Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049

quote:

---

Originally posted by yardie

That is two out of how many?

---

__________________
"I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049

quote:

---

Originally posted by yardie
Is this so? Didn't North Korea made a deal with Clinton after being bribed in 1994? Didn't they just renegade on that deal? I think Bobby Mike;s arguement is more plausible than the one you are presenting. The U.S. is afraid of North Korea because it has nukes ot can use. Which begs the question: if Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was so dangerous, why is the U.S so anxious to invade?

---

__________________
"I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."

Registered: Feb 2000
Location:
Posts: 1571

Arfe other nations supporting the U.S are other goverments? BUg difference. The U.S is the only country that has majority citizen support for a war on Iraq.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BobbyMike


When you say "international backing" you should be saying unanimous or unilateral backing since there are nations that do support the US on this. I consider your ignoring them arrogant.

---

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Registered: Feb 2000
Location:
Posts: 1571

KCannon,

Most, not all Americans are good people. I have dealt with some nasty Americans over the years. Adding to this, racism is still imbedded in America especially the South.

I agree that a country should decide its own fate. I do not agree that a country should be able to invade any other country it wants on a whim. The U.S has yet to prove that Iraq is a threat to it..and I think this is where the opposition to the war lies. The question on everyone's mind is where is the threat? The Kuwaiti war had a lot more support.

quote:

---

Originally posted by K. Cannon

Okay. So we agree that force should be the last option...now, how do we decide when force is needed?

You can't just take a "yes/no" vote from each country and if the majority says "yes" then you go.

I understand that the problem is that a lot of people don't trust W. But the point that Canadians are "good people" applies to Americans, too. We are mostly a "good" people.

Although society and the world have greatly advanced, scientifically, socially, politically, the fact remains that a Country should be able to decide it's own course of action. Sure, it'd be nicer if every Country agreed, but that is just not possible. Nor is demanding that a Country hold back b/c not all other Countries agree reasonable/feasible.

Honestly, I still believe the basic problem is that we don't agree on when force is necessary. Y'all don't think there is evidence that Saddam needs to be taken out, ergo y'all do not believe force is necessary. We do, ergo, we do.

Again, okay. So we agree that force should be the last option...now, how do we decide when force is needed?

---

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Registered: Feb 2000
Location:
Posts: 1571

My point was that France and Germany have no doubt coerced many to their side of the issue.

The "bad economy = war" shtick is getting a little tired. Not only is it demeaning, it doesn't make sense. Your second comment also is insulting.


Comments tend to be tired and demeaning when it hits a nerve. You cannot handle the truth ?


Can you think of a valid reason for the US not to pour billions of dollars into Israel? They are our allies after all. Of course we will support them, that's what allies do. If you think that's why they're the dominant player because of the US I don't think that you have studied history. They happen to be the dominant players because they've managed to kick booty whenever they've been attacked by their neighbors. they have managed to steer their own course, sometimes in concert with the US wishes, sometimes not.


Well do you honestly think that they are dominant now because they kicked booty in the past? There are lots of other countries that "kicked booty" in the past and is not dominant today. Their doiminance is being maintained by billions of dollars in U.S aid.

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Registered: Apr 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 734

quote:

---

Originally posted by yardie

Comments tend to be tired and demeaning when it hits a nerve.

---

__________________
<a href="http://www.kurtramsauer.com">KurtRamsauer.com</a>

Registered: Aug 2000
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1062

quote:

---

Originally posted by yardie
KCannon,

Most, not all Americans are good people.

---

oh, agreed. not every American is good. not every Israeli is good. not every Russian, Canadian, German, Englishman is good. i was responding to the "Canadians are a good people."

As a general statement (typed with trepidation) I would assert that Americans, Canadians, French, English, etc, citizens look more askance at murderous dictators than some other countries.

quote:

---

I have dealt with some nasty Americans over the years.

---

hmm. yes, you probably have. actually, i have, too. (probably more than you given that I live here) and i am truly sorry for those Americans who act-out to the embarassment of my country.

quote:

---

Adding to this, racism is still imbedded in America especially the South.

---

yep, we've got some nasty bigots 'round these parts. we've got some nice folks, too. (dare I say--like me? )

quote:

---

I agree that a country should decide its own fate. I do not agree that a country should be able to invade any other country it wants on a whim.

---

I don't agree that the course of action embarked upon was on a "whim".

quote:

---

The U.S has yet to prove that Iraq is a threat to it..and I think this is where the opposition to the war lies. The question on everyone's mind is where is the threat?

---

I honestly believe this goes back to a BobbyMike point, maybe in another thread, can't remember. (Deal with Iraq before it *becomes* North Korea.)

The threat may not literally be for this evening, tomorrow, or next week, maybe not until 2005, but the threat is definitely there. And I also think the threat is for more than just the United States. Blatenly flaunting his disobedience to the UN resolutions should have earned more for Saddam than a blind eye and a deaf ear for lo these eleven years.

quote:

---

The Kuwaiti war had a lot more support.

---

So did storming the beaches of Normandy. I just think the difference is the timing, the willingness to be extremely unpopular now to do a better good for tomorrow.


Personally, these discussions on this board have made me very aware of the the "other side." Unfortunately, some actions by the "other side" (for example the booing during the American anthem during the hockey game) have awakened the isolationist in me that I don't really like. I find that I equate this situation to the times leading up to WWII. Country, under sanctions caused by previous misdeeds, becomes lead by horrible dictator. When do other nations step in to stop the dictator prior to WWIII?

Registered: Feb 2000
Location:
Posts: 1571

K.Cannon,

I think people do, think and say irrational things when passions are high. I would not read much into the booing of the American anthem at the hocky game in Montreal. That being said, I would prefer an isolationist U.S. A over an interventionist U.S.A. I bet there would be less hatred towards the U.S if/when this happens.

In terms of flaunting UN resolutions, other countries have done -- Israel comes to mind -- and all they got was a slapped on the wrist and billions of dollars more in American money (not an invasion).

quote:

---

Originally posted by K. Cannon

oh, agreed. not every American is good. not every Israeli is good. not every Russian, Canadian, German, Englishman is good. i was responding to the "Canadians are a good people."

As a general statement (typed with trepidation) I would assert that Americans, Canadians, French, English, etc, citizens look more askance at murderous dictators than some other countries.


hmm. yes, you probably have. actually, i have, too. (probably more than you given that I live here) and i am truly sorry for those Americans who act-out to the embarassment of my country.


yep, we've got some nasty bigots 'round these parts. we've got some nice folks, too. (dare I say--like me? )


I don't agree that the course of action embarked upon was on a "whim".


I honestly believe this goes back to a BobbyMike point, maybe in another thread, can't remember. (Deal with Iraq before it *becomes* North Korea.)

The threat may not literally be for this evening, tomorrow, or next week, maybe not until 2005, but the threat is definitely there. And I also think the threat is for more than just the United States. Blatenly flaunting his disobedience to the UN resolutions should have earned more for Saddam than a blind eye and a deaf ear for lo these eleven years.

[/b]So did storming the beaches of Normandy. I just think the difference is the timing, the willingness to be extremely unpopular now to do a better good for tomorrow.


Personally, these discussions on this board have made me very aware of the the "other side." Unfortunately, some actions by the "other side" (for example the booing during the American anthem during the hockey game) have awakened the isolationist in me that I don't really like. I find that I equate this situation to the times leading up to WWII. Country, under sanctions caused by previous misdeeds, becomes lead by horrible dictator. When do other nations step in to stop the dictator prior to WWIII? [/B]

---

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049

quote:

---

Originally posted by yardie


Comments tend to be tired and demeaning when it hits a nerve. You cannot handle the truth ?

---

__________________
"I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049

quote:

---

Originally posted by yardie
K.Cannon,

I think people do, think and say irrational things when passions are high. I would not read much into the booing of the American anthem at the hocky game in Montreal. That being said, I would prefer an isolationist U.S. A over an interventionist U.S.A. I bet there would be less hatred towards the U.S if/when this happens.

In terms of flaunting UN resolutions, other countries have done -- Israel comes to mind -- and all they got was a slapped on the wrist and billions of dollars more in American money (not an invasion).

---

I'm sure Saddam would have preferred an isolationist USA too. I know Hitler would have preferred it.

The problem with that is that no country can be isolationist. the world is too open for that.

You might like to know that we (the USA) doesn't really care if people hate or like us. That is up to the other fellow. We try to do what's right, not what what's popular. This time we just happen to be doing what's right, and what the majority wants. Unfortunately for some people, they can't deal with that and are having a temper tantrum

__________________
"I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."