andkilde
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 03:30 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by woodster
my last word on the subject ......... YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW !! 
Erm...
Even as a raving commie pinko leftist Canadian I find the above a little OTT.
While the US and the West in general have had some questionable foreign policy as regards Afghanistan in the past it hardly justifies armed
insurrection and attacks on civilians.
Bin Ladin is a deranged thug using his own twisted take on "in the name of god" to justify a warped POLITICAL agenda.
Blaming the US for inciting 9/11 is ridiculous.
Cheers, Ted
|
|
|
|
|
Jasper
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 03:43 PM |
|
|
quote:
Blaming the US for inciting 9/11 is ridiculous.
Cheers, Ted
I think you'll find an AWFUL lot of people will disagree with you there .......
People don't go to those lengths without some serious provocation - even if they are fanatical lunatics.
[Edited on 4/11/04 by Jasper]
[Edited on 4/11/04 by Jasper]
If you're not living life on the edge you're taking up too much room.
|
|
|
sgraber
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 04:39 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jasper
quote:
Blaming the US for inciting 9/11 is ridiculous.
Cheers, Ted
I think you'll find an AWFUL lot of people will disagree with you there .......
People to go to those lengths without some serious provocation - even if they are fanatical lunatics.
[Edited on 4/11/04 by Jasper]
Whoa. That's an eye opener. But I do agree with you. They are an AWFUL lot. And I'm not talking about quantity.
Listen, it's obvious that we will have to agree to disagree. I would certainly hope that our disagreement does not incite you to lay a pipe bomb
in my childrens school, because a rational human would not stoop to that level. The point being that typically speaking, radical views and ideologies
are not rational and do not represent the views of the majority in ANY society, including Muslim.
And as far as Terrorism is concerned. IMHO their agenda is flawed and the mechanisms that they use to foment change are flawed.
Alez, I was born and raised in Puerto Rico, Spent a year living in the UK, 6 months in Spain. I have also lived in Bulgaria for a period and I have
travelled extensively around the world. The place I prefer the most is the United States.
And as far as freedom is concerned, No man is free -in the sense that we are all bound to obey the laws of our land and uphold certain moral standards
that are dictated by society. But what we DO have is a Free Democracy. A fact proven resoundingly by the elections that just took place.
I am not a scholar and I don't portend to be one, but I understand the rights and the liberties afforded me under the Constitution of the United
States.
Steve Graber
http://www.grabercars.com/
"Quickness through lightness"
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 06:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sgraber
Listen, it's obvious that we will have to agree to disagree. I would certainly hope that our disagreement does not incite you to lay a pipe bomb
in my childrens school, because a rational human would not stoop to that level.
Similarly I would hope that any disagreement would not cause you to unilaterally decide to invade my country, bomb the crap out of my cities, hunt my
goverment down and leave your troops stationed to combat any resistance my countrymen might put up.. and then declare us "free" while you
ran the puppet government.
I'm not trying to wind anyone up.. obviously the situation is completely different.. right?
|
|
|
sgraber
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 07:03 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by blueshift
obviously the situation is completely different.. right?
That is so friggin ridiculous it doesn't even rate discussion.
I shake my head in amazement and will simply have to walk away from this conversation.
I hope we all are still friends even though we feel so differently (and strongly) about our perceptions of the world around us. Maybe someday we will
find common ground.
Until then I hope that we can still build cars together? 
Steve Graber
http://www.grabercars.com/
"Quickness through lightness"
|
|
|
andkilde
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 07:04 PM |
|
|
Well, yes there sort of is a difference.
Nobody wants their country invaded but if you let terrorists train, live, preach and operate out of your country you have to expect consequences.
In Afghanistan retaliation against the Taliban and Al Quaeda was both warranted and necessary. In fact they should have run the scum down completely
before they saw something shiney a couple of countries over and got distracted.
Not going to take on the Iraq arguement -- I still need convincing on the US' motivation & timing there.
But, to paraphrase Eddie Izzard, they are a bunch of Homicidal F*ckheads. Hussein, Bin Ladin et al.
You wouldn't accuse the UK of inciting the IRA's London bombing campaign of a few years back, would you?
Cheers, Ted
|
|
|
Jasper
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 07:56 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by andkilde
You wouldn't accuse the UK of inciting the IRA's London bombing campaign of a few years back, would you?
Cheers, Ted
Actually yes - I think most English people would acknowledge their past goverments mistakes - certainly far more than most American's would
acknowledge their goverments part in the huge amount of resentment felt against their country. And I certainly wouldn't want to dwell on the
huge sums of money that used to be donated by Irish Americans to help 'the cause'.
And if the only valid reason for invading Irag was to remove the Al Qaeda training camps then why didn't they do what they've already done
in so many other countries, including Libia - just use 'surgical (ha-ha) strikes against them and leave the rest of the population alone? - talk
about using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. Yes - Hussein was/is a totally evil bastard - but as I've already said - why does that give us the
right to invade his country?
If Bush put just 10% of the energy and investment into curing the Israel/Palestine problem that he put into the Iraq war, then the US and the rest of
the world would be a much safer place than it is now.
[Edited on 4/11/04 by Jasper]
If you're not living life on the edge you're taking up too much room.
|
|
|
Brooky
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
MMM the ireland thing used in the same context. I dont think the british goverment trained and encouraged the IRA to fiight invaders before we
invaded?
quote:
And as far as Terrorism is concerned. IMHO their agenda is flawed and the mechanisms that they use to foment change are flawed
so what is sound policy ? to mass an army against the mandates of the united nation, occupy the country illegally and control the
"democratic" government ?
I bet the Iraqi's are so glad they are out of the control of the tyranical rule that killed anybody who opposed
them...................................................................OH hang on a minute.
[Edited on 4/11/04 by Brooky]
|
|
|
Noodle
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 10:41 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by andkilde
You wouldn't accuse the UK of inciting the IRA's London bombing campaign of a few years back, would you?
Cheers, Ted
Our fault. We've treated the Irish like poop for hundreds of years. Oliver Cromwell used to practise genocide on them.
It's no excuse for the IRA, and I think that the British government has been trying to rid itself of Northern Ireland to be self governing for
decades, so the IRA put back the cause some. 'Twas only when they were seriously militarily incapacitated that they sat down and everyone could
try and be civil (ish) again.
But yup, the British (well, English I suppose) were historical gits to the Irish.
Cheers,
Neil.
Your sort make me sick
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 10:51 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brooky
so what is sound policy ? to mass an army against the mandates of the united nation, occupy the country illegally and control the
"democratic" government ?
the UN were wobblers, in danger of seriously undermining themselves, by making threats and not following them up. If the 'occupation' was
illegal, it was only due to these wobblers. As for controlling the democratic government, it isnt fully democratic, it is an 'appointed interim
administration', as a halfway house to fully elections and full democracy. And it is not controlled, it is directed. Guided maybe, but
technically free to do as it wills. the only reason that there are 'occupying forces' still in the country is due to these 'freedom
fighters' who cant accept a freely elected democratic government. they are the war mongers, not us.
And regarding other posts about what is the correct form of government/regime, you will find that dictatorships and communist states, and countries
with religous or military rulers, always have worse human rights abuses, worse freedom of speech, worse quality of life etc. And all the clever cocks
will bring up Bush's religous conservative policies, and the alleged abuse of human rights at guantanamo and elsewhere, but at the end of the
day, this isnt the same as the more extreme examples you will find around the world.
ps and noodles is right about the irish situation, what with the potato blight etc. I believe that the americans have blood on the history pages too
with regards to native american indians and polio (was it polio?). But no one is responsible for the actions of their ancestors. Do people still blame
Germans for the world wars?
[Edited on 4/11/04 by JoelP]
|
|
|
splitrivet
|
| posted on 4/11/04 at 10:58 PM |
|
|
Jasper,brooky and blueshift you have taken the words right out of my mouth.
The saddest thing of it all is that innocent people are getting killed all thru dogma and ignorance, the thing most Americans (or thier government
anyway) cant seem to comprehend is that to an iraqi a palestinian an afgan a dead son/daughter/mother/father is still grieved over is still loved and
missed as would an american
One attack on America has bought a thousand times more grief to more families throughout the world than 9/11 ever did.
90% of Americans in most states dont even know whats happening in the county next but one to thiers let alone on the other side of the world, perhaps
if they did American politics wouldnt be the farce that it is.Perhaps its no surprise that it was in these states that Bush got most of his
support.
To the American government both now and in the past war and killing is OK as long as its a long way from them, and they cant still buy cheap gas and
hamburgers
Youve got to see where this has come from, its a bitter irony that the last Nazi's live in Israel (and 90% of thier goverments ministers by the
way are ex terrorists)and would have been long gone if it wasnt for the support of the good old USA , and that only way young intelligent Palestinians
feel that they can make thier point is by strapping a load of explosives to themselves and blowing themselves and some other poor kids up.
As for Bush winning, god help us all.
Gets off soapbox and goes and gets pi$$ed.
Cheers,
Bob
[Edited on 4/11/04 by splitrivet]
I used to be a Werewolf but I'm alright nowwoooooooooooooo
|
|
|
TheGecko
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 12:09 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sgraber
quote:
obviously the situation is completely different.. right?
That is so friggin ridiculous it doesn't even rate discussion.
I shake my head in amazement and will simply have to walk away from this conversation.
Steve,
I wasn't going to involve myself in this but.....
The problem is, to a lot of the rest of the world, the situation blueshift posits looks exactly like that. There are no WMD's, there is no
connection between Saddam and bin Laden, there is no evidence that Iraq supported any of the 9/11 terrorists. Bush and Rumsfeld et al have been
quietly admitting this for some time, despite having spent months trumpeting to the US populace about them as justifications for an invasion.
Unfortunately, once you take away all of the false reasons, all that's left is the simple one. Bush wanted Hussein gone. Now don't get
me wrong, I think Saddam Hussein was one of the most evil despotic leaders the present world had BUT that doesn't give the US or anyone
else the right to pre-emptively invade and depose him. The fact that the US did invade makes us in the rest of the world justifiably concerned about
what will happen if GWB decides he doesn't like us next. And don't say it can't or won't happen - it can and (unfortunately)
probably will. And if the US is going to play policeman for the whole world could they at least choose a president who had even travelled outside the
US before he was elected! And one who can string enough words together to suggest he has any idea what he's doing.
If I say that my biggest concern in world politics right now is a nation of religious fundamentalists who have amassed the worlds largest stock of
WMD's and have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to invade and attack other countries and to covertly support terrorists and other
oppressive regimes, most American's would assume I'm talking about Iraq or Iran or Libya or somesuch. No - I'm talking about the
USA!
Guys, seriously: get yourselves out of Israel and the rest of the Middle East. Get rid of all of your big, stupid, gas guzzling SUV's so that
you don't need to sell your nations soul to the Saudis for oil. Stop poking your noses into the politics of other countries. Understand that
might DOESN'T make right and that the USA is not the centre of the universe.
Just re-read all of the above and it looks very harsh but I'm going to leave it stand.
quote:
I hope we all are still friends even though we feel so differently (and strongly) about our perceptions of the world around us. Maybe someday
we will find common ground.
Until then I hope that we can still build cars together?
Absolutely.
Peace everyone.
Dominic
Brisbane, Australia
|
|
|
pbura
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 06:22 AM |
|
|
It was interesting that in his concession speech, John Kerry urged Bush to stay the course in Iraq. This indicated to me that not much would be
different in Iraq were he to be elected.
I'm disappointed that the Iraq invasion did not uncover stockpiles of WMDs, but instead "only" about a half million tons of
conventional weapons. Reports that more advanced weapons were moved to Syria prior to the invasion are plausible, IMO, because of Saddam's use
of portable weaponry and laboratories and the long period of time that elapsed prior to the invasion.
Whether Osama was linked to Saddam is immaterial to me. What matters is that Saddam was not complying with the terms reached at the end of the first
Gulf War, concerning weapons inspections. Saddam challenged the US to this war, if anyone can remember, with his defiance of the treaty.
This election was mostly about liberal versus conservative values. Kerry was really unable to declare a platform, because his party is comprised of a
mishmash of intellectual elites (i.e., Marxists) and various disaffected parties who are looking for favors from government. Making a strong stand in
any area would have alienated large sections of his constituency, so he didn't. The only thing they all agreed to was that government needed to
have more, spend more, and do more. This is anathema to most working Americans, who mainly want the government to stay the hell of our backs and to
stick to its responsibilities according to our Constitution. We have had enough social engineering over the past forty years to last us a while,
thank you.
I suppose it is possible that Bush is the cynical, manipulative pawn of mega-corporations that Jasper, et al, make him out to be. No offense taken,
guys, because I've donned the tinfoil hat now and again myself. I have chosen to take the man at face value, and I hope that his
accomplishments will show him to have been the real deal.
Of course, his detractors will never be satisfied. If a tyrant who controls his people through hatred of the West goes down and is replaced with a
more congenial government, we are deemed to have "bought it". And maybe we did, with our money and with our blood. If so, is that so
bad?
Pete
Pete
|
|
|
pbura
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 07:02 AM |
|
|
Re: Israel
Almost forgot to mention, the "Palestinian" Arabs already have a state. It's called JORDAN.
A little history lesson
Also, in 2000, Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat the frigging moon and it was not enough. The panty-wearing dipsh*t wanted the whole enchilada!
Read about it here
I have great sympathy for the Palestinian Arabs. Their leaders have screwed them royally.
Pete
Pete
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 07:26 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sgraber
Alez, I was born and raised in Puerto Rico, Spent a year living in the UK, 6 months in Spain. I have also lived in Bulgaria for a period and I have
travelled extensively around the world. The place I prefer the most is the United States.
I got a very wrong impression then, Steve. The reason I asked is because I've read that very same post (freedom and that) many times before and
I find it very significant that only US people seem to have that opinion.
BTW, I use US people when I mean people from the US, and Americans when I mean people from anywhere in America. But it doesn't surprise me that
a lot of people do otherwise, for different reasons which sometimes are clear to me. America is not the US.. yet (we are working on it though).
Cheers,
Alex
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 10:15 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by pbura
I'm disappointed that the Iraq invasion did not uncover stockpiles of WMDs, but instead "only" about a half million tons of
conventional weapons. Reports that more advanced weapons were moved to Syria prior to the invasion are plausible, IMO, because of Saddam's use
of portable weaponry and laboratories and the long period of time that elapsed prior to the invasion.
Pete
Unless saddam moved those weapons across the desert on his own, lots of people in the iraqui military would know where they went. This would have come
out in 'questioning' or people would have come for a reward with the info.
America has more than 1,000s of tons of weapons. It has a shyte load of them that could knock the dust of this world into a different orbit
why? for protection against russia. And so russia had / has a shyte load too.
So, why cant Iraq follow this philosophy? A few 100,000's of conventional weapons is nothing compared to what America has as a friendly peace
keeping world policeman.
thats a pretty hefty night stick.
atb
steve
|
|
|
woodster
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 10:45 AM |
|
|
jasper , brooky well said .............. like i said ..... YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW ......... and for all the USA's strength you still can't
catch or kill a man with just a rifle living in a cave .
|
|
|
pbura
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 12:45 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stephen_gusterson
Unless saddam moved those weapons across the desert on his own, lots of people in the iraqui military would know where they went. This would have come
out in 'questioning' or people would have come for a reward with the info.
America has more than 1,000s of tons of weapons. It has a shyte load of them that could knock the dust of this world into a different orbit
why? for protection against russia. And so russia had / has a shyte load too.
So, why cant Iraq follow this philosophy? A few 100,000's of conventional weapons is nothing compared to what America has as a friendly peace
keeping world policeman.
thats a pretty hefty night stick.
atb
steve
Before WWII, the US had an army about the size of Canada's, about 20,000 regulars, and I wouldn't mind seeing us go back to that some
day.
"World policeman" is a rather inaccurate title for what grew out of doing the heavy lifting for NATO. The US military was assembled for
legitimate defense needs during the Cold War, and it that sense it's a vestige. Most Americans (which is what citizens of the US call
themselves because it's fairly easy to say, catchy, and doesn't REALLY cause any confusion or insult anybody) are not in support of
military adventuring, and are watching closely to see that its elected officials are acting responsibly. Americans are fairly evenly divided on Iraq
at this point.
To equate the US with Iraq is ridiculous. We did not build our armed forces for purposes of annexing Canada, nor have we gassed uncooperative
segments of our population. Who ever threatened Saddam?
I mentioned the possibility of Iraq's most serious WMDs being in Syria in passing. It would be delicious if they were in fact discovered to be
there. We're not talking about huge volumes, btw. And Arabs CAN keep secrets. It's part of their tribalism. Witness OBL. Giving him
up would be like committing suicide; promises of money are meaningless.
And who really knows what facts are available at the top levels of government?
An interesting article
Pete
Pete
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 03:28 PM |
|
|
Pete
I know this is going back a bit, but didnt the USA 'annexe' California, new mexico, etc, from the spanish / mexicans?
You can shoot me down if my facts arent correct. (which they may not be!)
If you go back a 100 years, the brits had to reduce the size of their navy, and the USA increase theirs to keep equality.
I think most brits would be able to see the 'days of empire' as us sticking ourselves where we shouldnt be.
It will be intersting to see what happens to the USA view in 100 years time.
I saw a documentary on discovery a year or so ago. It told of how the USA gained control in the pacific from the spanish. Supposedly an american ship
was bombed in the philipines. America reacted by invading the area and whapping the spanish.
It was subsequently suspected that it was an accident in the magazine that caused the ship to blow, and that the spanish were not considering an
attack.
possibly familiar?
We will never know if Iraq would have been a problem if left alone. Im kinda undecided cum supportive. Im glad its not my decision. Then, we dont know
if attacking Iraq is going to force the situation a lot more. Ther emay be people out for revenge now that want to get hold of a nuke even more than
they did before. Perhaps a bargain basement ex cold war ruskie bomb. I bet Osama has money to buy one....
atb
steve
ps
life insie falluja
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3986085.stm
|
|
|
pbura
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 06:28 PM |
|
|
Very, very good points, Steve, about two episodes in US history that are less than laudable. The Mexican-American War was based purely on greed. No
argument there.
The Spanish-American conflict was a bit more altruistic, in that the American public was sympathetic with Cuban revolutionaries, but beyond that had
no axe to grind and little to gain from fighting the Spanish over it.
I would categorize the first event as shady, and the second as misguided. I'll also throw the treatment of native Americans into the shady
category.
We've all had our moments, haven't we? Reflecting on the history of nations, transitions are almost always messy.
While I'm in support of reprisals against Saddam, I agree that this is an awkward stage in light of the power vacuum that exists in Iraq now,
but to turn heel on Iraq now would be cruel, IMO. I'm hoping that some Iraqi patriots who are willing to play ball in the modern world step
forward, and soon. The hopeful thing about Iraq, as compared to Afghanistan, is that they have a good source of national income that can be used to
finance an orderly society. Karzai in Afghanistan seems a very good man, but he has a long row to hoe.
Interesting discussion. Incidentally, I think the truth about these matters no doubt lies somewhere between the extremes of argument.
Pete
Pete
|
|
|
turbo time
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 08:41 PM |
|
|
I have just heard some bad news for us today:
NOTICE OF REVOCATION OF INDEPENDENCE
To the citizens of the United States of America, In the light of your failure to be able to select a suitable President of the USA and thus to
govern yourselves in a fair manner (fair to the rest of us that is), we
hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective
today.
Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties
over all states, commonwealths and other territories. Except Utah, which
she does not fancy. Your new prime minister (The Right Honourable Tony
Blair, MP, for the 97.85% of you who have until now been unaware that
there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a minister for America
without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be
disbanded. A questionnaire will be circulated next year to determine
whether any of you noticed.
To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following
Rules are introduced with immediate effect:
1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary.
Then look up "aluminium". Check the pronunciation guide. You will be
amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it. Generally, you
should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up "vocabulary".
Using the same twenty seven words interspersed with filler noises such as
"like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of
communication. Look up "interspersed".
2. There is no such thing as "US English". We will let Microsoft know on
your behalf.
3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents.It
really isn't that hard.
4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the
good guys.
5. You should relearn your original national anthem, "God Save The
Queen",but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you
to get confused and give up half way through.
6. You should stop playing American "football". There is only one kind of
football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good
game. The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your
borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football.
You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play
proper football. Initially, it would be best if you played with the
girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time,
be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football", but
does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing
full Kevlar body armour like nancies). We are hoping to get together at
least a US rugby sevens side by 2008.
7. You should declare war on Quebec and France, using nuclear weapons if
they give you any merde. The 97.85% of you who were not aware that
there is a world outside your borders should count yourselves lucky.
The Russians have never been the bad guys.
8. July 4th is no longer a public holiday. November 2nd will be a new
national holiday, but only in England. It will be called "Indecision
Day".
9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and it is for your
own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we
mean.
10. Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy.
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 5/11/04 at 10:14 PM |
|
|
Excellent discussion and sharing of views. I decided to read and learn rather than display my lack of knowledge on many of the issues raised here. I
have been reading everyones posts with interest and taken a few things on board.
Overall I would concur with the UK feelings that have been put forward here. However it has been very worhtwhile hearing the views of those in the
US.
I'm still of the opinion that the reasons we (US & UK) are at war in the middle east are not the ones our leaders would have us believe. I
also still feel that GWB has a lot to answer for as does TB, but I have come to appreciate that it probably would not have been very different with
anyone else in the hot seats.
Finally, as posted several times already, I hope we can all still build cars and share views and experiences on LCB. Afterall this is probably the
most international enviromnment most of us regularly experience.
Nick205
|
|
|
Jasper
|
| posted on 6/11/04 at 10:22 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by turbo time
I have just heard some bad news for us today:
NOTICE OF REVOCATION OF INDEPENDENCE
.......
hahhahhahhahha - really made me laugh
Quite right too.
Ok - I'm bored of all this now - it was a good discussion though, and good to get some 'middle America' views. Lets get back to cars
.......
If you're not living life on the edge you're taking up too much room.
|
|
|
