anti americanism fashionable

[Ramrod]

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.

Originally Posted by downquark1

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 ?

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.

Originally Posted by Ramrod

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.'

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?

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

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.

Originally Posted by Ramrod

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

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!



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

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

Originally Posted by towny

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.

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.

[downquark1]

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Graham

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.

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.

Originally Posted by towny

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.

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.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by towny

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

Who? Graham? Noooo....

Originally Posted by timewarrior2001

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 please dont glorify Bush for a job that has been incompetantly done.

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:

Originally Posted by towny

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.

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

Originally Posted by towny

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.

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.

Originally Posted by timewarrior2001

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.

thank you

Originally Posted by Graham

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!

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.

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.

[Ramrod]

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]