Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
I think there are many better things our leaders could be doing besides banning the description "French" from food items served in the Congressional mess hall. How 'bout figuring out how to rev up the economy?
I will go on and order "French" fries and "French" toast whenever I find the need for fast food fat.
*No disrespect to the poster named Redneck, as I am sure he does not run down cyclists in his rusting Chevy C 1500 of '70s or '80s vintage.
this is from www.frogweenies.com, support our troops, put U.S. flag stickers on your Mavic and Corima wheels:
France's disgraceful behavior at the UN has been laughable. France is jealous of US world influence and is attempting to block, veto and prevent the US-lead military action in Iraq. France's actions amount to an enemy and not an ally. France’s anti-American rhetoric and disgusting, ill-mannered behavior on the World’s stage should be condemned in the strongest terms possible.
Each day France is permitted to continue their “pro-Saddam” charade, American citizens, the American economy and American soldiers are put at tremendous risk. Make no mistake about it; the performance you’ve been watching from France has nothing to do with hating war. It has everything to do with hating Americans. Show your support for the American troops overseas and your fellow citizens here at home by participating in the Official French Boycott.
I understand that this is a concept difficult for you to grasp but Germany, France and Great Britain are democracies.
The governent is determined by the will of the people. The people that voted the governments in to office in those three countries do not want to go to war. So it would not really be truly democratic if the governments in those countries chose to go to war against the will of the people. It would be like the US governent going to war against the will of it's people. I am sure you have been "Pro" every war the US has fought but what would you think if 70% of the US population was opposed to a war and the government went anyway?
It is also ironic that you as an American complain that another democracy does not agree with you, a country founded as a democracy does not like other democratic countries when they disagree with them.......thats great........
The worst part of all this... American soliders are putting their lives on the line for some very questionable motivations.
As far as lying and cheating go, I hardly think that the US has a foot to stand on if that is going to be your argument. Lets face it, if the US has been unable to present evidence to the security counsel and all the coutries other than the US, including Britain are still trying to resolve this another way I dont think we can count on the US having been entirely truthful about its motivations for wanting to go in to Iraq.......
Fox is so much pro GWB that they BS the translations...I guess I understand french much better than any journalist at Fox.
anyway, here it is:
1. Chirac is not against war. Nor is he for Saddam. He (as well as French people, Russians, Germans etc...) want Saddam out, but they are all against a resolution whose only consequence is war.
2. the only thing that Europe (I count Britain with Europe as the only english for war is Blair..all the others are against...) wants is to get rid of Saddam in a peaceful way without going to war. As long as there is a way to achieve this, why do you want to put in jeopardy the lives of american soldiers, civilians in iraq (for info civilians in iraq are as innocent as all the people that were in the WTC on 9/11...)
3. if there is no other alternative, then the UN will go to war (that was in the talk of Chirac...) but in the meantime, SH is destroying weapons, so things are working...better have him destroy weapons under a war threat than really going to war...remember Gary...YOU are not going, YOU will still be riding your bike when US soldiers will be fightng...it's pretty easy for you to say "let's go to war" as you are not going...
4. ultimately, going to war without the agreement of the UN will lead to one thing: more planes crashing in towers, lead by fanatics who will hate the US even more. A deepening of the gap between Europe and the US. the next time a conflict will arise, everyone will say "screw the UN" we'll do it alone, this will lead to a WWIII and then, you will give a rat's ass about stupid triathlons etc...when the planet is about to explode because some thought the only solution was war....
Ameican alienation is a bad thing. Once the EU gets its act together they will offer some serious competition to America's capitalist machine. Only a matter of time before the UK joins the team.
Its really funny when the US imposed steel tariffs to protect the US steel industry they imposed them on Britain. The UK response was if you dont relax the tarrifs we will put tariffs on Florida OJ, PA Cotton T-shirt and Harleys made in WI. Three swing states. A commentator noted about this that it should teach Bush not to bring a knife to a gun fight..................apparently the less was not learnt.
Its so funny that Powell can not convince one country on the security counsel that Iraq poses and threat and all of the countries he is trying to persuade are a damn site closer to Iraq than the US..........
I do believe one thing is very clear though. None of the "progress" or new "compliance" that the world is witnessing by Iraq and Saddam "sharing" information and destroying some of their irrelevent weapons would ever have come to pass if it were not for the immense pressure currently being exerted by the US. So while the current diplomacy may be working, it is only working because of the threat of war that the advocates of diplomacy are trying to avoid.
300,000 troops at his border, essetially a gun to his head, he throws out a few crums for the world to see, and the world declares 'See, It's working!'
Before 9/11, folks would have thought we would be crazy to invade Afganistan. After, how many said "What did we know and why didn't our government do something to prevent this tragedy?" We have much more now on SH than we had before 9/11 on Al Queda, and folks are still saying where's the threat?
France's only concern is to show its power so that it can set itself up as a real power in the EU. They are using their veto to hold the US down and put their country in a favorable/powerful light ... to show other EU countries that France is a powerhouse ... to be the new EU leader. Im sure the french have no problems ousting Saddam or going to war but they want to be the ones to make the decision. See, years ago the French played a role in international events. They were part of the big picture. They tried to stop us from bombing Lybia as well.
Its not about oil, its not about Saddam, its not about peace ...
Its all about politics.