France, Germany react to overthrow of Saddam

[Dreadsox]

Never mind...LOL They were posted,

 

[hiphop]

You mean that you disagree with my belief that for 12 years France and Russia have been undermining the sanctions is wrong? Are you certain? Who has opposed stregnthening sanctions? Who violated the resolution that banned flights directly into Baghdad?

I am sorry, but I wholeheartedly believe what I posted. These two nations have been much less than cooperative at the UN. 12 years to work it out is long enough.

By the way...Over 260,000 dead from the sanctions that Russia and France have benfitted from so they can get good oil.

I stand by my beliefs.

Peace

Yes ok whatever, but you can?t go around to say it was Frances and Russias fault!

Say, there is a small arms shop down my street. My neighbors are customers of this shop. I feel threatened by the shop, even if I have made good business with it in the past, just like my neighbors. Anyway, the owner of the shop is a weird man.

In a try to pre-emptively defend myself, I take my gun and kill the owner of the shop, who is known for raping his employees. My neighbors didn?t care about that, they just wanted to buy their small arms, but I cared for the employees. Now he is dead, and they cheer. I tell my uncle he can have the shop to continue to sell small arms, nevertheless I am not persecuted by law for murdering the owner of this shop.

Question: is it legally my responsibility that he is dead, or is it the one of my neighbors who didn?t care?

 

[hiphop]

Never mind...LOL They were posted,

LOL

what did you want to say?

LOL

 

[Dreadsox]

Yes ok whatever, but you can?t go around to say it was Frances and Russias fault!

When Russia violates UN Resolutions and starts direct flights into bagdhad...how is it that they did not contribute to the situation?

When France, Russia, and Germany, oppose any steps to stregnthen sanctions....How is this not contributing to the place we were?


I have said they bear some responsibility for the place we were in last fall, absolutely. 12 years 260,000 dead, because of the bullshit idea that this peace was better than toppling Saddam. Yes, they bear some responsisbility.

If this war remains conventional, and I pray it does, there will be nowhere near 260,000 day. Which is more horrific, setting up a food for oil program, that allowed Saddam to further suppress his people, killing them SLOWLY or toppling the regime?

See, I find the slow starvation and UN Sanctioned Killing of the Iraqi people through Peace, to be much, more horrific. If that makes me wrong in your eyes, fine. France, Russia, and Germany have benefitted from the PEACE.....and that, is why there never was going to be any help from the UN to reslove this crisis.

 

[Dreadsox]

LOL

what did you want to say?

LOL

I will say this. I know the mods have addressed the issue but I need to get this off my chest.

SOme of you may have very good points to make, that I might be inclined to agree with but I find it embarrassing to be on the same side of the issue with you because of the manner you choose to post.

Many people post here with out swearing and making degrading comments. It does more harm to your point then help. It makes most people not read what you are really saying. I wish more people would not post like that, and stick to the debate.

Thanks.....if I overstepped, I apologize to the mods. I needed to say that.

 

[DrTeeth]

I'm confused Dreadsox, was the war 'directly the fault of France and Russia', or did they 'bear some responsibility for the place we were in last fall'?

 

[Dreadsox]

I will ammend my overzealous post up aboce, to say that I believe that the place we were in last fall before President Bush spoke to the UN was directly the fault of France and Russia.

As to the War....I think the UN in General, is a failure, as I have said elsewhere, because of the Veto ect. It seems to be incapable of dealing with this type of crisis..ie Kosovo...Palestine...Iraq....Rwanda.

I did overzealously state the war was their Fault. They do bear some of the responsibility as does the US. Mostly though, I blame Saddam.

 

[hiphop]

When Russia violates UN Resolutions and starts direct flights into bagdhad...how is it that they did not contribute to the situation?

When France, Russia, and Germany, oppose any steps to stregnthen sanctions....How is this not contributing to the place we were?


I have said they bear some responsibility for the place we were in last fall, absolutely. 12 years 260,000 dead, because of the bullshit idea that this peace was better than toppling Saddam. Yes, they bear some responsisbility.

If this war remains conventional, and I pray it does, there will be nowhere near 260,000 day. Which is more horrific, setting up a food for oil program, that allowed Saddam to further suppress his people, killing them SLOWLY or toppling the regime?

See, I find the slow starvation and UN Sanctioned Killing of the Iraqi people through Peace, to be much, more horrific. If that makes me wrong in your eyes, fine. France, Russia, and Germany have benefitted from the PEACE.....and that, is why there never was going to be any help from the UN to reslove this crisis.

Listen Dread I do understand your argumentation, you don?t have to repeat it. Whatever arguments you make, and some may be valid, you said

"...given the war was directly the fault of France and Russia..."

You didn?t say

"...they bear some responsibility for the place we were in last fall, absolutely..."

Thats a HUGE difference.

edit: ok, your above post says all.

 

[Dreadsox]

I agree...and I again was overzealous in my argument over the racism comments.

Peace

 

[Scarletwine]

Imagine there's no countries,
It isnt hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
No religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace...

I'm a hopeless optimist. Thanks Dreadsox.
Also for the post about "being nasty". My mother would say it only shows your ignorance, though I have a bit of a salty tongue myself.

edited to say:
Sting2, I see you and wish you would join us again.

 

[Clark W. Griswold Jr]

Re: Re: Re: France, Germany react to overthrow of Saddam

Okay, I get it..

Now for damage control of my own

If my choice of words offended, my apologies.

But if the overall statement I was making bothers some, forget it....I stand by my original position... entirely.

As for the racism comment, sorry-- I'm "not against the people of these nations, just their government."

You could attack another country. There?s Iran, Syria, North Korea on your list. If Egypt mixes too much into your affairs, go for it. If Lybia has a problem with that, you could ask Berlusconi to help you. His troops are near.

Hiphop: The list that you responded to was with regards to the forthcoming meeting among france germany and russia. They are the ones that need to figure out how they are going to have any kind of positive relationship with the new Iraqi government.

 

[sharky]

Ok, here's the deal. Its not so much that the US is going to benefit from rebuilding Iraq, its that France and Russia, if they do get to join in the rebuilding, are jumping on the bandwagon to take credit for something they didn't do. Look, I was on the fence with many parts of this war. War for oil, Iraqi civilians dying. Or the suffering of these people needs to be stopped, Saddam indirectly supports al Qaeda, etc. etc. One thing I always stood by though was that I support American troops. And I'll be damned if any country that didn't support us is now going to jump on the bandwagon now that American blood has been spilled to topple this tyrant.

As for the term racism being thrown around in this thread, be aware it?s a two-way street and the French said things about us too. Just leave this racism label out of this. We're debating the stance of leaders of different nations, not Freedom Fries and Freedon Toast.

 

[ALEXRUS]

1. You mean that you disagree with my belief that for 12 years France and Russia have been undermining the sanctions is wrong? Are you certain? Who has opposed stregnthening sanctions? Who violated the resolution that banned flights directly into Baghdad?

2. I am sorry, but I wholeheartedly believe what I posted.

3...Over 260,000 dead from the sanctions that Russia and France have benfitted from so they can get good oil.

4. Peace

1. Who has opposed lifting sanctions?
Who established no-fly zones over Iraq in violation of international law?

2. You believe...I know. Feel the difference? Lift up the receiver, I'll make you a believer...

3. ...over 260,000 dead from the sanctions that Russia attempted to lift but US rejected ANY attempt in that direction. By the way, we have enough oil in Russia, u know. We even export it... to the US!

4. I thought real militarists deny any notion of peace

 

[ALEXRUS]

France, Russia, and Germany have benefitted from the PEACE.....and that is why there never was going to be any help from the UN to reslove this crisis.

Still trying to find any coherence between the premise and the conclusion in the above sentence.
Should I?

 

[ALEXRUS]

Re: Re: Re: Re: France, Germany react to overthrow of Saddam

Hiphop: The list that you responded to was with regards to the forthcoming meeting among france germany and russia. They are the ones that need to figure out how they are going to have any kind of positive relationship with the new Iraqi government.

We'll figure it out if it's gonna be IRAQI goverment, believe me. I am true prophet in this kind of stuff. Im not sure though how we'll have positive relationship with a US-led/backed government in Iraq but I don't care... because it'll be illegal anyway...

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

And I'll be damned if any country that didn't support us is now going to jump on the bandwagon now that American blood has been spilled to topple this tyrant.

As for the term racism being thrown around in this thread, be aware it?s a two-way street and the French said things about us too. Just leave this racism label out of this. We're debating the stance of leaders of different nations, not Freedom Fries and Freedon Toast.

But don't you think that the primary concern here should be the welfare of the Iraqi people? Surely if France or Russia or any other country which didn't support the war is able to help in a post-war Iraq then they should be welcomed?

Everyone insisted that the US didn't go to war to protect its own interests, but rather to free the Iraqi people from Saddam's rule, so I don't understand how people can now be arguing that other countries shouldn't benefit from America and Britain's war.

 

[sharky]

But don't you think that the primary concern here should be the welfare of the Iraqi people? Surely if France or Russia or any other country which didn't support the war is able to help in a post-war Iraq then they should be welcomed?

Everyone insisted that the US didn't go to war to protect its own interests, but rather to free the Iraqi people from Saddam's rule, so I don't understand how people can now be arguing that other countries shouldn't benefit from America and Britain's war.

In the end, yes you are right Fizz. We should be watching out for Iraq before any other country. I have more of an issue with the bandwagon jumping than the business side of this. Its really great that France and Russia support us now but where were they two months ago? If I recall, France specifically said they would veto ANY UN resolution by the US and UK, regardless of any proposed compromises by the US and UK, simply because those two countries would be sponsoring it.

On a side note, regardless of who it is going to help, the US and UK gov't are taking contract bids from companies to help rebuild Iraq. While the best interests of the Iraqi people should be the upmost concern, there is money to be made in this rebuilding process. Money for companies and money for employed Iraqi citizens. We did the same thing in Europe after WWII to help them rebuild.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

I don't recall France and Russia saying they would veto a resolution specifically because it was put down by the US and UK. I believe they said they would veto any resolution which authorised the use of military force against Iraq, of course that would be put down by the US and UK, but they woudl veto the resolution because of what it proposed, not who proposed it. I don't really think Russia and France have "jumped on the bandwagon" about this - after all, this whole thread was started by an article where all Chirac said was that he was happy to see the fall of Saddam.

I know it's likely that the UK and US will give contracts to US or UK companies, but I hope that they don't allow their desire for those companies to make money take precedence over the welfare of the Iraqi people.

 

[sharky]

I know it's likely that the UK and US will give contracts to US or UK companies, but I hope that they don't allow their desire for those companies to make money take precedence over the welfare of the Iraqi people.

This we agree on. [woah! warm fuzzies in FYM. or is that warm Fizzies?]

 

[STING2]

One thing that should be obvious now is that the welfare of the Iraqi people has been far better served by the US/UK actions than those of Germany, France, and Russia. If we had taken Frances lead on this, Saddam would still be in power and the only questions would be, Would Saddam get Nuclear Weapons later this year or next year? How many tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians would die this year, as they have in past years, do to the oppression of Saddam Hussein? How many people would be tortured and raped this year if Saddam were not overthrown?

Its obvious that Bush's course action was in the best interest of the Iraqi people, because it got rid of the one thing that has killed over 1 million Iraqi's in the past 24 years. The cost of this war for the Iraqi people pales in comparison to the cost for the Iraqi people of another year under the rule of Saddam.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

STING,
One could just as easily ask how many Iraqis would be alive today, or healthy today, had they not been attacked by the US and UK...

 

[STING2]

Fizzing,

Thats easy, there would be far less Iraqi's alive today do to the constant torture, rape and murder that happens every day across Iraq. Saddam controled everything inside Iraq including who was allowed to recieve humanitarian supplies and food. Towns and cities that had often been denied food and had poor drinking facilities because Saddam would not repair them. Now food is coming to these people because Saddam has been overthrown. Drinking water is being fixed.

The French proposal to continue inspections would have continued the suffering and misery of the Iraqi people. An average of 50,000 people die every year in Iraq from the rule of Saddam. 1,300 Iraqi civilians have died in this war. That is far less than the number of lives that have been saved.

Oh and while I'm on the topic, where are all the refugees?!?! There was supposed to be 2 or 3 million according to the anti-war protesters. Just another point in which the anti-war crowd had it totally wrong.

Another point, the number of civilians that would be killed. They claimed themselves supported by so called accurate UN statistics that over 800,000 civilians would die. Not even close.

Did any of the anti-war protestors ever once think about the number of civilians who would be raped, tortured, and murdered by the continued rule of Saddam? More sanctions you say, 6 months more of more sanctions? How many civilians did you count would die in those 6 months at the hands of Saddam. It seems that many in the anti-war crowd do or did not realize that the course of action they were proposing involved a cost on the Iraqi people that would be far greater than a US military invasion.

The Bush administration has removed one of the greatest mass murders in the history of the world.

 

[melon]

I think we need to be a bit more practical in the rebuilding of Iraq. France and Russia merely care about their pocketbooks, perhaps in the same vein as the U.S. / U.K. does in the long run. Why should France and Russia be "rewarded" for doing nothing?

Melon

 

[hiphop]

I think we need to be a bit more practical in the rebuilding of Iraq.

If you want practicability, why not forget about pocketbooks and stuff and include every country in helping Iraq to rebuild what US and UK have bombed down? I think like that it would work out faster, and the faster Iraq is rebuilt, the more practical it is.

 

[hiphop]

It seems that many in the anti-war crowd do or did not realize that the course of action they were proposing involved a cost on the Iraqi people that would be far greater than a US military invasion.

That?s wrong, I never proposed sanctions. I was for disarmarment, but not for sanctions.

 

[ALEXRUS]

I think we need to be a bit more practical in the rebuilding of Iraq. France and Russia merely care about their pocketbooks, perhaps in the same vein as the U.S. / U.K. does in the long run. Why should France and Russia be "rewarded" for doing nothing?

Melon

Absolutely. We don't even seek participation in rebuilding of Iraq. Why should we? After all, we did not bomb it out. We only want 8bln that Iraq owes us back. That's it.
By the way, Kellogg Brown&Root (Halliburton's subsidiary) already got one oilwell firefighting contract in Iraq (AP, news.com.au., etc) so I hope at least Mr.Cheney is satisfied

 

[JOFO]

Absolutely. We don't even seek participation in rebuilding of Iraq. Why should we? After all, we did not bomb it out. We only want 8bln that Iraq owes us back. That's it.
By the way, Kellogg Brown&Root (Halliburton's subsidiary) already got one oilwell firefighting contract in Iraq (AP, news.com.au., etc) so I hope at least Mr.Cheney is satisfied

yep, and that 8 billion, plus the billions owed to france and germany, are the reason they would not support military action: because there is a chance that the new government of iraq will not honor those debts and they will never see that money repaid.

life's a bitch, ain't it?

 

[STING2]

HIPHOP,

"That?s wrong, I never proposed sanctions. I was for disarmarment, but not for sanctions"

I'm not talking about sanctions, the death and suffering of the Iraqi people is do to Saddam Hussein and not sanctions. Saddam Hussein murdered over 1 million Iraqi's through his wars, executions, and the denial of humanitarian supplies to various regions of the country when it benefited him. Saddam would buy humanitarian supplies through the oil for food program and instead of giving it to needy people in Iraq, he would resell it illegally to other countries through smuggling.

The Anti-war crowd does not realize that leaving Saddam in power would kill far more Iraqi's than the current war did, with or without sanctions.

 

[verte76]

I'm aware that Saddam screwed his own people. However he did his damage over the course of 24 years. I'm from the crowd that were upset about the *possible* humanitarian damage, (hell, I work for a humanitarian charity, the African Well Fund group in my sig) and I'm not familiar with any numbers as high as 2 or 3 million. Keep in mind that we had no idea how long the war would last. The only numbers Oxfam (the group I represented as a protester) used were hypothetical, based on the time the war would last. The word was "possible", not "accurate". "Accuracy" is impossible given the time uncertainty. The only certainty was there would be refugees. I got into humanitarian fund-raising by way of a refugee crisis, that of Kosovo. I supported that campaign, incidentally; I am not a complete pacifist. Bosnia had convinced me that Milosevic was a . It was heart-wrenching, and the Milosevic regime was guilty of much of the suffering. I recall one Serbian soldier shooting a mother who was nursing a baby. That was a particularly odious act. Ouch. So I'm familiar with regimes that screw their own people and just how odious they can be. I happen to have really intense, strong feelings about refugees. They're innocent people in a horrible, horrible set of circumstances.

 

[Rono]

yep, and that 8 billion, plus the billions owed to france and germany, are the reason they would not support military action:

life's a bitch, ain't it?

Are you shure of that ? Or is it the capitalist way of thinking from the Bush goverment ?Because if i read story`s like this ,...


Advisors of Influence: Nine Members of the Defense Policy Board Have Ties to Defense Contractors,..

http://www.publicintegrity.org/dtaweb/report.asp?ReportID=513&L1=10&L2=10&L3=0&L4=0&L5=0