The Iraq Thread

[Jinef 2]

Also on a different point.

Is large income inequality good? Is it good to have some poor sod in MacDonalds on Å3,00 an hour while you have doctors who are on Å70 an hour?

True the a doctor is more qualified and deserves more which is true, but still it would be better to increase the MacDonalds employee wages and lower the doctors creating less of an income inequality.

It would be nice if everyone could just about get on and live instead of large aounts of poverty and small amounts of elite luxury, communism goes along these lines in theory.

Strange that now the largest former comunist country (Russia) has the largest income inequality due to it's transition to democracy and therefore small amounts of people are boosted into elite luxury.

Consequently Cuba and China have the smallest incoe inequality.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ Dec. 16 2002,05:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Only being benefficial for America it self of course, yes you can say that you've helped everyone with their troubles but who is giving more, the rich lord with a hundred pieces of gold or the old woman with her life savings of tuppence?<span id='postcolor'>

What do you mean?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Anyway America has an eagle as it's national symbol, a symbol of supremacy and power. But every empire that has had the eagle as it's symbol has fallen........need i emphasise?<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah, the national symbol has a lot to do with whether or not a country will prosper.

And, just so I can understand you better, can you define "income inequality" for me?

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well first off I dont' see that statement as wrong at all. It's obvious that Russia was moving away from communism, I have no idea how you could think otherwise as they've departed from that form of government. And I believe that, as China's economy changes it will become democratic. But that's just my personal opinion.<span id='postcolor'>

You seem to have no idea on what life in china is like. Check the latest amnesty international report on it. When it comes to violation of planetwide accepted human rights you will see them in the lead on numerous threads. Yes, your opinion is very personal, but pretty weird if you ever watched news from abroad the US. Opening a country towards money doesnt mean to change the attitude towards people within itself.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well what's wrong with it? It's obvious that the American government and economy has worked wonderfully so far.

<span id='postcolor'>

Oh yes...

You do claim to be very democratic, open minded and such but you are pretty ignorant when it comes to countries abroad US. Was this comment serious or are you drunk ?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Cuba is being let be. As a matter of fact we're not even trading with them. <span id='postcolor'>

Sarcasm maybe an option when you run out of ideas but it will certainly not contribute to a discussion. If you run out of facts remain silent.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, I figure they'd only retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meaning someone would have to be pretty pissed off to strike first.<span id='postcolor'>

We had around 6 possible "thumb on the button" situations within the last 2 years. You maybe want to check out facts on the Kashmir area to find out more. It is a hot situation down there for quite a while now and it´s unlikely it will calm down soon. And yes both, Pakistan and India tend to use their weapons as they dont have the historical background to know about the consequences of a nuclear strike and are additionally religious motivated. You know, not everyone on this planet has the possibility to get educated in a school.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Kinda hard you just believe you when you can't spell Iraq (Just kidding around with you man)<span id='postcolor'>

No problem. I chose the wrong spelling cause in german it is actually spelled IRAK. No serious error to swap it with mother language pronouncation, is it ?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If we stay one step ahead of the game<span id='postcolor'>

Makes no sense as the only players are US and Russia, but Russia drops back a lot, cause the lack of money hits military research a lot. So you play against yourself ?

[Frisbee 0]

a) I also really hope you were joking about the American governement working out well,thus,that giving them the right to dictate others.....

Their policy is so good that most of the world disagrees with them,and a small part wants to see them shot,blown up or in general being done some kind of bodily harm.(them being the us)

Something has got to be wrong if almost noone likes you,no?Oh right,it's just the others,I forgot about that.

b)Cuba is all but being let be,putting an EMBARGO pretty much rules out the term 'being left alone'

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Frisbee @ Dec. 16 2002,06:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

I don't think it makes any difference how China treats it's people, just it's economy. Although the two may be directly interlaced. I think as China's economy changes it will eventually at least start to consider democracy.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You do claim to be very democratic, open minded and such but you are pretty ignorant when it comes to countries abroad US. Was this comment serious or are you drunk ?<span id='postcolor'>

I'm really getting sick of these immature comments. If you don't like what I say fine, but don't call people ignorant.

Anyway, I still dont know whats wrong with the U.S. economy and way of life. I'm sure it's not perfect, but it's better than a lot of other things.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sarcasm maybe an option when you run out of ideas but it will certainly not contribute to a discussion. If you run out of facts remain silent.<span id='postcolor'>

Oh so now you're going to dictate to everyone when they can talk and can't talk?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We had around 6 possible "thumb on the button" situations within the last 2 years. You maybe want to check out facts on the Kashmir area to find out more. It is a hot situation down there for quite a while now and it´s unlikely it will calm down soon. And yes both, Pakistan and India tend to use their weapons as they dont have the historical background to know about the consequences of a nuclear strike and are additionally religious motivated. You know, not everyone on this planet has the possibility to get educated in a school.<span id='postcolor'>

What difference does it make how they're educated or not?

And again this all boils down to never making everyone happy about the U.S. If we're isolationist, people get pissed off, if we stick our nose in everyone's business, people get pissed off.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I also really hope you were joking about the American governement working out well,thus,that giving them the right to dictate others...<span id='postcolor'>

Well first I don't think we were dictating to anyone. If they wanted to resist they could of, and in a sense eventually did.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Their policy is so good that most of the world disagrees with them,and a small part wants to see them shot,blown up or something like that.(them being the us)<span id='postcolor'>

Our policies are good for us and our friends. The only people who want to shoot and blow us up are religious fundamentalists, apparently, most of which are not politically motivated.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Something has got to be wrong if almost noone likes you,no?Oh right,it's just them,I forgot about that.<span id='postcolor'>

Almost noone likes us? I think plenty of people like us. But either way I don't think it matters. Everyone's going to look out for themselves and their friends, that's what we're doing.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">b)Cuba is all but being let be,putting an EMBARGO pretty much rules out the term 'being left alone'<span id='postcolor'>

What difference does it make?

[Harnu 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you don't like what I say fine, but don't call people ignorant.

<span id='postcolor'>

Ya, only us Americans can call other ignorant    

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Something has got to be wrong if almost noone likes you,no?Oh right,it's just them,I forgot about that.<span id='postcolor'>

Plenty of people like us.  And it's not even like it really matters.  We aren't playing a popularity contest here.  It's just that some places and cultures may not agree with us.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">b)Cuba is all but being let be,putting an EMBARGO pretty much rules out the term 'being left alone'<span id='postcolor'>

As I said before, we are picking our fights.  An embargo on Cuba shows we are against communism.  But it wouldn't be that great if we did it to China.  "Hypocracy with reason" is what I call it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Cuba is being let be.  As a matter of fact we're not even trading with them.<span id='postcolor'>  

Sarcasm maybe an option when you run out of ideas but it will certainly not contribute to a discussion. If you run out of facts remain silent.

<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What difference does it make how they're educated or not?

And again this all boils down to never making everyone happy about the U.S.  If we're isolationist, people get pissed off, if we stick our nose in everyone's business, people get pissed off.<span id='postcolor'>

This difference is they may not have all the knowledge that others may have.  If a family teaches the kids at home, only the knowledge of th parents is being passed on.  Then the only way to find out what they don't know, is to go out and find it.  And that's a luxury that not everyone can have. Unfortunatley  

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Dec. 16 2002,02:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Our policies are good for us and our friends.  <span id='postcolor'>

I feel like a kid who has found a huge heap of candy. Where to start?

That your policies are good for me as a Swedish KFOR soldier and allied of the US was all that I could think of when the greatest danger to my life came from unexploded American bombs...

I am sure that you can convince the numerous Albanians who lost their families to American bombs. Woohoo for US help!

You backing out of the ICC agreement and the Kyoto agreement was soooo benificial for us. Yeeehaa, my children will be breathing the shit that you spew into the air. I am simply speechless from gratitude.

On the other hand, I think Osama might agree. Who knows if he would have ever became anything without US support back in the good ole' days in Afganistan, fighting the Soviets. On the other hand, it kind of rules out the "good for you" part, doesn't it?

That is the core of all these discussions. We don't care how you run your country. You have the right to have a culture of your own and organize your country like you wish. The problems arise when you start throwing bombs over the border without thinking of the consequences first (and dragging us along since we are your 'friends and allies'. Now, I'm not saying that your foregin policy and actions have always and in every case sucked, but the current administration is a disaster.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Dec. 16 2002,08:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That your policies are good for me as a Swedish KFOR soldier and allied of the US was all that I could think of when the greatest danger to my life came from unexploded American bombs...<span id='postcolor'>

You can't possibly blame us for when our equipment accidentally malfunctions.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am sure that you can convince the numerous Albanians who lost their families to American bombs. Woohoo for US help!<span id='postcolor'>

Those were accidents. You'd think someone with yoru experience would realize this.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You backing out of the ICC agreement and the Kyoto agreement was soooo benificial for us. Yeeehaa, my children will be breathing the shit that you spew into the air. I am simply speechless from gratitude.<span id='postcolor'>

I really don't know anything about the ICC agreement or the Kyoto agreement, so I'll just sleep tight tonight knowing that my president probably had a good reason to do what he did, I just don't know it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">On the other hand, I think Osama might agree. Who knows if he would have ever became anything without US support back in the good ole' days in Afganistan, fighting the Soviets. On the other hand, it kind of rules out the "good for you" part, doesn't it? <span id='postcolor'>

Not at the time it didn't.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Now, I'm not saying that your foregin policy and actions have always and in every case sucked, but the current administration is a disaster.<span id='postcolor'>

Is this an anti-U.S. or anti-Bush comment?

Look, as one of the most powerful nations in the world, the U.S. has a lot of responsibility. No matter what we do we're always going to piss people off on one hand and make people happy on the other. Just remember that no matter what the people who didn't vote for him tell you, our president knows this and is trying his best to do a good job. Let's look at reality here, he's not some kind of boogey man that enjoys bombing people or sending his troops to go off and die somewhere while he sits in a mansion and drinks oil for breakfast.

Anyway, it seems to me that a lot of the reasons you don't like the U.S. couldn't be helped. Unexploded American bombs cant be helped, neither can civilian casualties.

[Guest]

1--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Dec. 16 2002,041)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Dec. 16 2002,08:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That your policies are good for me as a Swedish KFOR soldier and allied of the US was all that I could think of when the greatest danger to my life came from unexploded American bombs...<span id='postcolor'>

You can't possibly blame us for when our equipment accidentally malfunctions.<span id='postcolor'>

Of course I can when you drop it where I am expected to walk!   And the question wasn't of blame assignement, but how good the US policies are for its friends and allies.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am sure that you can convince the numerous Albanians who lost their families to American bombs. Woohoo for US help!<span id='postcolor'>

Those were accidents.  You'd think someone with yoru experience would realize this.

<span id='postcolor'>

Say we have a hostage situation. A bank robber has taken 100 hostages. The police storms the place and in the action kills 50 hostages. Was it a good action? No.  That was exactly the case in Kosovo. NATO bombs killed far more Albanians then the Serbs did, and the Albanians were the people you were supposed to help, remember?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I really don't know anything about the ICC agreement or the Kyoto agreement, so I'll just sleep tight tonight knowing that my president probably had a good reason to do what he did, I just don't know it.

<span id='postcolor'>

Homer Simpson? Is that you? It is a very dangerous attitude to have, saying "what I don't understand must be good". Bush got into power largely by financing from the oil industry. The Kyoto agreement was on reducing the exhaust of gases created by burning fossile fuel. You do the math.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">On the other hand, I think Osama might agree. Who knows if he would have ever became anything without US support back in the good ole' days in Afganistan, fighting the Soviets. On the other hand, it kind of rules out the "good for you" part, doesn't it? <span id='postcolor'>

Not at the time it didn't.

<span id='postcolor'>

My point exactly. With this current policy you are digging another hole for yourself, just like you did that time. Shoot first, ask questions later does not work in every case. Sometimes you have to think first.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Now, I'm not saying that your foregin policy and actions have always and in every case sucked, but the current administration is a disaster.<span id='postcolor'>

Is this an anti-U.S. or anti-Bush comment?<span id='postcolor'>

Anti-Bush. What you usually call anti-US is just you being paranoid. We are discussing politics here.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Unexploded American bombs cant be helped, neither can civilian casualties.<span id='postcolor'>

Of course they can. Think twice before going to war.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Anyway, it seems to me that a lot of the reasons you don't like the U.S. couldn't be helped.  <span id='postcolor'>

Don't trivialize the issues. I like the US. I don't like the current president and his administration (with possibly the exception of Colin Powell). I disagree with most post WW2 US military actions, but again that is politics, it has very little to do with the country and the people.

My criticism is towards the policy, not the country. Now instead of trying to defend things I'm not attacking you might want to instead focus your debating on relevant arguments.

Let me get you started: Sweden produces and sells cluster bombs. These bombs were widely used by all sides in former Yugoslavia. How does that go together with the peace loving political message that Sweden likes to project?

[Tovarish 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Dec. 16 2002,00:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tovarish @ Dec. 16 2002,04:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What gives the US the right to set up/maintain a government for the Cuban people? You think this is right?!? It surprizes you that they took it down??<span id='postcolor'>

Well what's wrong with it? It's obvious that the American government and economy has worked wonderfully so far.<span id='postcolor'>

You are unbelievable you know that? Fact is, on average under Castro, life has improved for the Cuban people. Batista was a bloody dictator. So perhaps is Castro, but under Batista there was a huge gap between the rich and the poor. Under Castro the nations resources benefit everyone equaly, and everyone is guaranteed health care and education. No one is starving now. if you see nothing wrong with your "Champion of Democracy" the United States setting up dictatorships when it suits them by the likes of Batista and Pinochet...you are beyond argument. This is one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Cuba is being let be. As a matter of fact we're not even trading with them. <span id='postcolor'>

That also ranks highly with the list of ignorant things I've heard. The Bay of Pigs, The ongoing occupation of Guantanamo, the Embargo....you call that letting them be?!?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You mentioned before that the US softened up on China and Russia because "they were moving away from communism"....as wrong as that statement is, Cuba has also had reforms.<span id='postcolor'>

Well first off I dont' see that statement as wrong at all. It's obvious that Russia was moving away from communism, I have no idea how you could think otherwise as they've departed from that form of government. And I believe that, as China's economy changes it will become democratic. But that's just my personal opinion.

<span id='postcolor'>

They departed largely BECAUSE of the progress made through glasnost and perestroika! These were not symptoms, they were the cure! And yet your government refuses to do the same with Cuba.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well maybe you're right and maybe your wrong. Yes, Cuba has made some changes, but they are still communist.<span id='postcolor'>

Newsflash: So is China! Cuba has never had such a Stalinistic version of communism as China, and you have free trade with them.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It's probably just a matter of time before we forget the embargo and get along nicely.<span id='postcolor'>

With people like you voting for your government, who hardly seem to know what you're talking about but take every chance to say something in defense of your government without thinking, I'm not holding my breath. I only expect more injustice.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Of course I can when you drop it where I am expected to walk! <!--emo& And the question wasn't of blame assignement, but how good the US policies are for its friends and allies.<span id='postcolor'>

Well hey, at least you're overrunning enemy positions.

And maybe it was just me, but I thought you were blaming the U.S. for things it couldn't help. Probably just me.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Say we have a hostage situation. A bank robber has taken 100 hostages. The police storms the place and in the action kills 50 hostages. Was it a good action? No. That was exactly the case in Kosovo. NATO bombs killed far more Albanians then the Serbs did, and the Albanians were the people you were supposed to help, remember?<span id='postcolor'>

The U.S. has spend millions if not billions of dollars designing super accurate weapons that only hurt what they're aimed at. Yes, the equipment malfunctions, yes, the pilot might simply miss, but still, it's not like they bombed civilians on purpose. The U.S. puts a great deal of care in bombing around civilian areas.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Homer Simpson? Is that you? <span id='postcolor'>

D'oh! I mean, no!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It is a very dangerous attitude to have, saying "what I don't understand must be good". Bush got into power largely by financing from the oil industry. The Kyoto agreement was on reducing the exhaust of gases created by burning fossile fuel. You do the math.<span id='postcolor'>

Then again, there's someone else out there saying the exact opposite of what you just said.

That isn't math, it's algebra.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My point exactly. With this current policy you are digging another hole for yourself, just like you did that time. Shoot first, ask questions later does not work in every case. Sometimes you have to think first.<span id='postcolor'>

I agree, but how were we supposed to know that, even though we helped him in the 1980's, he'd go off on a tangent to us landing planes near him in the 1990's?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Of course they can. Think twice before going to war.<span id='postcolor'>

We do, if we didn't Iraq qould be a democracy right now.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let me get you started: Sweden produces and sells cluster bombs. These bombs were widely used by all sides in former Yugoslavia. How does that go together with the peace loving political message that Sweden likes to project?<span id='postcolor'>

Well, just because you love peace doesn't mean you won't defend yourself, or help your allies/customers defend themselves.

IMO if you love peace, you won't try to start any wars. That doesn't necessarilly mean you wont defend yourself, or your allies.

[Harnu 0]

ICC agreement and the Kyoto. Can you bring me up to speed on these anyone? I'm not all up on the world politics and agreements. (I'm only 15, and currently too occupied with getting a girlfriend than arguing with you guys )

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tovarish @ Dec. 16 2002,04:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I only expect more injustice.<span id='postcolor'>

You mean like when Fidel expropriated* all American businesses without compensation in 1960?  A few months before we cut diplomatic ties, too.

Don't even get me started on the missiles thing.

And the released prisoners Castro sent us, thanks a bunch.  Resulted in one of my favorite movies.  ("First you get the money...")  

If the Cubans are happy under Castro, more power to 'em.  I would hope we can agree that neither side in the continuing Cuba/U.S. debacle is blameless.

*Stole is such a harsh word.

Semper Fi

[Tovarish 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Dec. 16 2002,06:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tovarish @ Dec. 16 2002,04:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I only expect more injustice.<span id='postcolor'>

You mean like when Fidel expropriated* all American businesses without compensation in 1960? A few months before we cut diplomatic ties, too.

Don't even get me started on the missiles thing.

And the released prisoners Castro sent us, thanks a bunch. Resulted in one of my favorite movies. ("First you get the money...")

If the Cubans are happy under Castro, more power to 'em. I would hope we can agree that neither side in the continuing Cuba/U.S. debacle is blameless.

*Stole is such a harsh word.

Semper Fi<span id='postcolor'>

The US only stole Cuban freedom and soverenigty under Batista. What did you expect, the people to lie down and be good little citizens of your banana republic while you kept Batista in power as long as he sold you real estate at bargain prices? Fidel took back what was ours and had been sold off by nothing less than a traitor. Oh and on the missiles, as i mentioned before, where a counter to the ones you had stationed in Turkey, about the same distance to the USSR as the ones in Cuba had from the US. And no, many of us aren't happy with the way Castro has gone, but it is much better than Batista was, and the fact that he is still on power can be attributed to continued US hostility towards Cuba, which facilitates his uniting the majority of the Cuban population against "the enemy" under a cold war mindset.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Dec. 16 2002,05:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And maybe it was just me, but I thought you were blaming the U.S. for things it couldn't help.  Probably just me.

The U.S. has spend millions if not billions of dollars designing super accurate weapons that only hurt what they're aimed at.  Yes, the equipment malfunctions, yes, the pilot might simply miss, but still, it's not like they bombed civilians on purpose.  The U.S. puts a great deal of care in bombing around civilian areas.<span id='postcolor'>

The point is if there had been no war in the first place neither those bombs nor the civilian casulties would have been there.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I agree, but how were we supposed to know that?<span id='postcolor'>

Again, my point. Don't do things that will come to haunt you later. Don't shoot first and ask questions later.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Of course they can. Think twice before going to war.<span id='postcolor'>

We do, if we didn't Iraq qould be a democracy right now.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, just Iran under the Shah or Chile under Pinochet

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">IMO if you love peace, you won't try to start any wars. That doesn't necessarilly mean you wont defend yourself, or your allies.<span id='postcolor'>´

..or sell weapons to the highest bidder

Where does all this fear come from? Why do you constantly need to defend yourself? You are a strong country. Do you really think that Osama or Iraq really could hurt you? Come on! Why are you so afraid?

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The point is if there had been no war in the first place neither those bombs nor the civilian casulties would have been there.<span id='postcolor'>

And you have a solution to stop all the war in the world?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Again, my point. Don't do things that will come to haunt you later. Don't shoot first and ask questions later.<span id='postcolor'>

Again, my point.  We don't know whats going to haunt us in the future.  We can't look into the future and know that Osama Bin Laden is going to get pissed off at us for some wierd reason.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">..or sell weapons to the highest bidder  <span id='postcolor'>

How is that a relevant argument?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Where does all this fear come from? Why do you constantly need to defend yourself? You are a strong country. Do you really think that Osama or Iraq really could hurt you? Come on!  Why are you so afraid?<span id='postcolor'>

Why are we so afraid?  Were you living under a rock on September 11th?  The U.S. has a serious issue here.  Yes Osama or Iraq could really hurt us.  No, they're not going to storm our western front with so many troops, but they could very well (if they havent already) put terrorists in the U.S., and use them to attack us, like they did on Sept. 11th.  The U.S. has one of the mightiest militarys on the planet.  But that's useless against something like terrorism.  It's like telling the police to check the grammar in the library.  They can try, but it's not what they're made for.

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And you have a solution to stop all the war in the world?<span id='postcolor'>

Case dependant. And yes. Ruanda for example where 1 million people were slaughtered in a very short time could have been stoped (expert opinion) with only 5000 well equiped UN troops. Again it was not on the list of national interests so nobody really cared.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Again, my point. We don't know whats going to haunt us in the future. We can't look into the future and know that Osama Bin Laden is going to get pissed off at us for some wierd reason.<span id='postcolor'>

So the conclusion of this would be to throw bombs on what- or whoever that possibly will get an enemy to US. Are you serious this will work in the longterm ?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Were you living under a rock on September 11th? The U.S. has a serious issue here. Yes Osama or Iraq could really hurt us. No, they're not going to storm our western front with so many troops, but they could very well (if they havent already) put terrorists in the U.S., and use them to attack us, like they did on Sept. 11th. <span id='postcolor'>

I can understand that you feel hurt about 9/11 cause it was the first attack on USA on their own soil. But checked by numbers and historically compared it was a minor incident. More children die daily in 3rd world countries than people died in World trade center. To set this up for a reason to go into a war driven period is certainly not ok. Afghanistan was really on the hard line when it came to justification, but Iraq is not related to 9/11 at all. Also you might want to think about Mr Bush naming the "axis of evil" before 9/11. Europe currently does oppose the change in US policy. We know what it´s like to have own soil burnt in huge amount and we know that war in general can´t solve problems. It´s just like :

"You kill my kids, I will kill your kids" That is what you are talking about. An endless loop of terror. Both sides. I see any military air supported bombings as terror, so you do plenty of it in Iraq right now. If plain and carpet bombings start again it will be terror on civilians mostly. Same with bomblets that remain active for a long time and killed or seriously injured more civilians than anything else. I posted this ages ago, as it is my suspicion that he high failure rate of bomblets is more an option than a technical problem. You see ?

And one more thing FS. You call people immature but the only one that patriotically swollows his brest whenever the flag shows up is you, not others. I mean you have to accept that sentences like this

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well what's wrong with it? It's obvious that the American government and economy has worked wonderfully so far.<span id='postcolor'>

are immature. Checked the latest financial reports on US economy ? Checked the latest amnesty international report on US ? Checked the latest pollution report ?

Do so. You tend to follow your president like a bunny with closed eyes. Maybe you will find out what it is about when you go to your first real war and return in a plastic bag after you defended your freedom in a mumbojambo country. Vietnam experience didnt last that long i guess. Dominion in firepower, mancount, weapons and intelligence does not mean US soldiers don´t die. You may think so but you are not right. Do you know how many soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan till today ? You don´t know ? Why ? Cause it´s a military secret.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Dec. 16 2002,07:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Where does all this fear come from? Why do you constantly need to defend yourself? You are a strong country. Do you really think that Osama or Iraq really could hurt you? Come on!  Why are you so afraid?<span id='postcolor'>

Why are we so afraid?  Were you living under a rock on September 11th?  The U.S. has a serious issue here.  Yes Osama or Iraq could really hurt us.  <span id='postcolor'>

Balschoiw answered all the questions as I would, but here is something anyway.

Leading cause of deaths in the US:

Heart Disease: 710,760

Cancer: 553,091

Stroke: 167661

Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease: 122,009

Accidents: 97,900

Diabetes: 69,301

Pneumonia/Influenza: 65,313

Alzheimer's Disease: 49,558

Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 37,251

Septicemia: 31,224

The deaths of those in the WTC were of course tragic, but in absolute terms insignificant. They did make good TV of course and its always easy to be scared of the 'barbarians who are going to kill us all'. While I am sure part of that irrational fear is real, it is fueled by those in power. Joining against a common evil enemy makes you forget your other problems, right? I mean Bush's approval rating sky rocketed from under 50% to over 90% in one day. And what had he achieved? Failing to protect his people from terrorist acts. But who cares, we have the 'evil doers' now to blame.

710,760 people in the US die of heart diseases. Why don't we see a 'war on McDonalds'? It would save many more lifes.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No, they're not going to storm our western front with so many troops, but they could very well (if they havent already) put terrorists in the U.S., and use them to attack us, like they did on Sept. 11th. <span id='postcolor'>

Yes, where are all the terrorist acts? It's been over a year and a lot of threat warnings have come and gone, without anything happening.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The U.S. has one of the mightiest militarys on the planet. But that's useless against something like terrorism. It's like telling the police to check the grammar in the library. They can try, but it's not what they're made for.

<span id='postcolor'>

Exactly, so why go invading countries then? The terrorists can and will get caught through international policing. Since the terrorists are spread out through the world and not associated with any specific country, what's the point of running around invading other countries? As you said, its useless against somthing like terrorism.

[Oligo 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Dec. 16 2002,13:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Heart Disease: 710,760

Cancer: 553,091

Stroke: 167661

Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease: 122,009

Accidents: 97,900

Diabetes: 69,301

Pneumonia/Influenza: 65,313

Alzheimer's Disease: 49,558

Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 37,251

Septicemia: 31,224<span id='postcolor'>

We should be having:

War on Small Particle Clouds. Clouds of small particles are caused by e.g. heavy traffic in cities and smoking cigarettes. These are the leading cause of Lower Respiratory Disease, killing a whopping 122,009 people a year.

War on Transport. Cars and other forms of transport are the leading cause of accidents, reaping a nice toll of 97,900 lives a year.

War on Bad Genes. Bad genes are the partial cause of several ailments like cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, nephritis and Alzheimer's. It can be claimed that bad genes waste more than 1 million people in U.S. every year. If we invested the defence budget of U.S. to research on gene therapy and associated disciplines, we would be saving quite a number of lives each year.

This world is such a peachy place. Merry x-mas.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

I still insist - disband your bases and go home, and don't come back out anywhere unless the UN asks you to.

Bang, you have 98% of the hate defeated, no more excuses for terrorism. You will be able to live in peace, others will be able to live in peace.

I recommended this earlier, you said it would mean capitulation. It may seem like it, but it would be a great victory in fact. You would stop all the fanatical anti-US postures all over the world and people wouldn't get killed in wars on terror as the terror wouldn't exist anymore.

And putting the US under UN command (like the rest of the world has done) would even bring praise.

Right now I can't see the point of having US bases all over the place, other than "safeguarding" your pseudo-empire.

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Dec. 16 2002,13:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I still insist - disband your bases and go home, and don't come back out anywhere unless the UN asks you to.

Bang, you have 98% of the hate defeated, no more excuses for terrorism. You will be able to live in peace, others will be able to live in peace.

I recommended this earlier, you said it would mean capitulation. It may seem like it, but it would be a great victory in fact. You would stop all the fanatical anti-US postures all over the world and people wouldn't get killed in wars on terror as the terror wouldn't exist anymore.

And putting the US under UN command (like the rest of the world has done) would even bring praise.

Right now I can't see the point of having US bases all over the place, other than "safeguarding" your pseudo-empire.<span id='postcolor'>

So basically you are saying we should go home and then only come out when the rest of the world needs us again. What I am hearing is no one wants the US out there until they need us. Well you all can screw off then.

I assure you that we go home the world can handle its own problems without us because we ain't coming back out for YOU.

And if you think that the US withdrawing will defeat "the hate" and end terrorism you are way too naive. There is always another cause. Whether it be Israel or sand in their jockeys.

You think Osama just popped up after the Gulf War? He's been around in Afghanistan (where he happily received our help) and has fought a continuing terrorist action against the government of Saudi Arabia since before Afghanistan and before the US popped in.

[Longinius 1]

"And if you think that the US withdrawing will defeat "the hate" and end terrorism you are way too naive. There is always another cause. Whether it be Israel or sand in their jockeys. "

Nations are "liberated" in the name of freedom, democracy and the American way like they would be the only and best solutions of the world. Well, news flash, you cannot force solutions on people. They have to figure it out by themselves. Otherwise, you will appear to be an aggressor.

So, just stand down, go home and let people figure it out on their own.

And if you really want to make a change you should try aid and education, not force and brutality. Noone ever felt better or got smarter by being bombed to bits.

Y"ou think Osama just popped up after the Gulf War? He's been around in Afghanistan (where he happily received our help) and has fought a continuing terrorist action against the government of Saudi Arabia since before Afghanistan and before the US popped in. "

Yes, and America havent bothered with stopping him until he turned on them. So whats your point? If you are trying to say that America funds terrorists then you are a bit late. We allready know this.

[CosmicCastaway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Akira @ Dec. 16 2002,16:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And if you think that the US withdrawing will defeat "the hate" and end terrorism you are way too naive. There is always another cause. Whether it be Israel or sand in their jockeys.<span id='postcolor'>

Although you must admit that having a continued presence in a country who's populace may not particulary like the idea, is somewhat pushing your luck in the hatred stakes?

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So basically you are saying we should go home and then only come out when the rest of the world needs us again.<span id='postcolor'>

That is basically what any other european nation does. We go out on NATO decisions or UN missions, but go back to our countries when conflicts are done. We have embassadors to deal with abroad governments, but we certainly dont need a military presence in any region on this planet.

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Dec. 16 2002,16:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"And if you think that the US withdrawing will defeat "the hate" and end terrorism you are way too naive. There is always another cause. Whether it be Israel or sand in their jockeys. "

Nations are "liberated" in the name of freedom, democracy and the American way like they would be the only and best solutions of the world. Well, news flash, you cannot force solutions on people. They have to figure it out by themselves. Otherwise, you will appear to be an aggressor.

So, just stand down, go home and let people figure it out on their own.

And if you really want to make a change you should try aid and education, not force and brutality. Noone ever felt better or got smarter by being bombed to bits.

Y"ou think Osama just popped up after the Gulf War? He's been around in Afghanistan (where he happily received our help) and has fought a continuing terrorist action against the government of Saudi Arabia since before Afghanistan and before the US popped in. "

Yes, and America havent bothered with stopping him until he turned on them. So whats your point? If you are trying to say that America funds terrorists then you are a bit late. We allready know this.<span id='postcolor'>

What kind of naive double-talk is that? You can't force solutions on people and yet you are clearly willing to allow dictators (who's very definiton is "force") and terrorists to do just that. Just as long as the US doesn't do it right? So what....should the entire planet take on a laissez-faire attitude to the rest of the world? "Well ya can't force people after all." What kind of antipathy would THAT wonderful policy create? You think with the world hands-off aggressors wouldn't pop up? That is the most ridiculous piece of garbage I ever heard.

And the rest of the world didn't bother stopping him either. Gee that sounds like a product of your "letting people figure it out" idea. So what is your point? America funds terrorists? What about your wonderful country and its antipathy to what is going on around it?

All I hear is people saying "Go home go home" and then having the nerve to add "until we call on you again." You can't have it both ways and don't expect us to respond at your beck and call and whim, Your Highnesses.