Topic awaiting preservation: We "old europeans"... (Page 1 of 2)

Sorry to reharsh an used topic... But now I am very upset and I need explanations.

A few days ago, France, Germany and Belgium raised an objection to USA. After that, a large number of american politics critisized this point of view. We, the "old Europe", became the target of many american organisations. Well, I have seen politics being near from insulting us. Or for example a newspaper (sorry I do not remember the title) was titling "THEY HAVE FORGOTTEN" (speaking of frenches and the WWII). And, even worst ! Americains were called to recall that in 1966 exactly Charles de Gaulle (our president at this time) left the NATO !

Please, tell me that this is not normal. WHY should we follow everytime the USA point of view ? Are we some new type of dog or what ? Because a few countrys in the NATO do not accept a point of view we deserve a discrimination ? As far as I know, the NATO was created in order to hear everyone's point of view. So what is the problem when we are giving ours ? And, beyond this problem, is it a reason to recall about WWII or what Charles de Gaulle did ? Well your medias are happy to say that we left the NATO in 1966... But obviously they do not want to evoke what Charles de Gaulle did with Kennedy : he supported him a lot during the Cuba crisis. Oh then it's easy, we use history but only we it serves us...

So, excuse me, but as I am an "old european" I do not understand your motives and why such reactions appear... So please explain me your point of view and if you agree or not with that.

Thanks

Ultimately all things are known because you want to believe you know. -Zensunni koan

probably the same reason that you are saying "I do not understand your motives", passion and rushing to say something nullifies the human's abilities to communicate clearly. Also, people have agendas, suprise! Everyone has personal a perspective that influences their views. It was not personal from all Americans to all old Europeans, I guarantee that =)

quote:

---

Are we some new type of dog or what?

---

Not in my opinion. Good question though. I surely hope noone in power thinks that way or even close to it.

Jason

Moon Shadow: Personally I don't have a problem with people proposing a different solution to the problem, however, I am concerned:

1. That they haven't shared this plan with their allies.

2. That they also seem to be restricting their support for Turkey a fellow NATO member.

and I see this kind of thing as being unhelpful and potential highly divisive. I'm still unsure about the motivation of some of the atcions of the participants and it is probably a highly complex interaction of things (as I dont think the US' push for war is all about oil) - I suspect such rastic measures might be the only way to actually halt this rush for war and I've already touched on my concerns about the haste with which the US and UK seem to be dragging us off to war.

As has been said - war should be the final option and currently some parties seem to consider it pretty much the first option so seen in that light it may be that sometimes the only way to stop a seemingly out of control run away train is to derail it and hope that the fatalities will be less than if you allowed the train to crash into the station. Its a risky game but it is also one of the most important issues of our generation so desperate times might call for desperate solutions. I think the only way we'll no who is 'right' (which is a terribly absolute way of looking at things) will be with hindsight

We could, of course, all be effette, bed-wetting liberals with no stomach for war but Europe has seen far too much war and I don't think we are quite ready to go around exporting it to other people at this point

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

I am happy to see that all the Americans do not share this point of view, JKMabry

Emperor, you said

quote:

---

That they haven't shared this plan with their allies.

---

Well I can send back the sentence : the USA do not share their plans... And even more, the report speaking of disarmament made by Irak was given to USA... And after having it for themselves, they only did COPIES for ONU. Not very normal I think.

I mostly agree with you next (though I am not sure to understand fully what you said, your 3 lignes sentences are very hard to follow for a person non-used to english langage). But, if I understood well what you said it justified a bit war. I will not go back on this topic, it has been talked and talked about in another threads. But, frankly, do you think that the behavior of your governement and medias (critisizing us Europeans) is normal ?

Ultimately all things are known because you want to believe you know. -Zensunni koan

Essentially, France, Germany, and Belgium protested the Turkey plans at the last possible moment indicating that they didn't even want to discuss with us alternative and leaving Turkey, the only Muslim NATO member, in the lurch.

It was truly despicable so I cannot understand your motives.

quote:

---

Please, tell me that this is not normal. WHY should we follow everytime the USA point of view ?

---

I will tell you that I have been extremely critical of your country for a while now. I look at your history and I'm not happy with it. But please don't think that any of my criticism is based in hatred or anything like that.

There are quite a few French jokes being told over here right now and people in America are, quite frankly, sick of what they perceive as your arrogance towards us. We feel as though we have sacrificed much to support your country in the last century and that you don't care about that. In fact, to some of us you seem to resent the fact that we did help you in the past. The best quote I've heard about your country and Western Europe in general was that "[you] have never forgiven us for helping you during WWII".

You need to understand that your country can certainly disagree with us but it seems to have become much more than that lately. It seems that it is more about opposing everything we want because of some other reason. I think it is complex just like Emps pointed out but it also could be as simple as this. France cannot stand the fact that they are becoming less and less important in world affairs and having to follow a "bunch of ignorant cowboys" like us must really hurt.

This latest move of blocking defense of Turkey surprised me. I didn't think the "old europeans" would go that far.

What is the purpose of a post Cold War NATO? Good question. But I will say that the point of having NATO was to pull together "allies". If France and Belgium don't care to be allies anymore, then maybe it is time for NATO to disband. Communism has been dealt with by NATO and perhaps now it is time we create a new alliance that is specifically designed to combat terrorism.

quote:

---

The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew.
--Abraham Lincoln

---

. . : slicePuzzle

Ok i am an englishman, ex military and like WS seen my fair share (and then some) of bloodshed; and of up close n dirty combat.

So here's my 0.2c for what it's worth.

Untill you have ever been in a combat situation you will never understand the full horrors of war, its ok for you arm chair theorists and policy makers to bash one and anothers country's for their choices.

Europe has seen more bloodshed and tears than almost anywhere else in the world recently, maybe thats why their is a certain reluctance to go that step further. Bosnia etc ring any bells, it was the europeans that dealt with that under the UN auspices, granted a bit of US airpower (and not much) came into effect.

Dont get me wrong i am not anti american but some peoples (some of the americans here) attiudes suck here recently, the amount of "we did this for you and that for you" posts, face up to it, yes america did enter both world wars in europe, but a a late stage in both, where were you when the chips were down in the beginning?

Now for the NATO issue, Nato was formed as a defensive alliance to combat the cold war threat of the warsaw pact alliance, the phillosophy behind it was this:

Any attack on a member of the NATO alliance was to be considered an attack on the whole of NATO and as such the alliance would respond as a whole.


Forgive me if i am wrong but at the moment there is no attack, and no one has said they WILL NOT defend turkey, it is a timing question about putting into place formal steps (planning steps). IF and i say IF it is decided to go ahead with an attack, it will take a matter of hours to get the neccesary defences in place, and it will be done before any attack takes place. The same country's that are holding back on the planning are those putting forward diplomatic solutions to the IRAQ problem. It would be hard for anyone to take someone's diplomatic attempts seriously while making ready war plans at the same time.

Again where has anyone said they will not defend turkey, they have only questioned the timing.

Every county you have mentioned particpated in the last gulf war, germany has stated it will probably not commit troops in an assault, however it will be providing defensive forces for all countries bordering iraq (such as patriot missile defenses etc.)

France has dragging it;s heels but has moved an aircraft carrier into the region, so it WILL more than likely commit if all else fails.

As for belgium, well i dont know whats up with them, but thats their choice as a democratic nation.

Now i am not going to mention names here, but maybe a few people need to stop and take a deep breath and think about the next few lines of text before posting an answer.

Have you been to war? Do you know what its like? Do you know how scary it is, its not glorious, well maybe for you sat at home patting yourselves on the back when the undoubted victory will come, but ask yourselves one question and thats this....

Is it worth the loss of one life of anyones armed forces or civillians, untill the absolute last peaceful avenue has been explored...

I've been there at the dirty end of the stick, i've seen friends die a few feet from me, and we went knowing there was no alternative, it didnt make it any easier, it sure has hell didnt make it better for their familly left behind without a brother,father or son.

So from a personal point of view, if you have not been there or at least volunteered for serving your country, shut the FUCK UP and stop bitching about other country's policy's, it's their soldiers, their citizens that will lose their lives they have the god given right whether to send them to their deaths or not.

Just because not everyone jumps when america or its closer allies like my country says jump, does not make them any poorer for that.

And bugs if any countries got the right to bitch about europe its england not the USA, we did more in both world wars than the USA, but we dont seem to spend all our time reminding everyone about it.

I would say i am sorry if i have offended anyone, but to be honest i dont give a fuck, i know how bad it is, i would go again if i knew my country needed me, but i am so pissed off with people putting other peoples countries down because they dont like their anti war, or lets try every peacefull means first attitudes first. Its chest beaters like some of the more idiot posts in here (not this thread yet, i mean the stop the iraq war thread), that cause a lot of bad feelings against countries.

Did england moan like a bitch, when is staunchest ally USA held out on the falklands issue? no we didnt we got on and did the job...

[This message has been edited by tomeaglescz (edited 02-11-2003).]

[This message has been edited by tomeaglescz (edited 02-12-2003).]

Moon Shadow:

quote:

---

though I am not sure to understand fully what you said, your 3 lignes sentences are very hard to follow for a person non-used to english langage

---

Sorry - I get a little carried away sometimes I'll kep an eye out for that though sorry.

quote:

---

But, if I understood well what you said it justified a bit war

---

I'm not sure what I said was leaning towards a war. I'm not anti-war but I want to see all avenues being explored and I don't feel the US/UK efforts have really explored all the options and that we are being rushed into war. However, I also concerned that the Franco-German proposal has been poorly handled - you say that the USA didn't share their plans but they have largely been working openly through the UN and the F-G plan has come completely out fo the blue without consulting important parties and I really think that could be damaging in the long term.

quote:

---

frankly, do you think that the behavior of your governement and medias (critisizing us Europeans) is normal ?

---

I'm not an American so I can't speak for their press but the UK press seems to have dealt with things pretty fairly (esp. given that they have often been anti-European and anti-French).


___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Moon Shadow: I hadn't quite realised how bad things were in the US press but I was just reading this in today's paper:
www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,893119,00.html

and I was quite shocked by the depth of crude hatred being expressed

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Emps: As an American, I find that article disturbing and quite embarassing. I am mortified that things have come to this.

quote:

---

...if you have not been there or at least volunteered for serving your country, shut the FUCK UP...

---

It's pretty hard not to take your words personally, tom. Since you saw fit to tell it to me straight then I'll return the favor.

You are wrong to say that only people who have fought for their country are allowed to have a voice on this issue. The people making the decisions to go to war are more than aware of what is at stake. Some of them have been in your shoes and some have not.

I am not in the military but if I were called upon to fight, I would go. I have not volunteered to do so and we do not have the draft here in the US at this time. There was a time back when I was on the other side of the political spectrum that I would have been heading for Canada had the call come. I have sinced changed my opinion on a great many issues and this is one of them.

You and others like you fought for the very right I and others are exercising by voicing our opinions. And please know that I am extremely grateful for that service and sacrifice. I cannot speak for anyone else here but me on that issue. I grant you that some here need to hear your words about war not being glamorous. Believe me, I do *not* think that it is and I am *not* happy about losing anyone in what is to come, Iraqi or otherwise.

You have hurt me with your words and you have made me very angry because I heard you say I have no right to speak. But I waited a while to reply so I could cool down. Now that I've got that out, I'm going to continue with my opinions and just so we're even, I don't care if you don't want to listen to them. Fair enough?


These kinds of debates between our countries are part of how our societies are supposed to work. We have learned it is much better to fight our battles on the battlefield of ideas and debate rather thatn on the streets. Your House of Commons proves that quite well and I enjoy watching all of the political blood letting that goes on there.

But why should it end there? The same kind of squabbling and struggling between allies is just an extension of this process.

If anything has disgusted in this latest volley, it's how hyper sensitive each side has become. I know that it is simply expected by the leaders of our respective countries but we citizens seem to be taking everything so personally.

Where was the outrage when the German official compared Bush's tactics with Hitlers? You don't think that was low? Come on! But I didn't mind too much because she was stating a fact. Rumsfeld stated a fact when he used Germany in the same sentence as Libya and Cuba. It was no doubt designed as a snub and was far from productive but it's not like Europe hasn't heaped insults at us too. I consider it par for the course.

But this brings me to your main point about not criticizing other countries. Why can't we criticize the leadership? What is wrong with questioning the policies of our own governments as well as our allies? NOTHING!!!

Bosnia??? That is one of the examples I cite when criticizing Europe's foreign policies. Not as much the UK because I believe you were the only ones pushing for something serious to be done at the time. But what was done prior to our insistence??? Why did it take so long to do anything and why did it just so happen to coincide with C*****n's pushing for action? I don't think the way the Europeans dealt with Bosnia under the UN auspices gives me much confidence at all.

quote:

---

yes america did enter both world wars in europe, but a a late stage in both, where were you when the chips were down in the beginning?

---

We were listening to the very voices we are hearing from France, Belgium, and Germany right now!!! We had very serious isolationist leanings and I am opposed to isolationism. I think the best way to avoid these larger conficts is to be far more responsive to trouble spots.

NATO: I'm not exactly sure how the rules of NATO work but not having the missille defenses in place *before* Hussein launches them makes me very nervous and moreso if I was in Turkey right now. I stand by my opinion that holding back on their defense is a very cold move.

quote:

---

And bugs if any countries got the right to bitch about europe its england not the USA, we did more in both world wars than the USA, but we dont seem to spend all our time reminding everyone about it.

---

You named my name, tom. I don't make it a point to remind everyone about it all the time, you've got me confused with someone else.

But I'm not so blind and neither are you to know our histories. And don't think those on the continent don't know just as well but we just don't talk about it. I give the French a hard time and they are free to return the scorn because our record is not spotless, God knows. But let's get it out from time to time and let people decide for themselves who made better choices the last go 'round.

quote:

---

Is it worth the loss of one life of anyones armed forces or civillians, untill the absolute last peaceful avenue has been explored...

---

You tell me when that time is come. It's been 12 years. Iraqi children are dying because of our "peaceful" pressure yet we wait. How long is too long for disarmament? How many civilians do you let die in Iraq before you decide he has no intention of disarming? You tell me.

Moon Shadow, are you outraged when you read the personal insults heaped upon the American president? I have held back, somewhat, in defending him but do you think it is ok to call him and idiot, a cowboy, a murderer? When we criticize France, how does that compare to the French criticizing the US? It works both directions.

I find it amazing what people will say and do when you get them to puff up their chests and cry " Patriotism ! " Getting folks to do that is usually a calculated manuver on somebody's part.

And I do not believe that any country has ever done anything for another country that they did not believe further their own interests in some fashion.

I am an American, a former US Marine, and have never been called an " effette, bed-wetting liberal", at least not by anyone with the guts to stand toe-to-toe with me and do so. But I will say without the slightest hesitation that I am against going to war.

War is always about gain and always carries a price. So, the real question here is "Who will gain what by going to war?" and "Who will pay the price?"

I believe there is too little to be gained, and that the price will be paid mainly by those who stand to benifit the least. The thought of so many wasted lives, so many futures cut short... and for what?

The world has become so small, we are really just one community now. And just like in any other community, in the long run , the only way to insure our continued existence is to work together as a group.


/* Sure, go ahead and code in your fancy IDE. Just remember: it's all fun and games until someone puts an $i out */

quote:

---

Until you have ever been in a combat situation you will never understand the full horrors of war, its ok for you arm chair theorists and policy makers to bash one and anothers country's for their choices. -- Tom

---

I must say, I agree with this part whole-heartedly. And so do many of my fellow veterans. This does not make us pacifists, nor liberals, nor against war, when it is absolutely necessary. However, our experiences have taught us about the real horrors of war...it's not the actual war in and of itself that is so horrible, though it is certainly bad. It's the change in the people fighting it. You know, I lost something very valuable in the gulf war...a piece of humanity, that I can never, ever get back. Only someone who has lost this, knows how valuable a thing this piece is...to those who still have it, you have no right to judge, or even to comment in this sense about it. I will not go into the personal nightmares, the flashbacks, and the enormous difficulty of returning to a semblance of normality...just be aware, that there are killers in your midst, that fight with themselves, inside, to prevent you from being the next victim. For most, it is not that they want to kill, that surely would be incorrect. More, it is what can happen, when one is in a situation that hangs from reaction. I'll relate a stuation that happened to me...

I used to be a bouncer, at a bar. It was work, I did it well, got paid. A job. It should never be personal. One night, a disturbance started (not unlike other nights, really)...a guy started pushing around a woman. I really don't like that type of stuff. However, it is my job to prevent such disturbances, so I moved to the scene...at this time, the guy went violent, started hitting the woman. I moved in to stop him. He noticed, grabbed a beer bottle, and broke it on a table. I assume he was going to try to use it on me. I reacted. My fingers hit his throat first, then I took him down. This all happened in a split-second...I then had a black-out...I found out later, that were it not for the other bouncer, I would have killed the guy...he pulled me off the guy, and did his best to prevent himself from being put in the same situation...apparently, I also had hurt him pretty badly. After this incident, I stopped doing Bouncer work...and attempt to stay out of such situations...I have no idea, if and when it could happen again...it's like having a ticking time-bomb inside, one that has no set timer...I don't know when it will go off again. You see, there is no...limit, that normally prevents someone from killing someone else. The war removed that. It also de-sensitized me to violence. Though intellectually I know it is wrong to kill, the instinct, the reaction to do it, is there. The limit, that was there before, is no more.

quote:

---

It's pretty hard not to take your words personally, tom. Since you saw fit to tell it to me straight then I'll return the favor.

You are wrong to say that only people who have fought for their country are allowed to have a voice on this issue. The people making the decisions to go to war are more than aware of what is at stake. Some of them have been in your shoes and some have not.--Bugs

---

Hmmm...I can only use an analogy...if you can't drive, and never have, don't tell someone who can how to. This doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion on the issue...however, one must understand that Mr. Bush is not a veteran. That said, he really doesn't know of the horrors of war, not personally. Therefore, he really cannot understand what he is about to get the world into. I could understand this rhetoric, if we were to be going to the defence of some country, or our own. Then it is a cut-and-dried issue. Pre-empting is not.

quote:

---

I am not in the military but if I were called upon to fight, I would go. I have not volunteered to do so and we do not have the draft here in the US at this time. There was a time back when I was on the other side of the political spectrum that I would have been heading for Canada had the call come. I have sinced changed my opinion on a great many issues and this is one of them. - Bugs

---

You can always sign up. I'm sure the military would be glad to have you. Then we could talk after you came back...if you came back. This may sound harsh, but it is something that every veteran has had to deal with. Comrades that haven't come back, or friends...they all come back changed...those that come back.

quote:

---

Where was the outrage when the German official compared Bush's tactics with Hitlers? You don't think that was low? Come on! But I didn't mind too much because she was stating a fact. Rumsfeld stated a fact when he used Germany in the same sentence as Libya and Cuba. It was no doubt designed as a snub and was far from productive but it's not like Europe hasn't heaped insults at us too. I consider it par for the course. - Bugs

---

Actually, there was an uproar over here in Germany over the 'Hitler' remark...the woman was made to apologize...and it was a very big deal here in Germany. You need new news sources.

In conclusion, I mostly support what Tom has said...most veterans would. It's also not something that I can explain to someone who hasn't had the experience. For all of you wondering (and supporting war), what (and how) it is like, join up...and you'll get a chance to find out. Make sure you sign up for the front lines (you wouldn't want to miss anything). Just be forewarned, you will not like it. You will definitely not enjoy it. At least, I sincerely hope not. And you will lose something, that is amoung the most precious of things - your humanity - and maybe your life. Still think it's worth it?

Bugs:

Everyone else i apologise for this slight diversion.

My comments were not aimed at you so please do not take them personally.

quote:

---

You named my name, tom. I don't make it a point to remind everyone about it all the time, you've got me confused with someone else.

---

was in reply to this comment you made:

quote:

---

There are quite a few French jokes being told over here right now and people in America are, quite frankly, sick of what they perceive as your arrogance towards us. We feel as though we have sacrificed much to support your country in the last century and that you don't care about that. In fact, to some of us you seem to resent the fact that we did help you in the past. The best quote I've heard about your country and Western Europe in general was that "[you] have never forgiven us for helping you during WWII".

You need to understand that your country can certainly disagree with us but it seems to have become much more than that lately. It seems that it is more about opposing everything we want because of some other reason. I think it is complex just like Emps pointed out but it also could be as simple as this. France cannot stand the fact that they are becoming less and less important in world affairs and having to follow a "bunch of ignorant cowboys" like us must really hurt

---

All though I have the deepest respect for your points of view normally, you are one of the most balanced debaters here; this last line of this last paragraph, made me both surprised and angry.

quote:

---

France cannot stand the fact that they are becoming less and less important in world affairs and having to follow a "bunch of ignorant cowboys" like us must really hurt

---

whether it was theorizing or its your point of view, it really doesnt matter, what it implies is that america is better and more powerful than france, earlier in your post you said that you were not a chest beater, yet you reply in a manner that screams of it in that last phrase.

Its statements like that along with those linked by emps, that cause such anti american feelings.

I too have had misgivings abut french policies in the past, but not on this one, its thier right to choose their actions, however that said, i expect and demand, that any member of nato defends turkey to the fullest measure when the time proves necessary, and if any country WILL not, then they really have no future in NATO, at the moment no one is saying they wont defend it, just questioning timings.

And bug's you have every right to reply, just as i have every right to read and respond...

What i am trying to say is this:

Everyone sat at home in your own countries, has the right to demand of your governments actions that you believe in. WHAT you HAVE not got the right to do, is dictate the actions of a foriegn nation, or start a verbal campaign slamming them if their policies dont match those of the USA.

all it does is serve to distance allies and cause ill feeling and further stubourness. Germany is just as bad at this at the moment.

The main problem is this, The key members of NATO are also amongst the majority of those holding seats (veto) on the security council, and therefore can block things both ways. And as such it may seem that they are being beligerent in many ways.

Now to my comment on shutting the fuck up, maybe it was harsh, it was meant to be. Like i said i am sick of people throwing lets bash any country that doesnt match one's own countries ways and beliefs and political alignments. The whole iraq issue is seeming to create a blood lust among some people. Normal rational people are posting some utter crap here. Like i said unless you have been there the horrors and fears are impossible to comprehend. But to systematically belign a country in a way that is going on in the USA at the moment is beyond contempt. It is their citizens that will die, it is thier right to choose when and how and under what circumstances that occurs. I honestly wonder if more people here had experienced war close up if thier would be a different angle on this debate and if they would be so keen to send thier fellow citizens to their deaths.

All i want to see is this, every last avenue explored for peace, untill it is 100% exausted, then by all means use force, but untill then or untill proof beyond reasonable doubt, lets wait a while. Bush and the Bush administration claims to have that proof, but refuses to share it. This itself causes either disbelief or anger from allies that may be willing to help but feel left out because they are not being told the threats etc.

Under resolution 1441 any member state of the UN must provide any and all evidence and intelligence on weapons of mass distruction to the inspection team, the bush administration has stated that it will not give all information for security reasons. By that alone the US is in breach of the same resolution. (one of the truer accusations from iraq).

So back on track, please everyuone take a deep breath, surely its better to exhaust finally all measure of a peaceful nature first. NO more maligning anyone for thier beliefs or those of our allies, by doing so we are only playing into the hands of our enemies, by weakening the resolve of those allies they may face in battle.

Just to get some more facts straight (although I hate to distract from far more important points of this thread):

quote:

---

Where was the outrage when the German official compared Bush's tactics with Hitlers?

---

This woman, at the time head of our department of justice BTW, did not only apologize (like WS said), she resigned. Immediately. And has not returned to any official position.

Thanks, MW. I thought that she had, but I wasn't sure...one wonders why this didn't make the American Media...one can see, what happens when information is just not reported...

Bugs:

quote:

---

Moon Shadow, are you outraged when you read the personal insults heaped upon the American president? I have held back, somewhat, in defending him but do you think it is ok to call him and idiot, a cowboy, a murderer? When we criticize France, how does that compare to the French criticizing the US? It works both directions.

---

Avoiding the obvious point that we shouldn't use the 'they started it excuse':

1. The French press have been very restrained in this affair (there was a side column to the main one I posted about the US press).

2. Bush may actually be dim and he may be owned by big business (this has come up before and no one has presented evidence that he isn't) and if we make jokes about it it is because it is a way of dispelling some tension (humour as catharsis) as he is the most powerful man in te world and a lot of us are genuinely worried. The insults heaped on the French are crude slurs on the French people - it is right to criticise the French goverments motives and discuss but to call the French and their allies "a chorus of cowards", "Cheese-eating surrender monkeys", etc. is the equivalent of calling Americans "burger eating morons" - I know I don't find that acceptable and I have been appalled over the years by some of the British tabloid presses insulting of Europeans but this is:

a) At a very critical point in history.

b) Affecting 'serious' newspapers as well.

I must assume this, in some ways, reflects US opinion about our European allies and that is not a good thing

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Hum I will try to answer you all guys :

Bugimus,
I will say to you something I already said on this forum. The USA are the first country in the world in many domains. Nowadays,
they tend to be like the policeman of the world and this is normal : they assume their role of leader. But nothing generate awe and envy like that. You already see it from the "poor" countrys. It also tends to be true in France. Many people, hmm I would say "not very educated" do not think very much about it. And they lead to basic anti-americanism. Even in our rich country. These "short minded people" (I do not intend such a hard qualify but I can't explain it differently) do not have a big capacity of thinking. If Americans are not good nowadays from their point of view, they tend to assimilate it like if it has forever been the same. It is the same with politics : during 5 years they make laws for richs, and the few lasts month they take popular laws, and they are reelected. But I will answer like JKMabry said to me : this is absolutely not true for all the French. Me and my friends for example do not consider Americans like nuisance. Before judging a thing, we try to know it entirely. So do not worry, many have forgotten, but many still remember what you did for us. And not only for the WWII.

I do not think that we oppose with USA in everything by now. I do not think that we are less and less important at this degree. Oh you are right : France do not have a important political point in the World. But there a not so many countrys before us. You are the first, Japan is next (but Japan do not have a political importance, it comes from the WWII), then is Germany, next is France and next is GB. Germany and Belgium share the same point of view. I do not think that we act like this because we are "recessing". We are rather important in the world with Germany, so we do not act like this because you are the first. The current scene just demonstrated that we are not so far away from you : we just discovered a new way to cure the HIV.

tomeaglescz,
Happy to see a english point of view according to mine. I appreciated it I agree with what you said apart from the involvement of USA in the WWII. They were absolutely not forced to get involved from the beginning. From my point of view, they HAD to do it at the beginning or later, because they would have been forced anyway to face nazism. But why would they do that at the beginning ? This is thei right to not get involved at a certain point.

Emperor,
I'm ok with you now. Now you see the article I spoke about. It's what made me want to react. I can bear people not liking us. I can bear people hating us. Even for idiotic reasons. But I can't bear medias (New York post in this example) spreading such ideas.

Bugimus,
No I do not like the basic anti-americanism in our country. That's what I said just below.

Norm,
Wars do not permit determining who is right, but who survives. I agree with you.

Ultimately all things are known because you want to believe you know. -Zensunni koan

quote:

---

Bush and the Bush administration claims to have that proof, but refuses to share it.

---

They do not share it with ONU. Ok, well, they are not obliged to. But if they want to legitimate their war, is it normal ?

The "perception" I have of this "war" is that Bush and Bush administration want to go to war. They are able to do their war without any country nor the ONU support. But they want to justify it, and how do they justify it ? By not sharing their "proofs" or jumping on any opportunity (like yesterday the tape with the hypothetical voice of Bin Laden) to justify it. Well, I am a bit confused.

quote:

---

So back on track, please everyone take a deep breath, surely its better to exhaust finally all measure of a peaceful nature first. NO more maligning anyone for their beliefs or those of our allies, by doing so we are only playing into the hands of our enemies, by weakening the resolve of those allies they may face in battle.

---

Hum finally you are maybe right. I can understand this and not show my objections again. But this arise a new problem in me

Closing eyes on something... Not talking about it... Well, it's not ok in me, ordinary I do not like such behaviors. But I will do as you want.

Ultimately all things are known because you want to believe you know. -Zensunni koan

I thought I'd drop in this opinion piece which covers some of the issues tomeaglescz touched on - what have the Americans done for their closest ally (the UK) in the past 60 years:
www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,893757,00.html

The answer (which I can't really fault at least on the military front) is nothing and in fact they have worked against out interests on some occasions.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Hmmm...that's interesting. Funny, one never really thinks about that. I need to look into this further...thanks for the link, Emps.

WS: Yes I'm sure the arguement is shot full of holes (I'm wondering about Suez, for example) but I was a little suprised by a few things:

1. Noraid not being banned.

2. Reagan shafting Thatcher (in the none physical way ~shudder~) - if ever the US and UK were on the very same page it was with those two.

Anyway must stop dicking around with this politics thing and try and get something done today

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Emps, so it's "what have you done for me lately" then?

I think this thread is asinine. It opens with a question asking why our countries don't respect one another's point sof view. It quickly progresses into people not respecting one another's points of view and thinly veiled finger pointing of the like I've not seen since grade school.

Points of view are exactly that, they come from whole other places. You will most likely not understand them for that very reason, but you can try. Rage doesn't help the thought process.

May justice and judgement prevail in this trying time. May we all realize that's exactly what all of our leaders are working for. When the time comes, authority will speak, justice will be carried out according to judgement. Which brings us full peanut gallery circle, are these people in position of authority of sound mind and judgement? I think the burger eating idiot cowboys, cowardly frog dogs, drunken red commie mafioso, waffle headed, nazi and limey bastards better get ready to take it on the chin again...

Jason

This is the fun part I'll tell you. Australia, through our colonial ties to Great Britain and our political ties to America, tend to sit in the middle of alot of things like this. We sit between the europeans and the american's both pulling different ways, and there we are, right in the middle.

I'm actually quite angry about the bad press france, germany and belgium have been getting over their decision. Quite frankly, that's what it is, their decision. They are democratic countries, same as America, and so they have the same rights and freedoms of decision that america has. But it's the kind of thing that is going ot happen regardless. I prefer to think some people are blinded by their own ignorance...but how extreme can ignorance be sometimes?

Not to be america bashing, they recieve their fare-share of bad press in other countries as well, australia included (though only on certain channels). This however does not give the right to do the same in turn. A tit-for-tat war of words could possibly be one of the most stupid ways of doing things.

I agree whole-heartedly with WS and tom...it's fine for those who've never experienced the trauma of war to sit there and call it patriotic, to say that war can solve problems, that those who advicate war over negotiation (a good number of whom are war veterans) are cowards...ok, say it if you want. It doesn't make it right.

I've never been to war myself, and I don't plan to go any time soon. I in no way think dying for my country is glorious. I may not have seen first-hand the horrors of war...but I have seen first hand the soldiers who came back and did survive. As WS said, they left some small, essential part of themselves behind. There's something about being in a life-and-death combat situation they plays havoc on the human mind. If you survive, the instinct to fight doesn't stay behind. The soldiers who return home may leave part of themselves behind, but they bring home something new. The instinct to kill. In a kill or be killed situation, humanity goes out the window, and not all of it survives the drop.

An australian band called 'Redgum' had a member of theirs go off to the vietnam war. Here's the lyrics to a song he wrote about hte war and the aftermath.

quote:

---

Mum and Dad and Denny saw the passing-out parade at Puckapunyal
It was a long march from cadets.
The sixth battalion was the next to tour, and it was me who drew the card.
We did Canungra, Shoalwater before we left.

And Townsville lined the footpaths as we marched down to the quay
This clipping from the paper shows us young and strong and clean.
And there's me in my slouch hat with my SLR and greens.
God help me, I was only nineteen.

From Vung Tau, riding Chinooks, to the dust at Nui Dat
I'd been in and out of choppers now for months.
But we made our tents a home, VB and pinups on the lockers
And an Asian orange sunset through the scrub.

And can you tell me, doctor, why I stil can't get to sleep?
And night-time's just a jungle dark and a barking M16?
And what's this rash that comes and goes, can you tell me what it means?
God help me, I was only ninteen.

A four week operation when each step could mean your last one on two legs
It was a war within yourself.
But you wouldn't let your mates down til they had you dusted off
So you closed your eyes and thought about something else.

Then someone yelled "Contact!" and the bloke behind me swore
We hooked in there for hours, then a Godalmighty roar
Frankie kicked a mine the day that mankind kicked the moon,
God help me, he was going home in June.

I can still see Frankie, drinking tinnies in the Grand Hotel
On a thirty-six hour rec leave in Vung Tau
And I can still hear Frankie, lying screaming in the jungle
Til the morphine came and killed the bloody row.

And the Anzac legends didn't mention mud and blood and tears
And the stories that my father told me never seemed quite real.
I caught some pieces in my back that I didn't even feel
God help me, I was only nineteen.

And can you tell me, doctor, why I still can't get to sleep?
And why the Channel Seven chopper chills me to my feet?
And what's this rash that comes and goes, can you tell me what it means?
God help me, I was only nineteen.

---

Some notes: the "Denny" referred to is Denny Schumann, John's wife; Mick is her brother. Puckapunyal is a basic training base; Canungra and Shoalwater are army facilities providing specialist training in jungle warfare.

So yes...I agree with tom and WS...don't talk about what you don't know about.

I'm sure many people would say 'yeah...I'll go to war, you know, short hop there, bit of running, few bombs dropped. I'll get to stick one up those Iraqi bastards' (and believe me, this is almost an exact quote from something a friend said to me), and you're free to think that if you want. But I think the world should listen more to the veterans of war. They are the one's who know. They are the ones who've seen friends that they would go to hell and back for drop dead right next to them. They, not you ,the one's who haven't been, are the only ones with an idea of just how truly terrible it is. I have never been, so I can't speak for their experiences, but I have seen what it does to them. I have seem guys who can't stop shaking, guys who jump and cower at the slightest loud noise, guys who (as has happened to WS) go off like firecrackers, with no control over their actions, and believe me, their actions can be dangerous.

I would like it if another generation of humans could keep from having to have their ties to humanity temporarily severed, and then reconnected not exactly right. Don't get me wrong...if war is the one and only answer...I'd do it if I had to, but I would rather not, and I'd try everything I could to avoid it. I think things would be interesting if all the world leaders involved in this were war veterans...then they'd have some idea of the pain and trauma their decisions could cause. I'm sorry, but they can read all the intelligence reports, but until they've been there, with only an M-16 anda few clips betwee nthem and uncertain death, they are really not qualified to tell the world what war is and what war isn't.

I agree with all of you who pointed out that human beings going to war are not the same when they return.
I have never been to war myself and I hope I never will be.

I appeal to anyone who does not know what people like WebShaman and tomeaglescz went through: consider that these are people who "knew the risk" and were on the "winning side" at the end of the day... and they are fucked up for life...

Do you even dare think about how this stuff affects the people who where/are at the recieving end of large-scale bombings with whatever your "defense" industry comes up with? Do you still think all this hatred against the US is only based on ignorance and propaganda?

Well, here´s some more propaganda for ya (nope these aren´t unbiased sources, show me just one unbiased source of news and/or history and I´ll shut up)!


from http://www.isreview.org/issues/20/rogue_state.shtml :

"I will never apologize for the United States of America. I don?t care what the facts are."
- George H. W. Bush, then U.S. vice president, referring to an American ship that shot down an Iranian passenger plane, killing 290 civilians

"Terrorism is premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine state agents."
- Patterns of Global Terrorism: 1983, U.S. Department of State, September 1984

"If they turn on their radars we?re going to blow up their goddamn SAMs. They know we own their country. We own their airspace?. We dictated the way they live and talk. And that?s what?s great about America right now. It?s a good thing, especially when there?s a lot of oil out there we need."
- U.S. Brigadier General William Looney, one director of the continued U.S. bombing campaign of Iraq

"We sure are pleased with those backroom boys at Dow. The original product wasn't so hot-if the gooks were quick they could scrape it off. So the boys started adding polystyrene- now it sticks like shit to a blanket. But then if the gooks jumped under water it stopped burning, so they started adding Willie Peter [WP-white phosphorous] so's to make it burn better. It'll even burn under water now. And one drop is enough, it'll keep on burning right down to the bone so they die anyway from phosphorous poisoning."
- U.S. Pilot in the Vietnam war

"Between 1962 and 1970, the U.S. dropped 100 million pounds of Agent Orange and other types of herbicide over 4 million acres of land in Vietnam [...] Five-hundred pounds of the highly toxic and almost indestructible substance dioxin remained in Vietnam as a result of mass spraying of Agent Orange. Dioxin is so potent that experts estimate that only three ounces in the New York City water supply would kill the city?s entire population."


from http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/blu-82.htm :
"The BLU-82B/C-130 weapon system, nicknamed Commando Vault in Vietnam and Daisy Cutter in Afghanistan, is a high altitude delivery of 15,000 pound conventional bomb, delivered from an MC-130 since it is far too heavy for the bomb racks on any bomber or attack aircraft. Originally designed to create an instant clearing in the jungle, it has been used in Afghanistan as an anti-personnel weapon and as an intimidation weapon because of its very large lethal radius (variously reported as 300-900 feet) combined with flash and sound visible at long distances.
[...]
Eleven BLU-82s were dropped during Desert Storm, all from Special Operations C-130s. The initial drops were intended to test the ability of the bomb to clear mines; no reliable bomb damage assessment exists on mine clearing effectiveness. Later, bombs were dropped as much for their psychological effect as for their antipersonnel effects."


I´ll repeat the disclaimer: these aren´t unbiased sources. You show me just one unbiased source of news and/or history and I´ll shut up.

Please sign the Peace Petition and show Europe that not all Americans are against them...I already have.

If you are not American, sign it anyway...to show support for/against your government.

I appreciate your commitment Webshaman. I will sign it right now.

Oh I just want to add something.

Isn't the role of a friend to tell you that you are wrong ? Same for France and USA (I believe they are still firends...)

Ultimately all things are known because you want to believe you know. -Zensunni koan

I'll be honest - I haven't read about half of what's been posted here.

But in response to your last comment, Moon, I just want to reiterate -

Yes, that is one role of 'friend'. But France isn't doing anything other than looking after their own interests, and there is nothing remotely related to 'friendship' - or 'peace for that matter - in their current stance.

And of course, as has been said, a big reason that people are tending to get upset over France's actions is the simple fact that France (and others) tend to go against anything the US does until they themseleves are threatened. *Then* they want our intervention. And when it's done, they go right back to resenting us for intervening.

It's kind of hard not walk away with a 'fuck them' kind of attitude.

~YMMV~

I am not going again into debate...

Just consider a few things :

From my point we are not defending our interests. We are just defending an old and extremly used consideration towards mans. This consideration do not seems to be really respected nowadays... "Nobody has the right to kill another man for doubtful reasons."

And if you are able to make the difference between a general opinion and a particular opinion, you have proven yourself to be higher than those that I despise. It also works in two ways. I do not consider all Americans like if they all had the same point of view. Oh yeah the American governement make me really upset. But I have no reason to be upset against Americans. Simply because a good part of them do not support this behavior.


Ultimately all things are known because you want to believe you know. -Zensunni koan

I've done my best from refraining here, but I have to say most of what has been iterated above is bullshit, lies, deceit and naive mis-truths.

France's trying to halt the war in Iraq is just as noble an effort as the US's desire to do it.

France, Germany, Russia, China all have lucrative and long-range oil contracts with Hussein's government. There is serious (and well reasoned) thought that if/when the US puppet gets installed into Iraqi leadership, that puppet will no longer honor those contracts. Instead, he will negotiate new contracts with the petrol companies of the US and UK.

France is striving for peace in the same way that the US is striving to liberate the oppressed Iraqi people. The French governement doesn't give a damn about peace and the US government couldn't care less about the Iraqi oppression of the Iraqi people. Both sets of rhetoric are clever ways to let normally reasonable people (the citizens) believe their respective governments are not made up of the conniving scoundrels and power-lusting thugs that actually walk the halls and pollute the airwaves of their respective capitals.

The self-rightous French people who believe the poisonous words of Chirac and his henchmen are no better (and no worse) than the idiot gunslinging cowboys and the blind, naive suburban 'liberals' who believe the 'compassionate conservative' words of Bush and his oil guzzling cronies.

To hell with the lot of them.

quote:

---

The French governement doesn't give a damn about peace and the US government couldn't care less about the Iraqi oppression of the Iraqi people

---

Amen.

And just to clarify, I am not presenting a pro-war point of view here...just trying to offer a possible explanation of the 'american' attitude moon shadow is bringing up.

Mobrul : Then you are much more pessimist than I am. I believe that our governements are not only "evil". And I do not support Chirac.

Ultimately all things are known because you want to believe you know. -Zensunni koan

[This message has been edited by Moon Shadow (edited 02-13-2003).]

Hmmm...

I have seen (and witnessed) many things in the government, both firsthand, and second. There are truly good people (rare, but there are), trying to do their best...there are those, who are looking after their own asses (and self-intrests), power-hungry egoists, sheep that follow others, and those who really believe that they are destined to lead. All this makes for a very complicated net of power, and relationships, interests, etc. That it works, is amazing, quite frankly.

It becomes a danger, when too many get on board, for self-interest...or become 'enamoured'...and start blindly following...

That said, most governments do act from self-interest. It is rare, indeed, for a government to do something that is not selfish. Of course, to gather support for such (called manipulating the masses...wagging the dog by the tail, spin doctoring, etc), many grandiose words will be said, about this and that. Mobrul and DL are right on the money with this.

People (citizens, etc) are somewhat different - they are not under the pressure to perform, and they are not under the heavy weight of the consequences of failing - that next election, this policy, that treaty, etc. They have the blessed 'ignorance', if you will, to be idealistic...

mobrul: Which is why I said this in another thread:

quote:

---

is no one out there trying to do something without ulterior motives!!!

---

and:

quote:

---

I really despair - anyone fancy building a big Space Ark filling it with sensible people and leaving the bunch of children behind to squabble over the 'toys' and goodies?

---

I'm not against the option of war but I would like to see things given more time (and at the very least a second UN resolution) my major concern is that we can (and need to) disarm Saddam (in a number of different ways) but the way we come out of this whole thing with the best possible solution for long term peace/security is if we come out of this united (UN, EU and NATO) and my biggest worry is that we aren't going to.

This article examines the issue but doesn't really come to many firm conclusions:
www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,895220,00.html

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

I'm sitting here wondering if this thread is too close to the topic of the one I've banned myself from... crap!!!

Bugimus: It has wandered that way (in the Asylum!! Well I never) - if you'd prefer we could leave it on the main subject which was the nasty press given to those cheese eating.... sorry the French. Why haven't the Germans been singled out too (not that I want them to be but it seems a little odd) - is it (as that article above mentions) the Germans have, up until now, been strong supporters of the Americans?

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Well, they are a bit interconnected...but this topic is mainly about...the 'allies' and how they are dealing with one another...that is, IMHO, a bit different...

I actually basically agree with mobrul and DL-44 on what they said above. The only thing I add to it is that on top of every country acting in their own self-interest there are all the other reasons. And sometimes doing what is the most selfish can actually coincide with a good situation for both parties involved. In business I believe that is referred to as a "win-win" situation. As far as that speaks to the issue I'm avoiding forget I said anything.

But since this thread is really about how the "allies" are getting along I'll try to explain a few things I've said.

In the very first post of mine I attempted to echo some of the things I've been hearing around here about the French. Some of those things I actually feel myself and some of them are further than I would take them. There is a feeling by many here in the states that you French think you are culturally superior to us. Whether that is true or not, it is a belief here and nobody likes to be thought of as inferior.

That brings me to why I said[

quote:

---

France cannot stand the fact that they are becoming less and less important in world affairs and having to follow a "bunch of ignorant cowboys" like us must really hurt

---

tom, I know you took exception to this. I was stating this not as a feeling but jointly as a fact and as a theory. The US is superior militarily and of that there is no question but I was not suggesting that the French are less important as a people or anything of the sort. I was primarily referring to military might which like it or not determines who is "right" in our world. (not really right but who gets to force the rules on everyone else kind of right)

The second part of the quote was my theory as to why the French feel it necessary to be the "counter-weight" to the US. This is their words not mine. They have spoken about how the EU needs to be an "alternative" to us, not an ally but an alternative. That is a very interesting way of putting it and I've been trying to process how that fits in with the big picture.

Anyway, I am sorry if my views are causing anyone unnecessary angst but I need to be honest and if I have some misconceptions I'm hoping some of the insights from Moon Shadow can help clear them up. I really haven't had the privilege of chatting directly with any French recently

Moon Shadow, I'm interested in hearing more about why you do not support Chirac. I am also very pleased at reading your posts because it has become clear to me you are a very reasonable person and not narrow minded.

Oh, and one more thing. I do not think most of the "name calling" going on over here is anything but blowing off some steam and I consider it healthy. ...HOWEVER... there are a few things that I am very ashamed of and this kind of thing really pisses me off. Boycotts and laws against French products is going too far but I will certainly not be drinking any French wine because I had no idea they used cow blood to make it!!!!!! Ack!!!

[edit] while we are talking about all these things... Moon Shadow, what is your view of the attitude towards Jews in France? I have heard many reports of anti-semitism being strong there. Have you seen any of that? If so, what is your understanding as to why it still exists? [/edit]

. . : slicePuzzle

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 02-15-2003).]

Actually if you read the article bugs you'll see it says that they used to. They don't anymore...the practise was outlawed before 1990

Bugs: But these kind of sanctions have been rumbling on for quite a while (steel, bananas, etc.).

On the use of blood in wine:

quote:

---

Two U.S. wine experts contacted by the newspaper, said a few French wine growers used bovine blood as a clarifier before the process was banned in the late 1990s after the "made cow disease" scare.

---

So a small number of people used it and then it was banned - so if you bought a ten year old French wine it was unlikely that you'd get one with cow's blood in it and if you by (e.g.) a 5 year old wine then you aren't going to be getting animal products in it. I hate to say but a lot of animal products go into beers and wines to the clarifying/fining process (which is why a lot of beers aren't suitable for vegetarians) - they use fish scales in the manufacture of some beers.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor