France, Germany present alternative to war - Page 5

Arrian · February 10, 2003, 18:44

I love that Spiffor, a guy who has told me elsewhere that anti-americanism was central to his personal development, is complaining about Lancer (who I'm 99% sure is just ****in' around. Though he would help the rest of us 'mericans out by cuttin' it out).

As for this "plan" by France and Germany... Fine by me. UN occupation. Go right ahead - be my guest! I'm thinking, however, that a snowball has a better chance of surviving a day in hell than this plan has of happening. Like Saddam would consent to it!

-Arrian

Ned · February 10, 2003, 18:51

On the issue of supporting dictators, one could argue that we supported to Chinese dictators Mao and Chaing Kai-shek against a democratically elected government of Japan. The problem, of course, was that Japan was the aggressor in China even though it's government was democratically elected.

It is also true that we were supporting Stalin, who was hardly democratically elected, against Hitler, who was. But again, Hitler was the aggressor.

DanS · February 10, 2003, 18:53

Ive seen this dispute comming for some years now, the French and Germans have been pushing for a credible alternative to American power, they feel they have started to turn the tide, with the recent strength of the Euro, and the soon to be enlarged union, however, what they may have started to acheive Economically, they fall woefully behind with Military, and hence the overtures towards Russia.

God, what a ridiculous way forward. We've spent a whole lot of money and time just to see France and Germany try to create a credible alternative to our power?

Lancer · February 10, 2003, 18:57

Fox news just reported that France/Germany have a plan to deploy UN peacekeepers to Iraq to PROTECT IRAQ from the US.

I **** you not.

Ned · February 10, 2003, 18:58

As to the French/German alternative plan, of course Saddam well accept it. He will simply confine the blue-helmeted troops to quarters. There's no way he said he will allow the U.N. to take effective of control of his country.

Besides, the French want to lead this one. You can expect another Sebrencia. Saddam will begin massacring the Kurds and Shi'ites. The French will do nothing to stop Saddam and will certain not call on American assistance.

France is worse than a joke.

The Viceroy · February 10, 2003, 19:00

Dans, I agree .. its pathetic, if only they would look at potentially uniting all free nations oneday, rather than being the dominant player.

The persuit of Union within some quaters of Europe, is not about providing a better Europe for its people, but challenging the US (perceived) dominance

Lancer · February 10, 2003, 19:05

Well what's the deal w/ France/Germany vs NATO in the deployment of equipment that could stop Iraqi scuds?

What happens if an Iraqi scud hits Turkey because of France/Germany?

The Viceroy · February 10, 2003, 19:08

The kind of EU I want, was best represented by the statement made by several prominant European nations the other week, Spain, Italy, Poland, UK and several others all strongly support the US position.

Now thats an EU which I can be proud to be part of.

Sikander · February 10, 2003, 19:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
If you scare Kim, he's going to launch all his sh1t... mutually assured destruction... HELLO!!!??

But pro-war people don't bother to think ahead anyways

Oh boy a bald assertion and an insult that fits you better than those you describe.

Don't assume that others share your long list of defects.

Sikander · February 10, 2003, 20:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava

You're probably a Redwings fan, I'm surprised you can think rationally

jk Detroit Dave...

Seriously, this is probably one of the more intelligent posts in this thread.

Don't take it bad Dave, he doesn't know he's actually insulting you.

Spiffor · February 10, 2003, 20:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
I love that Spiffor, a guy who has told me elsewhere that anti-americanism was central to his personal development, is complaining about Lancer (who I'm 99% sure is just ****in' around)

I said my dislike for America was essential in the construction of my identity, and I separated America from Americans. I have no problems if Lancer hates France, because France mostly sucks anyways. I have a problem if Lancer hates the French. Sorry to bring this uninteresting topic again, but I wanted to clarify.

Spiffor · February 10, 2003, 20:36

On the French - German refusal to support Turkey in case of attack, I find it's truly outrageous. While all the barking about an agression on Iraq can be justified IMO, the refusal to defend an ally is purely a refusal to honor our treaties.
As per NATO's or Atlantic Alliance's treaty, we have to defend our allies if they are uinder attack. I wonder who's the cretin who decided not to back our defensive alliance.

Spiffor · February 10, 2003, 20:45

BTW, on topic, I've just read this :

Quote:

France suggests doubling or trebling the number of weapons inspectors - possibly to 300 - and giving them more time - months longer if necessary.

But reports of a Franco-German proposal to deploy thousands of UN peacekeepers were denied on Monday in Paris and Berlin.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2746459.stm

I guess this thread has now outlived its usefulness, and should be turned into an "Axis of Weasel" bashing

Sikander · February 10, 2003, 21:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Demerzel
It's amazing how the US sees things in black and white & good and evil, and then feels it has the right to go on a moral crusade.

What happened to those morals, when you supported dictators all over the world? How come you didn't remove them and put a democratic regime in instead when you supported Saddam back in the '80s when Iraq fought Iran? Oh, things weren't so black & white then?

So much hypocritical bs, you either are the good guys and you fight evil or you don't, don't play the crusader card and label us as needing saving by the US when you're quite prepared to ignore dictators and their abuse of power when it suits you.

How old were you when we won the Cold War after 50 years and millions of lives (thankfully the vast majority not ours)? Of course your propoganda instruction thoughtfully left out the realities and pressures of that conflict, without which none of this Iraq - Iran - North Korea business would have ever happened. The U.S. stood steady throughout the Cold War, and we are trying to tidy up the last few ugly messes that it left behind.

Your tirade reminds me of something a teenager might say to his father, lambasting his attempts to live up to some sort of standard because he hasn't always managed to do so. But it isn't the standard that is faulty, it is the expectation by the child that anyone could ever live up to that standard every day in every way. What he is angry about is that he is finally seeing his hero / father as just a man who did the best he could, but was not perfect. The implications for his own life, to this point mostly a theoretical enterprise, are unwelcome as doubt creeps into his idealized future.

At the end of the day, no one person is perfect and neither is any one nation. This is only a negation of the grossest excesses of idealization and hero worship, not nearly to the point many here seem to believe, that the concept that a certain amount of pride in one's nation is somehow abhorrant. In any event it is for each individual to decide what they feel proud about, if anything. I am generally proud of my country's efforts during the Cold War, though certainly not every subchapter of that massive generations long undertaking.

You seem to think that anyone who has sinned is somehow incapable of anything but hypocrisy or more sin, and seem to be happy with the paralysis that that sort of thinking brings. In fact the anti-war side seems to love these little logical roads to nowhere. Perhaps they are almost as emotionally satisfying as having an argument that can stand on its own, though the disingenuineness has to gnaw at the consiences of the more thoughtful. Anyway, no one, and certainly no state can live up to your ideals. But that does not mean that every action taken necessarily conforms to your paranoid expectations that every claim to serve the better good is a cynical ploy to do the opposite.

Ted Striker · February 10, 2003, 23:25

**** both France and Germany.

We played it their way for the past 500 years and look what the **** happened. Get together and kill each other every 50 years for fun and kicks. They had their chance, now they need to shut the **** up and take their place among the has beens and shameful wrongdoers.

The only reason those fools have been in check over the past 50 years is because the US was there to baby sit them.

The only way to get out of this mess is to kill Saddam. Either get on board or get the **** out of the way.

Oerdin · February 11, 2003, 15:07

It's official. The BBC has reported that Iraq has rejected the Franco-German counter proposal.

Quote:

Iraq itself has given an initial negative reaction to the appeal for strengthened inspections of its weapons programmes as an alternative to military action.

Because the French and Germans have sewed the seeds of desention there was no united front against Iraq. Now Saddam thinks he can continue playing the same old game and nothing will happen to him.

In other news the government of Belgium is still refusing to live up to its treaty requirements. Germany however has indicated they are coming around and France looks to be weakening its stance.