order to allow people to be free.

 

still highly dubious about the arrogance of the sentiment expressed here, but then i do live outside u.s. borders, so i guess my viewpoint is clouded by the malaise of my myriad ills. i've always found europe quite a nice place to live, but what would i know? impose away, i'm sure you have every intention to do just that. where does the 'temporary' re-education by force alone end though, when the great pyramid is sponsored by pepsi and a giant eyeball?

 

btw, unreserved apologies for my earlier holocaust comment, it was completely and utterly out of line, more directed at north in particular than americans as a whole, but thoughtless nonetheless.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Accepted, thanks. I don't think Europe is a bad place to live, I just think it's America's power that allows it to live that way, and I think America deserves some latitude from Europe in light of that fact. Depending on our power for your national security is fine, but then you can't turn around and say we're untrustworthy. You've already demonstrated by your actions that you trust us absolutely.

[Guest EricMM]

See I think part of the problem is that Europe isn't just Europe, it's France, Germany, The Netherlands, Spain... Great Britan...

(ahem)

Now that we've had a useless history lesson perhaps sentiment differs from country to country? I don't think France has ever backed us 100% in recent times, whereas Great Britan more often did. Germany may go one way, Italy the other.

 

Lesson?

 

Blame France. (j/k)

 

And Marney you aren't a Troll but you can BE a Troll.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

No. Again, trolls don't believe in what they post, they post solely in order to provoke a heated response. I don't care how people respond; I never make an argument I don't believe in and can't defend.

[Guest MrRant]

Troll!!

 

 

 

<winks>

[Guest Cancer Marney]

You can heat me up anytime, Reverend...

[Guest DeputyHawk]

trolls don't believe in what they post, they post solely in order to provoke a heated response. I don't care how people respond; I never make an argument I don't believe in and can't defend.

jesus, and i thought you were joking about wanting to nuke france! could you ask your gov't to hold off a couple weeks before implimenting the cloud d'champignon, i have to go back to paris and tidy my apartment up to get my rent deposit back. holy hot hell.

 

also, i've never said i mistrust america as a country, merely president bush as a statesman, although in my eyes he is redeeming himself a little with this token lip service to the u.n. everyone knows it's just an empty gesture, but nine times out of ten that's what international diplomacy requires.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

jesus, and i thought you were joking about wanting to nuke france! could you ask your gov't to hold off a couple weeks before implimenting the cloud d'champignon, i have to go back to paris and tidy my apartment up to get my rent deposit back. holy hot hell.

...doofus. <g>

 

Although "cloud d'champignon" made me laugh.

[Guest MrRant]

And I shall....