Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

And again you raise utterly irrelevant points which fail to address the subject.

Let me remind you again what the subject was: You said that America had "widespread support" for its action. I have demonstrated that on any rational and objective measure of "support' that was simply not the case. Now if you have any proof to the contrary, please produce it.

Sorry, isn't someone elsewhere in this thread complaining about another poster making personal attacks??

*Where* do I say you should *shut up*? I want you to speak up! I want you to show the *proof* of the claims you are making!

Please *SHOW* us something that demonstrates that your claims are not just your beliefs, but are actually *FACTS*!

We're all waiting...!!!

You can also assume they are doing it because they were told to by the Great Pumpkin or the little pixies that hide under their pillow. It's not very convincing as an argument, though, is it?

Ah, *more* supposition and innuendo! Because X did it in the past, they *must* be doing it again!

:rofl:

You don't like people who won't take your baseless claims at face value and instead request reasonable standards of proof. You, in turn, respond with evasion, obfustication and persona attacks and then act all aggrieved when they won't run away before your bluster.

Hang on! You say "this is a free society" and that people "have a right to demonstrate" yet you then follow it with the suggestion that they *PAY* for the right to demonstrate!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

And so you make one last desperate attempt to attack me, but end up only making yourself look even more ridiculous. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

In war you have to take out the infrastructure to deny it to the enemy. Anything less would be foolhardy. Thats a bit different to deliberatly targeting synagogues and buses don't you think?

I agree, cluster bombs are wrong, they may kill innocent women and children but that is hardly in the same league as targeting a bus full of children dont you think? That will kill them btw....no 'may' about it. Now if you can't see the difference, you definitly need your head seeing to. It's a question of intent, you see. The person who deliberatly kills innocents is deemed to be nastier than the person who accidently kills innocents whilst trying to kill bad guys. Also, the person who is trying to avoid civilian casualities will generally avoid them whilst the whilst the terrorist will generally get them every time ('cos that's what he's trying to do)....it's that 'intent' thing again you see...
I know that I'm talking down to you but you can't seem to see the difference between intent and accident (or just won't see it)

(All civilian casualities are tragic btw)

Who's phrase is that?, not mine, don't put words into my mouth. We are without a doubt 'better' than they are because we don't deliberatly target women and children. We don't set out to blow up buses and resturants and red cross facilities (using ambulances) I wonder how loudly you would squeal if we tried sh*t like that(but I don't see you condeming them for it:dozey: ) .

wtf has Turkeys apalling human rights record got to do with anything?

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

A bit like the comments (from all you liberal left wingers) to the effect that because the US has got it wrong in the past they must be doing it wrong again.:dozey:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

And, once again, excuse me, but *HOW* does targetting civilian water and sewerage systems hurt the Iraqi military???

http://www.oz.net/~vvawai/sw/sw41/watertarget.html

What about a power system that supplies Iraqi hospitals?

http://www.droitvp.org/electricityCivilian.html

You may want to quibble words about whether this is "deliberate" or "accidental", but the fact is that innocent women and children have *died* as a result of this policy and that is something you *cannot* deny.

No, because innocent people end up maimed, crippled or dead either way.

It may salve *your* conscience to think "Ah, we but didn't undertake a deliberate act to kill these people", but I doubt that's much comfort to them or their families.

If you think otherwise, it is *you* who needs their conscience, rather than their head, examined.

Ye gods, no, it's not your phrase, it's mine!! It's the way I describe your position. Other words I could use are for instance "hypocritical" or "short sighted" or "blinkered".

So *accidentally* killing them by destroying vital infrastructure which is *NOT* of any military value or by using morally questionable weaponry such as cluster bombs, depleted uranium et al is "BETTER"??

I would be rolling on the floor lauging at this point if it weren't so bloody tragic.

Ah, because I don't condemn "them", somehow I have no right to condemn "us" for engaging in illegal actions! What a wonderfully ludicrous piece of logic...!

You just condemned the bombings in Turkey, yet you hadn't said anything about the abuses of Human rights in that same country and the persecution of Iraqi Kurds by Turkish forces! As someone said "but I don't see you condeming them for it"

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I'm sorry, is the phrase "liberal left wingers" supposed to be insulting or something?

As to whether the US is doing it wrong again, I'll leave the evidence of the current state of Iraq to stand for my answer!

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Congratulations on summing up your own attitude, couldn't have put it better myself.

Incidently nothing I wrote was not irrelevant, merely following what was said by me in response from you before. I detected a rather smug arrogant attitude from you since were literally laughing at the new democracies supporting the coalition. Countries like Estonia, Poland etc have experienced years of oppression and now have a voice in world affairs, you I suppose would prefer they remained under Soviet influence.

I say again, we live in free society, people do have the right to protest; they have a duty to act responsibily; as long as they do not violate the law and cooperate with the police. I wrote at the time complaining our Council Tax would increase and none other than K. Livingstone announced it and at the same he was encouraging it, when as Mayor he should not be.

Some of the key people involved in the proposed demonstrations are members of the Socialist Workers' Party, the various Communist Parties and other fringe hard left groups, they have paid officials who are involved in organising and publicity, also there will be student activitists who will be paid NUS or other student union officials of various institutions. Others indeed may well be on state benefits, fine they have rights too. Certainly, on such ocassions when mob violence has resulted in damage to property and injuring police officers during the performance of their duties and any law abiding citizen then yes protesters involved in violent acts should pay compensation.


I have really tried to keep this friendly, I do not engage in personal attacks and will not but I will say that you are arrogant, you are intolerant and indeed you do respond with personal attacks.

I thought the speech from President George W. Bush yesterday at the Banquetting Hall was quite good.

Do have a nice day.

:wavey:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Absolutely!

'It ain't over till the fat lady sings':)

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

So did I.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

We know that the Iraqui military often located itself in civilian areas and went as far as using civilian buildings such as hospitals as bases.

We have to quibble over words when it comes down to deciding who is evil/to blame/how much to blame and who is not. Thats why we have a distinction between murder and manslaughter in law.



If my family was killed by accident I would feel differently about it than if they were killed deliberatly. It wouldn't make it right or help the sorrow but it would be different, for instance the question of retribution would have to be addressed (or not)

And this countrys legal system as well. Remember murder V manslaughter? Premeditated V accidental?:rolleyes:


I don't agree with using cluster bombs or depleted uranium shells. How do you know that the infrastructure was not of military value? The truth of stuff like that only comes out decades later. Anyhow the Iraquis often deliberatly sited themselves in/near/beneath civilian buildings.

The situation is tragic



Don't put words in my mouth. You have every right to condemn 'us' but when you don't utter a peep about 'them' it strikes me as odd and rather one-sided.



wtf? Are we discussing Turkey now? Different discussion, go start a new thread.:confused:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I'd just like to point out a couple of things:

1) I am sorry, but I think it reasonable to assume that most countries build their Miltary infrastructure outside population centres at least partly to minimise the impact on civilians if the place is bombed. Saddam did not do this.

He built Military bases in towns (near hospitals and schools for instance). Presumably this was in the assumption the west would not bomb them for fear of hitting innocent citizens. So, I personally blame Saddam Hussein for these deaths.

2) Saddam also killed hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of innocent Iraqi citizens.

3) Iraqi hospitals, if maintained to a reasonable standard, will have generators to power all essential equipment. Ours do.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Oh dear, now you bring this discussion to the level of the playground!

See that pile of poo? That's you, that is! That's your argument!

Yawn.

Any such "detection" is purely the result of your own imagination. I did not say anything of the sort, nor would I ever. I would ask you to prove your claim with cites, however past performance has demonstrated that the futility of such requests.

Why are people objecting to me allegedly "trying to put words into their mouth", yet don't complain when others do the same to me? Hmm...!

Irrelevant, irrelevant and irrelevant. Some of the people are members of (insert ny particular group you care to name here). Whatever particular groups people may belong to has *NO* bearing on the fact that a *lot* of people are protesting because they object to US behaviour and foreign policy. It certainly doesn't mean that they *AGREE* with or *SUPPORT* the philosophiles of the SWP, the Communists or anyone else.

And any protestors who are arrested and convicted of such acts in a court of law *WILL* pay compensation or be given jail sentences or whatever. This does *NOT* mean that people should, as you seem to suggest, "pay to protest"!

Unfortunately what is clear is that you have no idea what a reasoned debate is. You confuse opinion with fact, disagreement with intolerance, requests for proof of claims with personal attacks and think that anyone who doesn't agree with you is, thereby, being "arrogant".

Sorry, am I expected to read this as some sort of sarcasm?

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Oh.

The sound you can hear is me not giving a damn.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Ho hum. More irrelevancies.

Did you actually bother to *read* those links I posted? Let me quote a couple of relevant sections...

"During allied bombing campaigns on Iraq the country's eight multi-purpose dams had been repeatedly hit, simultaneously wrecking flood control, municipal and industrial water storage, irrigation and hydroelectric power. Four of seven major pumping stations were destroyed, as were 31 municipal water and sewerage facilities - 20 in Baghdad, resulting in sewage pouring into the Tigris. Water purification plants were incapacitated throughout Iraq."

"An estimated 90% of Iraq's national power grid was destroyed in the Gulf War."

Now *HOW* exactly, is that going to affect the Iraqi military *WITHOUT* also causing widespread suffering to civilians?

These are *ILLEGAL* acts under UN conventions which the US has signed up to. They border on, if not actually are, *war crimes*.

And the US redefined "civilian" as "military" to justify their illegal actions. Oh, and don't forget that they refused to take part in the International Criminal Court because they knew damned well that they'd be hauled up in front of it for what they'd done!

However we're not talking so much about "accident" as "carelessness"! The US has this lovely phrase "collateral damage" to describe what happens when civilians are killed as a result of their military action. Those who are now suffering cancers or who have been maimed or killed by unexploded cluster weapons or who were made ill or died due to the lack of fresh water are just more "collateral damage".

How would *you* feel if your family were just "collateral damage"?

Read the bloody links!

Now who is putting words into whose mouth?? There's a word for that...

Perhaps you didn't read what I wrote. Perhaps you didn't understand.

Here, let me quote the words again and see if you can fit them into the context of your above seeming attempt to "put words into my mouth":

'You just condemned the bombings in Turkey, yet you hadn't said anything about the abuses of Human rights in that same country and the persecution of Iraqi Kurds by Turkish forces! As someone said "but I don't see you condeming them for it"'

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

And all very valid points, except for the fact that they're *all* answered by the links that I posted, but which people don't seem to have bothered to *READ*!

1) We're talking about civilian infrastructure, not military targets. Targetting dams and water treatment facilities is an entirely different matter.

2) Irrelevant. We are talking about what *our* forces did (unless you believe the argument that "we had to kill them to save them")

3) Backup generators are a *temporary* measure, designed to keep the power going until the main supply is repaired. They are *NOT* designed to *keep* supplying power when 90% of the Iraqi national power grid was destroyed!

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Thats all right, I didn't expect you to:D

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Are these the dams you are talking about Graham:dozey:

Waters slowly return, but life may never be the same for Iraq's `Marsh Arabs'
By Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson
Knight Ridder Newspapers, June 3, 2003

"Saddam built dams to dry up the very existence of the Marsh Arabs, or Madan, who challenged his rule 12 years ago. U.S. troops recently released water from one of the dams, part of a plan by Iraqi and American wetlands experts to rehabilitate at least part of the marshes on what is now 7,000 square miles of cracked moonscape....Yet the marsh isn't the same. The water, once fresh, came back salty. The depth in May was about 5 feet, compared with 12 feet when the Americans first released the water weeks earlier. The fish that returned with the murky water were small and inedible. Former fisherman Nouri al Asadi said the fish were so bad that he was convinced the damage was permanent. "If the marshes return, so will the people, but I don't think the marshes will return," said Asadi....Today, there is no sign of marsh reeds or rivers teeming with life. What used to be marshland is made up of gray clumps of cracked earth with sparse desert vegetation broken up by dry riverbeds. The Madan say the blinding dust storms that blow across south-central Iraq are a result of this devastation. Even in Chebayish, where some green fields flourish now as a result of the recent return of water, a scramble up the banks of one of the canals the Iraqi leader built reveals a moonscape as far as the eye can see. Experts with an Iraqi expatriate organization called Eden Again are spearheading the restoration effort, funded in part by a $200,000 State Department grant. But getting enough water to restore even part of the marshes may take years, depending on the acquiescence of Iraqi farmers and oil executives, who benefited from the drainage program. Agreement also is needed from Syria and Turkey, whose dams curb the flow of water into southern Iraq

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

So any points I make are irrelivant but yours arn't? hmmmm.....

As I already said, the truth of these matters and the reason for them tends not to be apparent for decades. I am sure that there was a good tactical reason for bombing those dams.


While the Iraquis use ambulances to attack red cross buildings....


Now who's quibbling over words!
I believe that you yourself have called that kind of rhetoric an appeal to emotion, or words to that effect. (and lambasted me for it in the past)


What words exactly did I put into your mouth?:confused: All I said was: .


I don't see what Turkey has to do with this argument but if you want me to condemn Turkey for it's human rights abuses I will:confused: ....while we are at it, would you care to condemn Saddam for his and terrorists in general for theirs?

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

On a slightly off topic note and hoping to lighten the tone...I thought Graham Nortons gag last night was hilarious:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

:D

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Ah, we're back to the playground again.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

No, because, once again, if you've clearly not *BOTHERED* to *READ* what I'd actually posted, instead of probably just taking a quick skim and then ignoring the facts.

Try reading:

http://www.nowarcollective.com/powellbio.htm

Note the section:

" In his memoirs, Gen. Powell recounts drafting a warning to Saddam one day before the beginning of the fighting, on Jan. 15, 1991.

" If driven to it, I wrote, we would destroy the dams on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and flood Baghdad, with horrendous consequences. (Powell, 1995; p.491)

"The city of Baghdad that Gen Powell threatened to flood is home to 4 million civilians who are also victims of the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. During the Gulf War, the U.S. deliberately targeted the water supply infrastructure †“ Professor Thomas Nagy of Georgetown University"

Or how about http://www.mediamonitors.net/gowans22.html

"During the Gulf War, coalition forces bombed Iraq's eight multi-purpose dams, destroying flood control systems, irrigation, municipal and industrial water storage, and hydroelectric power. Major pumping stations were targeted, and municipal water and sewage facilities were destroyed."

If you wish to make a fool of yourself, that's your business, but please don't try to do it by twisting *MY* words into something I never said.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

If your point is irrelevant I'm going to bloody well *say* it's irrelevant. Just as your post above about the dams affecting the marsh arabs was irrelevant because those dams were *not* designed to provide fresh water, but only to drain the swamps the Arabs lived in!

If you think it is relevant: prove it.

Ah, once again we mistake opinions for facts....

And yet again you reach for irrelevancies to try to cover up your losing arguments.

That isn't quibbling. Those are *facts* Please try to tell the two apart.

All you did was imply that I was *only* attacking "our side" and hinting that, thereby, I was somehow "supporting" the other side because I wasn't criticising them too. That is nonsense.

Clearly!

Certainly, I have never said that I *wouldn't*.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

What?:confused:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I say again (and I said it before as well but you keep ignoring it):
'As I already said, the truth of these matters and the reason for them tends not to be apparent for decades. I am sure that there was a good tactical reason for bombing those dams.'


Exactly what words am I 'twisting' and how????:confused:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I give up, arguing with you is like banging my head against a wall.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

We've lost site of the topic, we were talking about why the USA was unpopular, I think this thread has proven the point, regardless of how valid the counter arguments are.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

But saying this is just the same as carrying on the argument that's been going on for days ... except without backing it up with any facts! :banghead:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

The red cross was concerned of quantomo bay. Leaving the geneava convention. War on iraq with no evidence of WMD.

This fact may have got lost in the media spin - but was there any connection between iraq, alqui eda or terriorists :shrug: ?

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I find it strange that the red cross is concerned with guantanamo bay but I haven't seen much about it being concerned with the ambulance launched suicide attack on it's Baghdad offices. Is this just selective reporting:confused:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

This is the kind of thing I am concerned concerned about.....and people say that Bush is the major threat to peace?! If Bush dropped dead tomorrow people like these bombers would carry on regardless.

Bush may be an a**hole but this problem is bigger than Bush or even the US. It is a problem of a clash of cultures and of some sections of the muslim cultures intolerance of the west.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Not directly, although I am certain Saddam would have passed any WMD he managed to develop to terrorists given the chance, on the basis that it would suit his own ends to throw London or New York into turmoil with a 'dirty' bomb or something chemical or biological.

But even this is not really the original topic you alluded to in your post earlier - the thread title is asking whether anti-Americanism is on the up because it is fashionable to be anti-American. Some of the unsavoury things the USA has done, which have been posted in this thread, do indeed lend weight to the argument that it is not mere fashion to be anti-American just now.

But then, the fact that a great many people (some of them in this thread) seem completely unable to acknowledge the fact that an evil situation existed in Iraq and has now been dealt with. This would tend to lend weight to the idea that such people are determinedly anti-American for some other reason, determined as they are to spend all their energies criticising the US while making little effort at all to condemn a murderous dictator or Al Quaeda terrorists.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

And you can keep on saying it until you're blue in the face, however, unlike the Snark in Alice in Wonderland, what *you* say three times does *not* become true!

We have already *HAD* a decade go by since those attacks were carried out, yet there is no evidence or proof of "good tactical reasons". There is, however, plenty of evidence of the suffering caused to civilians!

How long are we going to have to wait before you grudgingly admit that, maybe, just maybe, there *wasn't* a "good tactical reason" for those attacks?

You asked me: "Are these the dams you are talking about Graham" when it was blatantly obvious to anyone who had actually bothered to read the links I'd posted, that they were most certainly *NOT* the dams I was talking about.

You tried to undermine my point about the US bombing dams and water and sewerage treatment plants by making an *irrelevant* one about the dams built to destroy the Marsh Arabs' habitat which had nothing to do with the subject, but you tried to twist the meaning to seem that I was in the wrong.

You failed.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Translation: Ramrod's run out of arguments, his points are irrelevant, his logic is flawed and now he's blaming *me* because he's lost!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

(PS, it's easier to break through a wall using a sledgehammer)

(PPS for "sledgehammer" read "provable facts")

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

If you are going to throw accusations like this around, have the courage of your convictions to name names.

If you don't, you're just mudslinging in the hope that some of it will stick.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I never said sadam wasn't evil - I said the campaign to remove him was unjustified and illegal. But his removal will cause more dangers, Sadam would not attack America if he had anything to loose. He now has nothing to loose, he has become more dangerous.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

This has got nothing to do with courage. I'm not going to get drawn into finger-pointing. You can be sure that if I ever intended to level an accusation at anyone, I would name them, as I often have.

If you had read my entire post, instead of just the part you quoted, you would have spotted that I was summing up the argument from both sides. I notice you're not clamouring for me to name those who I think have made valid points about America's activities.

Funny, that. Anyone would think you were looking for an argument. :rolleyes:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

You state correctly that the Saddam regime has ended in Iraq. And its also true that the taliban no longer rule Afghanistan.
But then factor this into it:-

Saddam and his cronies are where? they are currently doing what? Is he in Iran with access to a dirtybomb or biological weapons?
Bin Laden is where? seems that Al Quaeda are still able to carry out bombings and terrorist strikes anywhere they please.
From this I deduce that Bush hasnt in fact completed his mission in these two countries, he has actually made the situation slightly worse. Unknown whereabouts of two people capable and willing to carry out attrocities is worrying. It was safer when we knew where they actually were.


So In general people, please dont glorify Bush for a job that has been incompetantly done.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Who? Graham? Noooo....

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

All the points you make are perfectly valid, except for the bit where you say I 'glorify Bush'. This is not true. The only words in the post you quoted which are in any way pro-American are 'an evil situation existed in Iraq which has now been dealt with'. It's an observation you are free to disagree with, but I don't see how you could suggest this fairly mild statement of opinion is 'glorifying' Gee Dubya in any way.

Of course, you, along with both Graham and DQ, chose not to draw attention to the part of my post in which I said:

It's beginning to appear that even an attempt to be balanced is not good enough in this thread. :(

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

The glorify bush bit was intended in general not as a direct reference to yourself. EDIT original post now edited to make that clear EDIT
I realised that you were trying to offer a balanced argument, I simply wished to point out that as honourable as Bushes intentions may have been he simply hasnt delivered.
You say that the evil situation has been dealt with, I agree partly, yes Saddam has no power now, The Iraqi people are experiencing a form of freedom, but Saddam has certainly not been dealt with yet.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

thank you :)

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Well, I can see now that you are very childish. One day you may grow up. Get yourself a life.

Do have a nice day.

:wavey:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Well thjis is ridiculous!!!

Slightly off topic here but it does tie in.

I have just tried to get to Sedgefield, some of you will know Sedgfiled is a little village in the constituency of Mr Blair. The village is closed!!!! No traffic in or out since 8pm last night!!!!!

Armed police everywhere, all with an attitude, I guess its because I wanted to protest peacefully and also get a glimpse of "the most powerfull man in the world".

The security isnt this bad when Mr Blair is there and I have seen him there several times. Security isnt like this for the royal family.
There are what appear to be US security people everywhere and I am alarmed that thye are licensed to kill anyone they say poses a threat.

Theres allegedly a lot of fear in th evillage itself as they are scared somehting will happen there. The villagers also want to demonstrate themselves at the treatment they have received.
This is another reason why Dubya therefor the US is becoming more and more disliked.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Taken from todays Times:





November 21, 2003

True fiction

I love a little country, Tony
By Toby Moore
Our writer anticipates President Bush feeling at home in Sedgefield, Tony Blair's constituency



[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]†œLOOK, Laura, little gardens far as the eye can see,â₠¬Ã‚Â� he said, peering excitedly through the smoked-glass window as they drove into Sedgefield.

†œFields, Mr President,ââ ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ� corrected an aide, flicking through the briefing note.

†œWhat? For crops and stuff?ââ‚Ã⠀šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ� It seemed incredible.

†œTheyâà ƒÆ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€ žÂ¢re standard-sized agricultural commodity production units, according to the embassy,ââ‚à ƒâ€šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ� said the aide.

They seemed awful small, the President thought as his motorcade pulled ahead, forced to move at the pace of its slowest vehicle, the anti-personnel nuclear presidential protection device launcher. Pentagon officials said it was cheaper to put the whole submarine on a low-loader lorry rather than detach the device itself.

Yes, this British countryside was certainly strange-looking, he thought, all rolled up and crumpled. Not like Crawford.

Eggs and tomatoes were flying through the air. How did they get there? Some harvesting technique? He wanted to ask somebody, but there was nobody visible.

†œThat produce is just hitting the road. What a waste of Godââ‚Âà ‚¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢s good giving, Laura. No wonder their farmers need subsidies. Say, where is everyone anyway?ââ‚à ‚¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ� he asked the aide.

†œTheyâà ƒÆ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€ žÂ¢re in their homes, Mr President, sealed in. You can just see masking tape around the doors. Itââ‚ ¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢s a security bubble thing.ââ‚Ã⠀šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ�

Finally, the convoy pulled up in front of a large, detached house. †œWeÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¢ÃƒÆ ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€Å ¾Ã‚¢re here, sir. I can see Mr Blair over there. Look, heââ‚ ¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢s wearing those dungarees you gave him.ââ‚ ¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ�

The President smiled and leapt out as the car door swung open. He liked Tony, and Tony liked him. He liked people who liked him.

†œJust the plastic grass between the tape, please Mr President,ââ ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ� said a suited man in dark glasses. †œWe havenââ‚ƚ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t had time to check the local natural growing material for toxins.ââ‚à ‚¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ�

But he was barely listening, just breathing in that scented country air. My, if this wasnâ₠¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t just like home. Then he saw them. Cows. Black and white ones!

†œTony, you shouldnââ‚à ‚¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t have.ââ‚ƚ¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ�

The Prime Minister frowned. The President slapped his host on the back, smiling. †œWell, I appreciate it.ââ‚Âà ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ� He made a mental note to make sure that next time his good buddy visited Texas, heââ‚ ¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢d reciprocate, make sure there were some local animals to remind his guest of home, maybe those haggis things that heââ‚ ¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢d been briefed about.

The aide was less happy and called over the Secret Service squad leader. †œHave those cows been vetted?ââ‚à ‚¬Ã‚ÂÂ�

†œYes sir, and sealed with masking tape.ââ‚ƚ¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ�

†œGood.â € �

The President and Prime Minister stood together staring at a silent, rolling landscape. †œYou know, Tony. The cows and fields. This is what binds us, our shared countryside. Except the flying eggs. We still collect ours the old-fashioned way,ââ‚ ¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ� he laughed softly. †œItÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¢ÃƒÆ ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€Å ¾Ã‚¢s a subsidy thing, ainââ‚Âà ‚¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢t it? Like the steel business.ââ‚ ¬ÂÂÂÂ�

What on earth was he talking about, thought Tony. Eggs? Best to move on. Was he threatening more trade wars? Tony beamed professionally at his guest anyway. †œWelcome to my home,ââ‚ƚ¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ� he said, wondering why there was no mention of eggs in his briefing notes.

They were to walk through the village. The main street was lined with men in suits wearing dark glasses. The President began shaking hands and looked at Tony. †œThis is great, Tony. These people are real friendly.â₠¬Â�

The aide coughed. †œTheyâà ƒÆ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€ žÂ¢re your Secret Service detachment, sir.ââ‚ ¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ�

†œReally? Where are the locals?ââ‚à ‚¬Ã‚ÂÂ�

†œThe local, sir. Just the one we managed to get through British security checks in time.ââ‚ƚ¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ� The President looked at the man in a flowing white tunic and black beard. He reached out his hand. †œDo you know about egg farming?ââ‚à ƒâ€šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ� †œNo, my nameââ‚ ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s Aaron Barschak. Iâ₠¬ÃƒÆ’¢â€žÂ¢m more a comedy terrorist.ââ ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ�

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]


:rofl:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Very funny and Very true.
[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]


:rofl:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I'm pleased to hear it.

It may surprise you to realise that, actually I *did* read the entire post, unfortunately I disagree that...

... because comments like ...

"Some of the unsavoury things the USA has done, which have been posted in this thread, do indeed lend weight to the argument that it is not mere fashion to be anti-American just now."

... with caveats such as "some of" and "do lend weight" or "that it is not mere fashion", hardly balance out such a blanket accusation that

" a great many people (some of them in this thread) seem completely unable to acknowledge the fact that an evil situation existed in Iraq and has now been dealt with. This would tend to lend weight to the idea that such people are determinedly anti-American for some other reason, determined as they are to spend all their energies criticising the US while making little effort at all to condemn a murderous dictator or Al Quaeda terrorists."

We go from "some of" to "a great many (some... in this thread)" and "completely unable" and "lend weight" that "such people are determinedly anti-American for some other reason" and "determined to spend all their energies".

Now whilst you may have *tried* to be balanced, unfortunately you did not succeed in your attempt, thus I called you to account for it.

Not because I "want an argument", but because you have, IMO, misrepresented the views of people like me. I will condemn Saddam or Al Qaeda as much as anyone, but that's not what we're discussing here and the fact that they are murderous dictators or terrorists does *not* excuse the US's illegal actions.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

And we can all sleep soundly in our beds knowing that Graham is on hand to call those to account that would post unsatisfactorily on nthellworld. ;)

Given that my point of view is already abundantly clear in this thread, and that I am not 'summing up' in the same sense as a trial judge who is duty-bound to be absolutely impartial, I thought I was quite fair in acknowledging good points made by those I generally am disagreeing with. My post was a general summary, and if it was a direct response to anything, it was purely and simply a response to DQ's point about topic drift in this thread.

And will you please stop mentally inserting your own name in posts I make ... as I said, if I mean you, I'll say you. Some people are condemning the US while excusing the acts of terrorists but I am not stupid enough to make sweeping generalisations and assume that everyone in this thread who has expressed anti-American or anti-war sentiment is also an apologist for terrorism. Where I think that people are apologising for terrorists, I have already said so.

So don't worry, I never thought you were fan of Saddam and Osama.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

:rofl:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

<sigh> Oh give it a rest. I'm not getting personal, why do you need to?

And I didn't. That's why I said it. Not because of any "grudge" against you, nor out of personal vindictiveness, but simply because IMO you got it wrong.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Strange how so many posters seem to think that you engage in personal attacks and yet you deny it and continue to engage in posts that are arrogant, intolerent, nasty bullying, intimidatory, make personal attacks and show rudeness.

Still, I suppose you were carrying yesterday one of those stupid posters declaring Bush to be number 1 terrorist at a time when Islamic terrorists were still slaughtering innocents, shame on you.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

<sigh> (especially definition 1c.) Please read the smilies as well as the text, they are there to avoid confusion. ;) ;) ;) ;)

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Putting a smiley after a comment like your one that I responded to is like saying "no offence" just before saying something offensive or "present company excepted". It doesn't excuse it.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Warning, the following message may contain sarcasm...

Wow! That's impressive, we jump from "personal attacks" to "arrogant, intolerent, nasty bullying, intimidatory, make personal attacks and show rudeness."

Damn, but I must be good to manage all that!

May I introduce you to my solicitors, Messers Pott and Kettleblack.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I had absolutely no idea you would find it offensive, and I certainly wasn't trying to offend you. However, clearly I did - so I'm sorry. :Peaceman:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Thank you for the apology. It's accepted in the spirit it was offered.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Then I'm glad of your sincere acceptance of my apology. :) Now what were we talking about?

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

You certainly are!;) :D

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Sorry, can't remember! :D :D :D

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I really like reading http://denbeste.nu, and the author wrote a really interesting article a couple of days ago regarding the differences between Europeans and Americans. Here are some highlights:

http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/20...ncountry.shtml

You know, I've never thought of it this way but this is definitely one of the truest statements I've ever read. At least, from my own experiences. He continues:

To this post, Steve got a reply:

And the reply:

:)

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Well, yes, because Britain acknowledges the concept of "Dual Nationality", but to become an American citizen you have to recite an oath part of which says "'I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic....''.

That's *ALL* it takes? Give up *everything* that's defined your life previously to become an American??? Oh, well *that's* no big deal!

Although I wonder if the author of that piece has been to Little China, or Little Italy, or Little Russia or Little Cuba or talked to a large number of Hispanics who don't even *speak* the same language as him...!!!

Or consider that Dual Citizenship is actually not that bad a thing after all.

Translation: It's that which makes some of us arrogant ba$$$$ds who think that we have the right to do what we want and to hell with anyone else because we're the biggest bully on the block!

Maybe if the US had actually *experienced* Nazi occupation they might have a different view on the situation.

(NB I don't approve of the laws in France and Germany that proscribe this sort of thing, but I understand why they have them)

And what about the one who accidentally shoots an innocent person...? Of course in America the intruder is *much* more likely to be armed...! (Oh gods, but *please* let's not start that debate again!!)

And the US is welcome to them...! ;)

He probably got *lots* of replies, but, from what I can see, since it's *his* site, he can pick and choose which ones he repeats!

Gods, if this was The Goodies I could just imagine Tim Brooke-Taylor standing there with his Union Flag and tape recorder playing "Land of Hope and Glory"

Unfortunately what this *really* reveals is that many Americans (without really knowing it) suffer from a "cultural inferiority complex". For instance Eddie Izzard once quipped "I come from Europe. You know, the place where history comes from!"

The USA are, when it comes down to it, the "new kids on the block" (no, *not* the boy band!). They talk about "Old Europe" as if "old" is bad and "new" is good, failing to realise that we've been working out how to get along since before their country ever existed.

Many of them are brash, arrogant, loud and attention seeking, just like a kid. "Hey, look at us! We're here, we're powerful, we're going to do what we want and screw the rest of you!" and seem upset when people suggest they settle down and use their brains rather than their mouths (or their "fists").

By the way, that doesn't mean that *all* Americans are like that, far from it, but unfortunately the ones we hear the most from are the loudest :(

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Not even for old times sake?:D

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Graham, I am pretty sure that you know that is not what Steve meant. Ignore the legal crap, and read that paragraph again. What he was saying is that, even if an American moves to Britain and renounces his American citizenship, Britains will keep thinking of him as a yank. This is even moreso in France. No matter what I do, I can't move to France and be considered French by the locals. I will always be a second-class citizen.

I am glad we agree, because I gave up everything to become what I am.

There is a saying... When in Rome, do as the Romans do. I get quite annoyed by all these idiots that move here, and then decide they're going to set up their own mini country inside mine. For crying out loud, go back! Why leave in the first place?

He isn't talking about citizenship!!! He is talking about WHO YOU ARE AT HEART.

You're just annoyed that we don't consult with stupid third-world countries and Europe before we do something.

Doubtful.

I don't. It is simply the government trying to regulate morality and forcing its will onto the people.

WHAT exactly does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Yes it is really funny how a continent of some 300 million odd people has started two world wars, experienced three, four dictators, not to mention the tens of civil wars inside Europe the past 500 years.

Come the United States. 50 independent States, joining a Union, with one civil war. No dictators. Prosperous for the past 200 odd years.

In the meantime, Europe still can't get its own continent under control (*cough* Bosnia) and had as recently as 1990s a genocidal maniac running around in the backyard (Milosovich).

Yes, old in this case seems to be bad.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Lets dig a little deeper and go to fascism.

http://denbeste.nu/external/Zinmeister01.html

And that, everyone, is the difference between the United States and Europe, and why the rest of the world hates us.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I'm curious, where have they got with this system? Last time I heard they needed an observation centre in yorkshire to track the missles, but of course yorkshire has no defense system, so a quick nuke to yorkshire and the US is wide open :dozey:
Have you seen our tabloids, the daily mail hates everyone/thing in the world, we have comedians doing mocking impressions of our politions and then go out in the street in front of the public causing trouble. As opposed to the US where one must swear loyalty and where anti-war protestors get beat up.
If I recall America trained Sadam Husain as an assasin.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

As long as we are posting half-baked opinions and carefully selected facts, here is a quote from a republican American's personal website - the FAQ section:

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

You know that is not what they are referring to. Try buying a Nazi flag and uniform in Germany. Try buying Mein Kampf.

Really? Not that I see how it is relevant to the issue at hand, but mind giving me a few sources? Because I have never read that Saddam Hussein is an assassin.


As to your question about the SDI, well, that is a post by itself and I'm going to take a nap now.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/217.html
http://www.cafeshops.com/pip_cia_saddam

http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle2849.htm

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

InformationClearingHouse? Lol. And the other two? Look, I can google too.

http://www.flat-earth.org/

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

I had heard the fact on a tv program I had to google to find mentions of it. Whats the problem in that?

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Well, we all know that we shouldn't believe what we read in the papers. The same could be said for the tv as well I suppose.....:D

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Jerrek, what is the difference between you posting a link to a site that may or may not be right, and Downquark1 doing the same?

Or do you class everything you don't agree with as wrong, so therefore any links to back it up are wrong?

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Here's where I heard it:
http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/sp...ard_place.html

Very good, you can watch the entire program on stream.

IT would be good if people watched this.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Fair enough.

But as opposed to, say, all those Polacks, Wops, Guineas, Spics, Niggers etc etc who live in the USA? I suggest you ask certain Right Wing groups if they consider those people to be "proper Americans"!

"I am glad we agree,"

I suggest you read that section again with your sarcasm detector switched on.

Ah, once again we hear the zeal of the convert!

ROFL!

No, I'm just trying to point out that there aren't two parts to the world, ie "America" and "Everywhere else".

"Doubtful"

How do *you* know? What grounds do you use to cast doubt on that?

Its his site, it's his ball, its his backyard. He can choose who gets to play. For all anyone knows, he could have had a hundred "anti" messages and one "pro" message, and picked the only one that agreed with him.

It's very easy for him to say "yes, look, this guy gets it!" without mentioning all the others who may not have.

I didn't say it was perfect, but let's look at a couple of facts.

The second was as the result of the first. The Treaty of Versailles was a bodge job. The US President *could* have waived or arranged easy terms on the War Debts of France etc, but he didn't. So France demanded Germany take the blame for the war and pay massive reparations. Thus were the seeds for the second world war sewn. The USA is *not* blameless in this.

And wars against Mexico, Spain, Britain, etc, the Cold War (and almost plunged the world into nuclear conflict on more than one occasion, not to mention being the only country *ever* to use nuclear weapons). War in Vietnam. Sponsored an attack on Cuba. Actions that are wars by any other name in Latin America. Invaded Grenada(!) etc etc etc...

"You're either with us or you're against us"? Or how about "Have you ever been a member of the Communist party?"

And participated in the slaughter of how many native Americans? Prospered on the land stolen from them and on the back of the slave trade (yes, Europe did too, I don't deny that).

Sorry, did someone mention Colombia? Or perhaps Chile? Or maybe Peru?

Don't try to paint the USA as perfect, because they aren't by any means!

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

The difference is that one is an opinion and it is quite clear it is just that: an opinion. The other one is groups trying to present what they have as facts. If it were facts, it would have been all over the news. InformationClearingHouse is just slightly left of Stalin himself.

It really depends. If they are not American citizens and they live in the States, but live in a mini country of their own, then NO. They are NOT Americans.

Easy. It isn't in our nature to restrict free speech like that. We had our own civil war, but you don't see us making the Confederate flag illegal. We didn't ban every artifact that could possibly remind people of the Confederation.

And did I say anything on the contrary? This really has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Don't digress.

So, because we don't want to hand out billions of dollars we are to be blamed for the second world war?

I wasn't talking about foreign wars, and neither was you. Don't ****ing change the subject. We were talking about internal politics. Comparing Europe with the United States. Europe has had it fair share of wars with other countries, and so has the United States. But what I specifically highlighted was the internal civil wars, something Europe is very experienced with.

Pray tell how that has a bearing on the subject at hand.

They weren't angels thats for sure. But I do believe the United States showed unprecidented growth and prosperity, something Europe nor any other nation have been able to rival.

How does that have to do with the subject at hand? They are all on a different continent!

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

And the US doesn't deal with countries who have bad reputations where it comes to human rights, does it? <cough> Saudi Arabia <cough> Turkey <cough> China <cough>

"European politicians have recently attacked and undercut the U.S. on North Korea, on the Middle East, over the Afghan war"

Translation: they weren't willing to just go along with what ever the US wanted.

"about prisoners at Guantanamo"

Those "unlawful combatants" held illegally, incommunicado, without access to legal representation, the Red Cross, about to be tried in military courts who have the power to issue death penalties with no appeals?

Gosh, I would have sworn that there are a few other countries who have had such powers...!

Because the USA wants to "buy" its way out of international accords on pollution, global warming et al because it's not in *their* interest! (Obviously environmental catastrophes are something that only happen to *other* people!)

"regarding the International Criminal Court,"

Sorry, which country was it who wouldn't sign up *unless* their people had *total immunity* from the Court?!

"in scores of trade battles,"

Did someone mention steel tarrifs? And what about the levy that the USA wanted to put on Scottish Cashmere? (Wow, *that's* obviously a major threat to US industry!)

Err, pardon??? I could have sworn I heard a contradiction there...!!!

Ah yes, a ballistic missile shield (which probably won't actually work unless the tests are fiddled!) but which requires radars on other country's soil to even attempt to get to function, meaning that *other* countries become targets instead! Oh! Of course, how silly of me! It means that the US will be protected from these "rogue states" because they'll be shooting at someone else!!

Of course not. The US has its own list of people who it wants to help for its own political purposes!! (Psst, Mr Rumsfeld, what were you doing in Iraq in the 1980s?)

Of course they won't! They're too busy shipping tanks and helicopters and other weaponry to Israel which they use to destroy homes in refugee camps and enforce a new "Berlin Wall" they're building! (Oh, BTW, don't they have a nuclear programme too?!)

Why does that sound like the words of the playground bully? Perhaps we should make sure we keep the bully happy? Isn't there a word for that? "Appeasement" perhaps??

Err, but *who* exactly is that massive force going to *fight*? Who exactly are they going to defend us *from*? Last I recall, the Soviet Union had collapsed and there's no major threat of invasion from anyone else!

And how much of the pollution?

And how much of the spam?!

Let's see, arrogance, bullying attitude, overweaning pride, the thought that they *must* be right and everyone else *must* be wrong, behaving like spoiled children who *have* to get their way, trying to dictate to everyone else how they should live their lives...

Yep, you've got that one *exactly* right!

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Here's where I heard it:
http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/sp...ard_place.html (in the transcript)

I really think it would benefit people interested in the subject of iraq to watch the 1hour program here: http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/sp...ard_place.html

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Jerrek,
Whilst I do not wish to offend you, or cause you any grief......


.....Instead of posting the pro imperialistic American propoganda :D that you choose to do, you know the posts repeating the whinging of why America is the most hated country in the world. Why dont you stop, read some of the replies here properly and think about what is being said. The thing that is most hated about America is exactly the kind of thing you are posting in its defence.

On another note heres a little story about when I was in the states:-

When I visited the states for the millenium, I found it to be a nice place, I cant say i would want to live there but it was nice for a visit. I found 90% of the people to be great, they really took an interest in me because I was English.
However whilst sat in an English theme bar (yeah I thought it was funny too)I met, or rather I had the misfortune to meet two Irish American "Gentlemen" who upon hearing my accent decided to launch into their Pro IRA speeches and sing songs of blowing up british soldiers.
I had a few choice words, I had to defend what I considered wrong, I had to point out that NI could go back to Ireland at anytime it pleases as far as I am concerned but the catholics and the proddies will slaughter each other and that was the reason the british army is there in the first place.
The world was put right!!!! lol

Anyway we went to a club, were refused entry because our English driving license didnt have a picture on it. And for obvious reasons you dont carry your passport around with you whilst in a foreign country. The bouncer was quite arrogant (see just the same as the UK). Told us that we needed to americanise ourselves whilst in his country. Now that statement to me sums up certain attitudes, we were visiting his country, we had made a journey of thoudsands of miles to be made unwelcome by some brain dead neanderthal whos whole ambition in life was to beat the living crap out of people that he didnt like.

The staff in the british bar we went too still have contact with us through a friend that now lives in the states. They collect metal pin badges and we often send over badegs of English football teams etc. These people are the nicest bunch of people I have ever met, however there are an element who, for reasons only known to themselves, think that America is THE place to live in the world, who consider anyone to be outsiders, who fear outsiders. I couldnt help but laugh at the bouncer that thought we were a challenge to his American way of life, 5 british guys who only wanted a drink.

I have come across Americans in the North East of England who are extremely arrogant, that try and use their American nationality to get them to the front of queues, get them entrance to places for free etc etc. I also have a great friendship with an American girl who married a friend of mine, she left sunny Florida to live in the north east of England, she had no trouble adjusting once she got used to the cold (lol). I often talk to her about the states, she see's things differently watching the UK news, she can see how the US is trying to dictate to the world. It makes her unhappy, she isnt a follower of the bush administration, she thinks he is bad for the country.


Perhaps this is because she gets to see the outside world, perhaps its because she is no longer fed the brainwashing "this is the American way" propagander, perhaps she just realised that the US is becoming its own worst enemy.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Ahhh right, so I guess the Eurofighter is a myth, what about our input into the JSF? Hey what about all the money we are paying to the US to purchase apache helicoptors? what about the Royal Navies development of supercarriers? (something the UK has NEVER had nor needed). What about the fact we have American listening stations on our soil to listen to the Russians making the UK a prime target for Nuclear attack (obviously back in the cold war days).
We dont want the US to defend us, we simply dont have enough soldiers or aircraft or indeed civilains to offset any potential friendly fire incidents.
So the US forces can quite happily **** off back to the states, most of europe couldnt give two flying ****s what they do.

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Watching it again I remembered how good it was- I think I might as well let this program do my arguing for me:p:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

Re: anti americanism fashionable
 

Sorry for the delay in replying, NTL has been screwed up majorly down here in Portsmouth and it's been impossible to get in.

I'm just going to address a couple of points...

Which is nonsense. Why can't you be American *and* acknowledge your roots?

Comparing your Civil War to the Holocaust is reaching just a little!

But you're acting as if there was one big country of "Europe" instead of a whole bunch of independant sovereign nations!

And in "America's back yard" according to some...! And please, don't tell me that US politics have nothing to do with what happens in those countries!!