hypersensitive ? or just disgusted

[BillA]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/secondworl...318972,00.html

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=912

I don't think the std disclaimer (all governments are the same) is appropriate

[2Busy]

None of this surprises me the least. From my knowledge of history of the French, it fits perfectly. I think France has long been jealous of the US for our super power status. To me, that is why the EU was born. Something to try to be able to compete at whatever level with the US. Germany is not far behind them, either.

[miladiou]

Originally Posted by unregistered

http://www.guardian.co.uk/secondworl...318972,00.html

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=912

I don't think the std disclaimer (all governments are the same) is appropriate

what are you trying to say/show ?
what is the link ?

[BalefireX]

re link 1: nothing surprising really, the list of countries who have 'forgotten' to release prisoners for political reasons is long as my arm - wouldn't make any generalizations based off it.

re link 2: if this is true (dont have any experience with the source, and haven't seen a word about it in either the US or British press) then disgusting is not a strong enough word. I can't honestly believe that a prime minister of any country would offer funding to a terrorist group that has attacked their allies, but if it were true, and this is a big if, I'd say toss them off the UN Security Council.

[Kobuchi]

Debka File is staffed by ex-Mossad with awesome connections but bear in mind their writers are biased often to the point of fantasy.

The French government had this problem earlier (same hostage case) where they established communication with the hostage takers, only to see US missiles guided by intelligence the French had shared with Iraqi authorities. Precision strike on terrorist hideout, hooray, don't mind the collateral deaths of foreign nationals. Each state has its own priorities.

So they tried to sneak around US intelligence. Failed. Bombed again.

EDIT: One of the negotiators has just announced all contact with hostage takers lost. Yeah, right. Tap the phone, bomb again.

[BillA]

miladiou
I merely posted the links
as is evident there are different views of the same subject

my comment should be read as it is written, no more - no less
De Gaulle, Chriac - politicians, no more than that
(like all of their type, no price - paid by others - is too high to support their desire to control and manipulate)
the label is "politician", no respect here

re debka
I've been reading that site for ~2yrs and oh so often what they describe will be in the press 6 mos later
lots of it is too hot for the mainstream (translate politically controlled) press

[BillA]

champions of liberty ?
or oil ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/sto...323967,00.html

I suspect the world will see much more on this, the internal UN investigation has merely started

[SysCrusher]

Originally Posted by unregistered

champions of liberty ?
or oil ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/sto...323967,00.html

I suspect the world will see much more on this, the internal UN investigation has merely started

Was just wondering if you guys would get to this one. There was a big story on it from Discovery Times a few weeks ago. Not only was it the French, but the Germans and Russians as well. Now you know why they were so dead set against it in the beginning.

[lolito_fr]

What if this is just the tip of the iceberg?
...

I think the expression is "République Bananière".

[BillA]

a friend put it succinctly:
"Eventually the French will have to decide if freedom is for all, or just the French."

look at their promotion of freedom in Iraq, really helpful
the Iraqis are to be continuously punished for the actions of the US ?
collective punishment of a 3ed party ?

hi ho

[miladiou]

as long as W will be the us president and that the americans will be in Irak it will sound weird to hear american people giving lessons about the respect of the liberty :shrug:

[Kobuchi]

Originally Posted by SysCrusher

Not only was it the French, but the Germans and Russians as well.

Also a few Canadians and Americans. This was not done for national interests. It was that group we call "the international community", for whom the UN is both forum and facility.

[SysCrusher]

Maybe we need a dictionary lesson.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...berty&x=9&y=16

Taking advantage of the oil for food program and the UN trade embargo for ones own monitary gain at the expense of the people in need of it really doesn't sound right when the Euro side speaks harshly about the US and Liberty.

Alot of Euro people would be at shock if they would look a little deeper instead of wearing the pink rosey glasses.

[SysCrusher]

Originally Posted by Kobuchi

Also a few Canadians and Americans. This was not done for national interests. It was that group we call "the international community", for whom the UN is both forum and facility.

I'v heard of that but never seen anything of subtance yet making that claim. If it happens to be the truth then I think we only just now starting to see the beginning of it. Alot of things/accusations are coming to a head in the corporate world here since this war.

[BalefireX]

Originally Posted by miladiou

as long as W will be the us president and that the americans will be in Irak it will sound weird to hear american people giving lessons about the respect of the liberty :shrug:

Independant of one's support for Bush or the way that he went about dealing with Iraq, you can't say that having Sadaam in power was a good thing, for the region, for the millions of repressed ethnic minorities, or for the politicial dissidents tortured and killed.

Sure, it is going to take a while to get things sorted out in Iraq, but look at the formation of any country - establishing a strong democratic system isn't an immediate process.

Even the French didn't jump from a Monarchy to a Democracy overnight, if I remember correctly, nobody was thinking about holding peaceful elections on July 15, 1789

[miladiou]

do you really think the US intervention was about instoring a democratic regime or protecting minorities ??? if it is the case why did nobody moved when saddam killed all these khurde ppl in 91 after the first war ?
I also think that the M. Moore movie gives a good conterpoint to the official american position
and btw some iraki ppl are still tortured ( by americans this time... which is probably the begining of a change ?)

[SysCrusher]

Ummm... because we were not allowed to under the democracy way instilled by the UN which France, Germany, Russia voted no??
Moore is just a cut-n-paste type of guy Miladiou - Don't listen to a fool. They were not tortured but humiliated. Those involved will be doing prison time.

[BalefireX]

I wouldn't say that American troops were torturers or murderers because of the actions of a few any more than I would say that the French are racist anti-semites because of the actions of a few. Things generally get worse before they get better when major social change is involved.

Again - I am not discussing the motivations for the removal of Sadaam as those are up for debate and really a matter of opinion. I am discussing facts: whatever the reason, the result is the right one.

I wish that people could get past the 'its cool to hate America' mindset, put aside their conspiracy theories and actually consider what the goal is. I refuse to believe that any French person is against the people of Iraq being able to elect a government of their choice, practice any religion they like, or even present a dissenting opinion. However, the media thrives off this sort of thing, so as long as people continue to let the nightly news make up their minds for them, you'll have French people saying that Americans are self serving bullies and Americans saying that the French are self serving bigots.

I agree, Sadaam should have been dealt with 15 years ago when we had the chance, but I'd rather the US dealt with him when it was politically viable for them to do so than to wait for the UN or the French to do something about it.

[miladiou]

Originally Posted by SysCrusher

They were not tortured but humiliated.

that's cool then !!!!

Originally Posted by BalefireX

I wouldn't say that American troops were torturers or murderers because of the actions of a few any more than I would say that the French are racist anti-semites because of the actions of a few.

you are right on this point, therefore the french racists do not represent the government, U.S. soldiers do...

my problem with what happen in Irak isn't to know if the french or the americans or i don't know who is right or wrong, the problem is just that i'm not sure that what is done is first for the interest of Iraki people.

at last, and this is just my opinion, Irak didn't attack the U.S., thus i think that an action there should have been directed by the UN.

[Jag]

"champions of liberty ? "
In my opinion there are none.

"They were not tortured but humiliated"
??
humiliated?Come on!

It's not so much invading a sovereign state, breaking all the rules of international law, forcing all to believe a mistification served as a "motive" for action.
Sure Saddam, was out of line, but a menace?What about Iran or China or North Korea or the african countries born from independence movements in the Sixties and Seventies, generally supported by the so-called bastioms of freedom, that now are the the wasteland of this world, mere trading posts for smuggling arms and the likes?
This world is the direct consequence of the wrong politics of a "cold war".

"Sure, it is going to take a while to get things sorted out in Iraq, but look at the formation of any country - establishing a strong democratic system isn't an immediate process."

Is the American people aware that such process can take from 10 to 20 years?
Are you ready to stay there all this time?

BalefireX, the images shown daily don't have any smell, or taste, they're just it - plain images and they just show what you see from the camera lens, nothing more nothing less.
If you want, try to see them with your sound off.

The thing is the "old powers" abdicated their military power and influence after WWII in favour of America, but at the same time they consider themselves the mannors of the house, like the old nobles. So, everything must be done in their fashion.
Only nowadays, the military power is the facto power.
America invaded Iraq, only because it could do so.
Bin Laden issue was something uncertain (as it proved to be), no one knew when or where, something had to be done.

[BalefireX]

I guess my point is that realistically, no country (or individual) is going to make a serious sacrifice, whether that be in terms of money or loss of life unless it gets something out of it. Any government that didn't act in the interest of its own people first and foremost would be a pretty poor government. However, just because someone may have their own motivations doesn't mean you should ignore the positive consequences of their actions.

I would have preferred that the freeing of Iraq was a UN action, but since a number of countries with heavy financial investments in Sadaam's government sit on the UN security council, and destroying/handing those investments over to the Iraqi people would not be in the interests of those countries, I doubt that we would have seen a UN action any time in the forseeable future. Again, countries looking out for their interests first and foremost.

As you said, Sadaam had been in power 15 years too long already, so I'm glad that someone has done something about it.

//edit: re Jag

1. I think the idea of international law is a farce, since it has been proven time and again that countries (and this goes for pretty much every country, try and name one that has never violated some international law) will break the rules when they deem it is in their interest. Speaking frankly, if I felt that I was in danger, I would want my government to do anything in its power to protect me, rules or not, just like I would break societal rules in order to protect my own life.

2. I don't know if the average American understands that it can take 10-20 years. I certainly do, as that is what I was trying to suggest in my earlier posts. I hope that America is in it for the long haul, because at the moment I don't see the rest of the world stepping up in any great numbers to help. They can claim that its out of spite for America, but that is unfair to the Iraqi people and sounds to me like the tantrum of a child who hasn't gotten their way. Maybe if the UN were doing something about the bad situations around the world I'd have greater respect for them, but at the moment they appear to be a lame duck.

3. The effects of propaganda are well documented. You might be able to say that 'those just show what the camera saw' but ask any photographer, director, reporter, etc and they will tell you that the way they take a picture, frame a shot, or write a story can change the story it tells.

Once again I am forced to wonder... are Europeans so virulently anti-American that they believe everything America does to be evil? It makes me sad, because really, hating Americans is no better than hating Blacks or Jews, or any other group.

I must ask the question: Apart from putting the needs and wants of Europeans before those of its own citizens, is there any way for the US to stop the hate; or is it simply a case of hating someone because they have a differing opinion and the power to enforce that opinion?

[miladiou]

BalefireX, the images shown daily don't have any smell, or taste, they're just it - plain images and they just show what you see from the camera lens, nothing more nothing less.
If you want, try to see them with your sound off.

In US the only images of the war one can see are about iraki people soooo happy that the nice american soldiers came to give them back their freedom. nothing common with what you can see everywhere else in the world...
even the the young americans that have been sacrificed for the interests of the few that make money with this war are barely mentioned...

It's hard from US to see that there is a real and nasty war...


" Once again I am forced to wonder... are Europeans so virulently anti-American that they believe everything America does to be evil? It makes me sad, because really, hating Americans is no better than hating Blacks or Jews, or any other group."

It is not about hating the americans... what people don't like in my opinion is that americans don't care about the other countries, and take decisions and act as if the planet was their own. (ie action against the advice of UN...)

And if you believe all this is for humanitary reason....

[BalefireX]

Perhaps there is a translation issue, because I have tried to make it very clear in my previous posts that I do NOT believe it is for humanitarian reasons, I believe that it is because the US government is doing what it feels is in the best interest of the US.

However that does not mean that it is the wrong thing to do in terms of the Iraqi people!

Do you know how many people died liberating France? Was that a waste of time because it took many years and cost millions of lives? Is the freedom of a Frenchman worth more than the freedom of an Iraqi?

Lets not fool ourselves here - the UN wasn't going to remove Saddam. He had been systematically misleading UN inspectors for decades, and was still oppressing his people.

I for one am glad that he is no longer in power, and if the reason he is no longer in power is because it serves American interests, thats a side issue.

If the UN would like to step up and deal with North Korea, or the conflict in the Sudan, or any of the other world issues, and they want to go at it without US support, good for them, I will applaud and support them 100%. However, until they stop bickering among themselves and start doing what they were formed to do, they may as well be nonexistant.

When I was last in the US, I certainly saw the same sort of news that I see daily here in Europe, at least in terms of the same sort of pictures. The rhetoric is less Anti-American, but then again, how much of the media in France talks about how horrible french people are? Sure, its a real and nasty war - war is hell. That doesn't make it wrong.

I think that Americans do care about what other countries think, just like I bet you care about what your friends think of you. However, when it comes to important decisions, you are going to go with what YOU believe, not what your friends think. Americans understand that Europe has different opinions, and would do things differently, but they are going to do what they believe in. French people should make important French decisions, Americans should make important American decisions, etc. You wouldn't want Chirac to do something he didn't believe was in the best interests of France because of what the US wanted, would you?

It seems, at least to me, that there is a double standard - why should European countries be allowed to stick to their principles without being hated when America cannot?

[bellevegasj]

I'll agree that 'some' Americans care about what other countries feel but not most. Certainly Bush doesn't, he's repeated that fact dozen of times. That's a crucial mistake. How can we really expect any respect other countries with someone like this in power? This isn't a game, we're losing human lives because of him. Most Americans live in a censored bubble away from what other countries think about them, away from what's really going within the United States itself. Bush and Cheney FINALLY just admitted that Iraq didn't have WMD's, a fact that has been widely known for over a year now. They just admitted to it LAST WEEK. According to the last poll, over 80% of the people that watch Fox news believed that we had already found WMD's. Do you not see a problem with that??? Everything in this last election has been turned around and twisted to the point that most people here in the United States have no clue what the truth is... unless you actually read between the lies/lines.

The United States created the UN, Bush turned his back on them and now we're in a war that we can't rush out of. I wish that we could, we have no business being there. Yes, Saddam is a bad guy, but the people there should have fought and died if needed to remove him from power. Easier said than done, agreed, but if you want something, you have to make sacrifices.

Who said that they wanted our kind of 'freedom' anyway? People are so arrogant. Do you really think that our capitalistic Britney Spears pop culture should be forced on people? People are fighting/dying for oil/money and we drive Hummers that get 8 miles/gallon and have atheletes getting paid $20million/year for playing a game while our educators and health care professionals can barely afford a house with starting salaries in the $30k range... and the whole time we have a huge homeless and health care problem.

How frustrating

[BalefireX]

I suppose you can look at it optimistically or pessimistically - I choose to be an optimist.

Maybe our world is broken beyond repair, but nobody ever solved anything by sitting and complaining about how unfair it is.