War perspective

[pwd72s]

Originally posted by Bo
The bottom line....

Gimme a break, Bo...keep this up and we'll twist this thread into blond jokes!

[turbo6bar]

Aurel, are your Frenchmen full of love for Americans? I remember reading in one of your posts the French wish the Americans had never driven the Germans from France during WWII. I hope that was tongue-in-check.

Is this because the French actually thought they could defeat Germany single-handed, or is it because the French despise their culture and wish to emulate Germany?

I don't hate France, but they sure aren't our friends. That's not saying much, because I really don't hate anyone.

jurgen

[speeder]

I visited France for the first time in 2002, before this latest political situation. I was excited to experience one of the world's greatest cities, Paris, and part of me wanted to encounter some stereotypically rude, American-hating Frenchmen. Just to do some biatch-slapping, which is an equal oportunity activity for me. All nationalities welcome!

It never happened. Sure their was a sour waiter or two, (just like here in the good old U.S.), but nobody who approached the ass-whuppin' threshold. What I found instead were mostly delightful people, of many ethnic backgrounds, (lots of African people, very interesting), and my pathetic college French from 20 years ago did not hinder my enjoyment of the trip. And if you love cities like I do, it is beyond intoxicating. Literally everything on earth there.
I will definitely return, but this year isn't looking good. Bad year for travel all around.

[Aurel]

Aurel, are your Frenchmen full of love for Americans? I remember reading in one of your posts the French wish the Americans had never driven the Germans from France during WWII. I hope that was tongue-in-check.

jurgen, this one was a joke, which came out of the blue when I got tired of hearing that the french should be grateful forever to have been liberated by the americans, and bow to any of their decisions. A friend can disagree with you sometimes, and still remain a friend. I`d say, my grandfather can be grateful to your grandfather, but the world has changed since then. And look at the iraqui, they are even worse: not even two weeks have passed, and they already want their liberators to leave...

Speeder, I am glad you enjoyed your visit of Paris, it is always good to hear that you were not attacked by monkeys

Aurel

[CJFusco]

"A friend can disagree with you sometimes, and still remain a friend."

Amen. One of my best friends since grade school is a 3rd-year cadet at West Point now, and I am a college kid in "damn liberal" massachusetts... you can imagine what our political conversations sound like...

[CamB]

Cam's post usually have a more subversive-provocative tone.

I must have been too tired to think intelligently enough for the subversive bit (I was and am VERY busy at work).

BlueSky - I was getting overtly trolly, to the point where it would piss me off if I read my posts. I am glad Island pointed it out.

[island911]

Hey, no problem.
I’m sure you’ll have the opportunity to return the favor, one day.

[island911]

Originally posted by CamB
France and Russia, after arguing forever to lift sanctions on Iraq, now oppose lifting sanctions on Iraq after the war is over and Saddam is out of power

This is already out of date. France want to lift the sanctions now.

They do? . . . really? . . . That was a month ago!

The sanctions still are on because the French don't want them lifted. They've talked about "suspending" the sanctions. . . but that is NOT lifting the sanctions.

I hope pointing this out helps those whom can't see what the French are really doing; pure Power-Play at the expense of everyone else.

[CamB]

So its out of date again

Speaking of which:

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/15/bush.france/index.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/15/french.list/index.html

Seems a bit far-fetched though.

I'm not really defending the French and their actions. To be honest, I think you're both as bad as each other. I just think the French bashing is often not that well founded, and its a bit hypocritical to refer to French actions as being self-interested (as they generally appear to have the result (if not the intention) of opposing the self-interested acts of the US). Pot calling kettle black, I say.

My diluted French blood must make me argue. The Baudinet name left France just before the turn of the 18th century, suspiciously around Revolution time. But I guess I am still a cheese-eating surrender monkey.

[Aurel]

The french are officially complaining against all the media lies and false accusations against them, such as providing visas to members of the iraq government, here .

Also, interresting article outlaying the parallels that exist between the current Bush policy and the Nazi germany, there

Finally, I`d like to notice how strange it is that we don`t hear much about Iraq anymore (just like Afghanistan), and how Saddam has disappeared (just like Bin Laden). Even this thread has been very quiet, while it is now (after the war) that the real interresting part begins...but maybe the media does not really want us to know what really is going on now, all they wanted was the american sheep to be onboard for the war...the rest (the big business) is not of their business...

Aurel

[Aurel]

By the way, have they found those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, YES or NO ????

[island911]

Yeah it seem the french are officially complaining against all the UK "media lies and false accusations" against them too. french whine

That's a pretty weak parallel to the Nazi . . ."God is with us" . . .EVERYBODY says that.

no confirmed WMD found that I've heard about. . .just lots of mass graves, from mass killings. Now there's a parallel to the Nazis!

[Aurel]

Good point for the mass graves, doc. And I fully agree that a parallel between Saddam`s regime and the nazi Germany can be made TOO. Maybe if the US had made the case of the mass graves and violation of human rights, more countries would have been behind...But there are many other regimes that violate human rights...so there had to be something else...that something else is WMD threat. But this threat was grossly exagerated. We all know that the end game is oil. Otherwise, how would you explain that oil fields have been perectly secured, while water pipelines have been damaged and left unreapaired, leaving the population without drinking water ?
Also, I have always claimed that military action in Iraq would not decrease islamic terrorism, but increase it. Now, how many Al Quaeda bombings have we had just recently ? Does it mean that the US is going to have to invade Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and everywhere a bomb explodes too ? By the way, those countries (Morocco, Saudi Arabia) ALSO violate human rights...do they need regime change ?

Aurel

[Aurel]

It seems pretty clear to me that war does not eradicate terrorism.
It is also obvious that the WMD threat was a fabrication, since none have been used neither found.
Thus, the driving force for this war must have been something else...

[Aurel]

One can argue that whatever the reasons for the war, the iraqui will have better lives now, so it was worth it...well, so far, it is a big mess...are the americans only good at bombing ?

[island911]

Originally posted by Aurel
. . . WMD threat. But this threat was grossly exagerated. We all know that the end game is oil. Otherwise, how would you explain that oil fields have been perectly secured, while water pipelines have been damaged and left unreapaired, leaving the population without drinking water ?

First, WMD: are you saying Iraq didn’t have WMD? . . .or are you just happy that the US is not quick to find them? We all know that when WMD is found, you anti-bush people will find at least 14 ways to claim it was planted. (. . .and what have you accomplished then?)

Second; the pump-houses that were destroyed (by Saddams guys --who’s the Hitler here?) exist in highly populated areas. (making them difficult to get to, for protection) Oil field, on the other hand, are out in the sand.

Furthermore, if more of the oil-field did get blown-up, you would be whining about the environmental damage of millions of gallons of oil smoking up the region. THEN you would be bytching about the one US company who is capable of contain oil fires, to be “in” (tied to, in a big bad corporate way) with the Bush family.
BTW restoring water has been underway. Water truck have been actively bring water to needed areas from the start. Have you heard of anyone dying due to the lack of water?

You guys on the left, spinniing reality so you can play the pity-card. . . .its not working for you, yet you guys continue to do it. . .hmmm.

Originally posted by Aurel
Also, I have always claimed that military action in Iraq would not decrease islamic terrorism, but increase it. Now, how many Al Quaeda bombings have we had just recently
. . . It seems pretty clear to me that war does not eradicate terrorism.

Al Quaeda bombings had been on the increase, up to 9/11. While wars cost both sides, Al Quaeda is loosing ground fast.

Terrorism will never be fully eradicated, BUT it can be made so costly that most those terrorists will decide to try to get along.

. . on the "the americans only good at bombing" thing; that is an "op-ed" piece, not news.

[WOODPIE]

I guess it is common practice to quote another poster in one's own post, if only to keep the topic of discussion fresh in all the reader's heads. Often these discussions get sidetracked, and I sometimes need help focusing on what the topic was originally.

More often, unfortunately, these quotes are simply being used as a debating tool. And so, it is with deep reservations that I quote the following:

"Terrorism will never be fully eradicated, BUT it can be made so costly that most (of?) those terrorists will decide to try to get along."

I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I thought I was pretty much up-to-date with what humanity generally considers most precious. Someone tell me, please! what has come along to replace life itself? The point being, my question:

What can be done to make an act of terrorism so prohibitively more costly than it already is to the terrorist?

Ed

[BlueSkyJaunte]

Originally posted by WOODPIE

What can be done to make an act of terrorism so prohibitively more costly than it already is to the terrorist?

Kill their family; kill their friends; kill their pet goldfish.

[CamB]

Kill their family; kill their friends; kill their pet goldfish.

Geez, who's the terrorist in this equation.

[island911]

Originally posted by WOODPIE
. . . The point being, my question:

What can be done to make an act of terrorism so prohibitively more costly than it already is to the terrorist?

Ed

Good question/point.
It does seem futile, in that these guys are going around blowing-up themselves (and anyone around).
It's a quick conclusion(western culture) that these guys must really believe in what they are fighting for to give their lives so willingly. . . .paints a pretty grime picture, eh?

However, as things stand right now, their motivations do not seem to be purely principle driven. First there is the big pile of money landed on the "martyrs" family. (or so we hear) This money turns the suicide act from martyrdom, to 'run of the mill' suicide-for-cash. . .much like so many in western countries do when they have a big fat life insurance policy and seemingly no finacial future for theirt famly.

Clearly, taking out Saddam was a step in the right direction, IMO.
More needs to be done to take out those whom support these civilian-killing drones.

Then there is the appeal of "warrior" pedaled to these "martyrs". . . "blow yourself up - become a warrior" (such skill)

They are also promised 19 virgins in the after life. . . do you think they get a money-back guaranty on that? Considering their perspective is; all the good women have been bought up by the rich, they don't really question the soundness of the 19 virgins idea.

It seems to me that ending polygamy would be a good first step in giving these guys some hope for a normal future.