Hey there Bean Dipped, what to you mean WE talk funny.

As far as we are concerned, EVERYONE ELSE talks funny.

Rick.

Beandip let's move this to the thread Mike started - Target Irag, here we go !

REply to me there please.

The US came to our aid because we had been are were about to be overrun (I group the two wars and circumstances togther) - we were directly threatened. We could also say that in the 1st war, the very fact that the Americans began to arrive convinced Germany that she couldn't win and she (as per all the others) had started to lose the 'stomach' to wage war. She capitulated before a alrge majority of US soldiers were engaged.

Anyway, in this weeks' circumstances, your country is not directly threatened, in fact not even indirectly. Yeah, you've been the victims if acts of terrorism, you retaliated against those responsible in Afganistan and 'liberated' that country from an opressive regime. It worked once so let's do it again ! Is Bush going to attack every Islamic country suspected of supporting terrorism in one way or another ? Things will get out of hand !

As I requested, let(s leave this thread and concentrate on just one - reply to me there (and I value your opinion). BTW, France declared war on Germany after the invasion of Poland and was occupied as a result.

Apart from many other nasty things that happened, in both world wars, several hundred thousand French starved to death as there was no-one to tend the fields and hundreds of villages were wiped off the map due to artillery barrages.

The French cavalry school at Saumur was decimated when they horse charged the German tanks - all for the honour and glory of their country - absurd !

HOwever, if a big brother or world policeman had contained Hitler as you have been successfuly doing to Saddam for 12 years, it wouldn't have happened.

I thought our (the wests') philosphy was that we only defended, and then only when a fellow country was attacked. This is a dangerous precedent (no pun intended).

You're right they do tlak funny but half as much as the Springboks !

Originally posted by TKR514

YES!

Things do change, the world is not static.

So you are saying that the Irish need a bigger army if they feel that they need to take back the lands to the north. That way they can hold the lands till things change again later. They have the same moral right to take the land by force and hold it as those before them? The longer they hold it, the more legitimate it becomes?

Sounds like a bad way to run a planet, but I guess if the people there cannot find a peaceful way to be represented as desired, then a little revolution is a good thing. I seem to remember we(U.S.) did as much a few hunderd years ago, Austrailia in 1901, India just 60 years ago, Singapore in 1966..... maybe Ireland in 2009? Who knows, maybe just accept this trend as inevitable change is the way to go as you suggest...

Umm. not not at all you missed the point completely. I guess its true, americans dont get irony.

The point i was making was:

An invader occupying a foreign land (You in america), which you occupied for 200 or more years, advocating the natives of another country to take thier country back from the people who have occupied it.

(my apologies if you are a native american indian, then this doesnt apply to you)

My two cents

I don't have any more credibility than most anyone else except I served 23 years in the Army. Korea, Japan, Germany, The Netherlands, and I read several news magazines and the newspaper cover to cover.

check out the latest issue of NewsWeek, the one with the yellow bomb on the cover. I believe their articles are right on.

The US is so powerful, that the world now has an imbalance of power. History says that it is natural for other countries to form alliances to balance that power. The Bush administration has spoken and acted as the sole super power. You can ask what is wrong with that, we are. The answer is in the articles. It just doesn't work over the long haul.

This war is the fault of the first Bush administration for not finishing a job. It is the fault of the rest of the world for not giving Sadam a unified face that might have forced him out. It is the fault of Geo W. for not getting support way before last fall, via good world diplomacy in all aspects of foreign affairs. Geo W. needs from lessons from his dad.

I am a firm believer in never committing our forces into the "tar baby". The end game has to be well thought out. We haven't done that. My only hope is that General Powell will continue to have influence over the rash folks in the Bush administration.

I'm not anti Bush, just disappointed in his go it alone attitude. It is immature. It can only last so long. In the long run we need the rest of the world to work with us on all the issues that face the earth.

Iraq is the tar baby.

PS. England and France can take the credit for dividing their colonys into "countries" that have historical enemies within the same country, and thus leading to all the ethnic wars of Africa and probably Iraq. What were they thinking????

But now our job is to kick some arse, take names, and set up a government that the rest of the world will support with what ever it takes to bring stability to the region.

PS. England and France can take the credit for dividing their colonys into "countries" that have historical enemies within the same country, and thus leading to all the ethnic wars of Africa and probably Iraq. What were they thinking????

Yep sir, been there, done that, it stink...

Originally posted by Lowell Marx

My two cents

(snip by carl)

The US is so powerful, that the world now has an imbalance of power. History says that it is natural for other countries to form alliances to balance that power. The Bush administration has spoken and acted as the sole super power. You can ask what is wrong with that, we are. The answer is in the articles. It just doesn't work over the long haul.

This war is the fault of the first Bush administration for not finishing a job. It is the fault of the rest of the world for not giving Sadam a unified face that might have forced him out. It is the fault of Geo W. for not getting support way before last fall, via good world diplomacy in all aspects of foreign affairs. Geo W. needs from lessons from his dad.

I am a firm believer in never committing our forces into the "tar baby". The end game has to be well thought out. We haven't done that. My only hope is that General Powell will continue to have influence over the rash folks in the Bush administration.

I'm not anti Bush, just disappointed in his go it alone attitude. It is immature. It can only last so long. In the long run we need the rest of the world to work with us on all the issues that face the earth.

Iraq is the tar baby.

PS. England and France can take the credit for dividing their colonys into "countries" that have historical enemies within the same country, and thus leading to all the ethnic wars of Africa and probably Iraq. What were they thinking????

But now our job is to kick some arse, take names, and set up a government that the rest of the world will support with what ever it takes to bring stability to the region.

A Great Post! Thanks for Sharing! Your 2 cents is worth $5 USD

Lowell Marx - you are absolutely right about our ex colonies, in fact after the first world war they were our 'protectorates' !

We would never, never have given them up if we'd realises there was oil down there !

Did you read what you wrote " SET UP a government" ? And everyone do WHATEVER it takes to bring stability to the region ? That which Bush is doing is the quickest way to destabilise the region, not to be fixed overnight by a puppet, token democratic government !

The Arabs are (rightly) thinking whose arse is going to get kicked next !

I think you have a lot of credibility to write what you believe and yes, he needs to do his homework on diplomacy but I get the feeling he don't care about that - he truly believes he can go it alone !

Go it alone?????

Excuse me, maybe I'm just an ignorant right wing redneck idiot but there were more supporters before the attacks started than those countries that were against it. Now that it has begun, even more countries have jumped on the bandwagon.

Bush did try diplomacy. Maybe some people wish we would kiss Sadam's arse for another couple of years, but what good would it do? Sadam would never surrender or submit and give up his toys.

Sorry for the rant, I realize that I may not be the most "educated" person on the board but I'm sick of people saying that the US is doing this on our own. Yes, maybe Bush was the one to start pushing for support and maybe he was the initial instigator, but if the support from other countries hadn't been there from the beggining, we wouldn't be where we are now.

Originally posted by Arizona240z

Go it alone?????

Excuse me, maybe I'm just an ignorant right wing redneck idiot but there were more supporters before the attacks started than those countries that were against it.

Care to provide a list of supporters?

Bush and Blair are virtually the only leaders "pushing" for action against Saddam. The few other countries and are "reluctant" (not providing any forces) supporters sit quietly in the wings nodding theri heads.

Ok, I've spent the last hour or so searching for a list of who was voting for what and can't find one..... Before it was decided that they wouldn't go to the UN for a final vote they had the 9 votes needed but didn't ask for the vote because of the French veto. As of yesterday over 40 nations had thrown in support for the operation. I've gotten this info by watching BOTH Msnbc and Fox news (covering both the left and right slant).

I agree that more countries should be offering support by way of troops, humanitarian relief, etc but they aren't, oh well. Maybe we should just not let them profit from the reconstuction efforts.

Originally posted by Arizona240z

Maybe we should just not let them profit from the reconstuction efforts.

Can see how that will play on the world stage...... "Typical Americans, profiting from the war and not allowing anyone else to share in the bounty or to get in their way of doing what they want.

That would be playing right into the negitive perception that many countries already have of us.

Not a good idea.

Also, you can't just count an absolute # of countries, as a tiny country that receives major funding from the US, does not count the same as a large country which can stand on it's own two feet and vote without fear of it's funding or support being pulled by a unhappy "partner". A country like Haiti, doesn't count the same as a France, or Germany, or Sweden, etc. (that may not be a good example, but I think you get the idea)

Carl,

My comment about not letting the French profit was half scarcastic. I do think those that support the actions, should be the ones to help rebuild (yeah it is profitable in rebuilding but it won't cover the cost of the war). I also don't want another country molded after ours....... Yes we are a great Nation but the world needs different flavors, let the citizens decide what they want once the Dictatorship is gone.

But since France is already crying about not letting the US have a say in the rebuild effort..... well, you can imagine what I could say. Bush has already said that he would prefer the UN handle the rebuilding.

sigh......... I think I'm going to retire from this thread, I feel like it is going round and round.... and we only really need one thread going on this subject. I'm off to smoke a cigar (in this free country, I can't do that in my own house

) and contemplate things........ with that I want to leave all of you with an interesting email I rec'd this week (it it all fits) I just copied and pasted it so ignore the marks:

>

> > Provided by Joe Galloway, author of We Were Soldiers and is an

> > item of possible interest.

> >

> > This one is definitely NOT tongue in cheek. Sig, the author, was

> > a teen-aged

> >

> > Marine who marched and fought as a rifleman to and from the

> > Chosin reservoir in Korea in 1950. He switched to the Army, and served

as

> > a

> > Special Forces officer in Vietnam. After Vietnam he joined the CIA, and

> > went

> > back to Korea.

> >

> > He's been there, done that, and has some specific thoughts on

> > countries that don't "like" us.

> >

> > If you aren't interested in the ramblings of an old man, please

> > delete now.

> >

> > If you're still there, pull up a chair and listen.

> >

> > Is there anyone else out there who's sick and tired of all the

> > polls being taken in foreign countries as to whether or not they "like"

> > us?

> >

> > The last time I looked, the word "like" had nothing to do with foreign

> > policy.

> >

> > I prefer 'respect' or 'fear.' They worked for Rome, which civilized

> > and kept the peace in the known world a hell of a lot longer than our

> > puny two centuries-plus.

> >

> > I see a left-wing German got elected to office recently by campaigning

> > against the foreign policy of the United States. Yeah, that's what I

want,

> > to be lectured about war and being a "good neighbor" by a German.

> > Their head honcho said they wouldn't take part in a war against Iraq.

> > Kind of nice, to see them taking a pass on a war once in while.

> > Perhaps we needed to have the word "World" in front of War.

> > I think it's time to bring our boys home from Germany. Outside

> > of the money we'd save, we'd make the Germans "like" us a lot

> > more,afterthey started payingthe bills for their own defense.

> >

> > Last time I checked, France isn't too fond of us either. Theysortofliked

> > us back on June 6th, 1944, though, didn't they? If you don't

> > think so, see how nicely they take care of the enormous American

> > cemeteries up above the Normandy beaches. For those of you who've

> > studied history, we also have a few cemeteries in places like Belleau

> > Woods and Chateau Thierry also.

> >

> > For those of you who haven't studied it, that was from World War One,

> > the first time Europe screwed up and we bailed out the French.

> >

> > That's where the US Marines got the title 'Devil Dogs' or, if

> > you still care about what the Germans think, "Teufelhunde." I hope

> > I spelled that right; sure wouldn't want to offend anyone, least

> > of all a German.

> >

> > Come to think of it, when Europe couldn't take care of their

> > Bosnian problem recently, guess who had to help out there also. Last

time

> > I

> > checked, our kids are still there. I sort of remember they said they

> > would be

> > out in a year. Gee, how time flies when you're having fun.

> >

> > Now we hear that the South Koreans aren't too happy with us

> > either. They "liked" us a lot better, of course, in June, 1950.

> > It took more than 50,000 Americans killed in Korea to help give

> > them the lifestyle they currently enjoy, but then who's counting?

> > I think it's also time to bring the boys home from there.

> > There are about 37,000 young Americans on the DMZ

> > separating the South Koreans from their "brothers" up north.

> > Maybe if we leave, they can begin to participate in the "good life"

> > that North Korea currently enjoys. Uh huh. Sure.

> >

> > I also understand that a good portion of the Arab/Moslem world

> > now doesn't "like" us either. Did anyone ever sit down and determine

> > what we would have to do to get them to like us? Ask them what they

> > would like us to do. Die? Commit ritual suicide? Bend over?

> > Maybe we should follow the advice of our dimwitted, dullest

> > knife in the drawer, Senator Patty Murray, and build more

> > roads, hospitals, day care centers, and orphanages like

> > Osama bin Laden does. What with all the orphans Osama

> > has created, the least he can do is build some places to put them.

> > Senator Stupid says if we would only

> > "emulate" Osama, the Arab world would love us.

> >

> > Sorry Patty; in addition to the fact that we already do all of

> > those things around the world and have been doing them for

> > over sixty years, I don't take public transportation, and I certainly

> > wouldn't take it with a bomb strapped to the guy next to me.

> >

> > Don't get me wrong: I'm not in favor of going to war. Been

> > there, done that. Several times, in fact. But I think we ought to

> > have some polls in this country about other countries, and see if

> > we "like" THEM. Problem is, if you listed the countries,

> > not only wouldn't the average American know if he

> > liked them or not, he wouldn't be able to find them. If we're supposed

to

> > worry about them, how about them worrying about us?

> >

> > We were nice to the North Koreans in 1994, as we followed the

> > policies of Neville/Clinton. And it seemed to work; they didn't restart

> > nuclear weapons program for a whole year or so. In the meantime, we fed

> > them

> > when they were starving, and put oil in their stoves when they were

> > freezing.

> >

> > In a recent visit to Norway, I engaged in a really fun debate

> > with my cousin's son, a student at a Norwegian University. I was

> > lectured to by this thankless squirt about the American "Empire," and

> > scolded about

> > dropping the atomic bomb on the Japanese. I reminded him that empires

> > usually

> > keep the stuff they take; we don't, and back in 1945 most Norwegians

> > thought dropping ANY kind of bomb on Germany or Japan was a good idea.

> > I also reminded him that my uncle, his grandfather, and others in our

> > Family spent a significant time in Sachsenhausen concentration camp,

> > courtesy

> > of the Germans, and they didn't all survive. I further reminded him

> > that if it wasn't for the "American Empire" he would probably be

speaking

> > German or Russian.

> >

> > Sorry about the rambling, but I just took an unofficial poll here at our

> > house, and we don't seem to like anyone.