-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
What do you think an ally is? Ohio?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
An ally is a nation that doesnt actively work against America on the global stage and run elections based on anti-american rhetoric.
You would think the European nations would be in full support of removing a vicious dictator - especially since all they had to do was approve of it, no troops or anything.
But no, not only did they not even tacitly approve of removing a dictator, they actively worked to keep him in power. As a former German im ashamed that my old country hasnt learned anything. :no:
You mean like the election Bush and the Republicans ran on anti-french rhetoric? And what about your active work against the French, Germans and others?Or do these 'standards' for what an ally is, and is not only apply when it's to your benefit?
You would think the Americans would be in full support of removing a vicious dictator's like the one in Rwanda who killed hundreds of thousands. Once again where was the moral outrage on your part OR ours when that was going on? It seems that there is direct relationship between the economic benefits and the level of indignation. You and the French are remarkably similar in that regard!
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
I wont even adress all that Bush-bashing. Its tired and old. If the guy is such a bad leader, why did he get elected again?
You should address the Bush bashing because he and his keystone cops administration is what has angered so many people and nations and NOT the American nation or people. Bush Junior is not America and trying to link the two just won't cut it!
And how in God's name did Clinton get elected again? His wisdom and upright moral character? You Panzerjager obviously believe that Bill Clinton was a terrific leader, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
The funny thing is - the same stuff was said about Reagan. He was dumb, a cowboy, blah blah blah.
A lot of nonsense was said about Reagan just as it is said about any political figure. One thing he never did was to alienate his allies or ignore advice he didn't want to hear. He knew how to lead and in fact did exactly that on the issue of cruise missiles in Europe which was a VERY unpopular move in Europe but he had the tact and wisdom to make it happen despite all that opposition.
Quote:
And you, the Americans were all too happy to take the money from desperate nations fighting the Nazi's before the war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
LoL - do you not realize how hypocrytical you are being? You bash America for going in and taking out a dictator who attacked his neighbors, now you bash America for not going in and attacking a dictator who hadnt done anything to us! In some people's eyes America is just bad - all the time. Welcome to the Blame America First club, enjoy your stay.. :dizzy2:
I thought America sat back and sold weapons to the Iraqi's along with the French when Iraq attacked it neighbour Iran. Where were the bugles and the banners then? Didn't you filter cash and assistance through Kuwait and the Saudi's to Iraq? It's the same old song with different players! When Iraq threatened your oil supply suddenly it becomes a whole different story, so I guess I can understand why you get :dizzy2: . I don't blame America for acting in their own best interests but I don't mistake it for some Moral Crusade either. There's nothing hypocritical about seeing you, as one country among others, with your fair share of faults. You are not God's gift to the nations, nor are you the chosen people!
Quote:
You as a nation are hardly in a position to talk about moral purpose, true allies and trust. You don't have the credentials.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
Ohh now your just trying to earn brownie points!
No. I am trying to point out that America is no more virtuous than any other nation and trying to make a moral stand on such shaky ground is not a good idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
The difference is that these days America is the one taking down tyranical governments and Europe is the one fighting to keep them in place.
Fighting in Afghanistan you mean? Wait, no...I suppose that doesn't fit the preconceived notion of European villainy so we shouldn't mention that. American support for numerous tyrannical governments is well documented just like European support is!
Quote:
If that was the case Panzerjager then why didn't you take them? If there was no danger what the heck were all those Americans doing here? Your entire national airspace was shut down for a reason, and that reason is that your government had no idea if there were more suicide planes out there or not. Your government was in hiding, in an at the time undisclosed location because they feared exactly that. Are you saying you believe this was some form of elaborate prank on the part of the American government?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
The airports were closed so no terrorists could board anymore aircraft. But I dont want to push this point. It was a good thing you did - and we all apreciate it!
Then why not just stop any planes from taking off? Pretty simple solution, and then let all those planes low on fuel land as they want to. The answer is obvious. And I am glad you appreciate it as I aim to please!
Quote:
You may not see Canada and these other nations as allies and friends but we see America as a friend and ally. If ever a threat materialized to the United States, we and the others, France included, would go to the mat for you. If you see us as disposable allies of convenience, that is to your shame, but if the day comes when you need us, you will find out how wrong you are!
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
Yea right. Its great that you feel that way but I doubt a majority of your countrymen or your government do. I will be shortly posting a new thread about how much our allies hate us. Look for it soon.
Ahh, the man of constant sorrow. Betrayed by so many and loved by so few. And all you were trying to do is save the world from itself. The majority of my countrymen DO feel that way, even the ones who don't much like the United States. There is an element of anti-americanism in Canada. We couldn't exist as a nation if there wasn't IMHO. But that is a far cry from hating you, or not coming to your aid if ever you needed it.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
grammar shramar
Actually, you are on a forum, of which the primary language is English, so the onus is upon you to write in a way that is vaguely comprehensible.
Regardless, as a trend I've found those who learn a language, as a second language, tend to have better grammar than native speakers, because they learn the technicalities of the grammar. So that argument really doesn't hold sway.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
You mean like the election Bush and the Republicans ran on anti-french rhetoric? And what about your active work against the French, Germans and others?Or do these 'standards' for what an ally is, and is not only apply when it's to your benefit?
Hehe, the guy ran on a lot of issues but none of which were Anti-french.
Quote:
You would think the Americans would be in full support of removing a vicious dictator's like the one in Rwanda who killed hundreds of thousands. Once again where was the moral outrage on your part OR ours when that was going on? It seems that there is direct relationship between the economic benefits and the level of indignation. You and the French are remarkably similar in that regard!
So its your opinion that if we cant remove all dictators, we shouldnt even attempt to remove any?
Quote:
A lot of nonsense was said about Reagan just as it is said about any political figure. One thing he never did was to alienate his allies or ignore advice he didn't want to hear. He knew how to lead and in fact did exactly that on the issue of cruise missiles in Europe which was a VERY unpopular move in Europe but he had the tact and wisdom to make it happen despite all that opposition.
Its also interesting to note that the European allies had the soviets breathing down their necks. Now that an immediate threat is gone, theyre singing a different tune - as usual.
Quote:
I thought America sat back and sold weapons to the Iraqi's along with the French when Iraq attacked it neighbour Iran. Where were the bugles and the banners then? Didn't you filter cash and assistance through Kuwait and the Saudi's to Iraq? It's the same old song with different players! When Iraq threatened your oil supply suddenly it becomes a whole different story, so I guess I can understand why you get . I don't blame America for acting in their own best interests but I don't mistake it for some Moral Crusade either. There's nothing hypocritical about seeing you, as one country among others, with your fair share of faults. You are not God's gift to the nations, nor are you the chosen people!
Even with all those words you didnt adress the main point. You criticise America for going in and taking out a vicious dictator in 2003, yet you criticise America for not going in and taking out a dictator in 1939. You cant have it both ways.
Quote:
No. I am trying to point out that America is no more virtuous than any other nation and trying to make a moral stand on such shaky ground is not a good idea.
I think America is more virtuous than many countries. Thats the problem these days, everyone has a UN type attitude. Thats how Iraq got on the commission for human rights. Dont give me that "Everyone's just as good as everyone else" BS because its not true. When was the last time America gassed a group of people it didnt like?
Quote:
Fighting in Afghanistan you mean? Wait, no...I suppose that doesn't fit the preconceived notion of European villainy so we shouldn't mention that. American support for numerous tyrannical governments is well documented just like European support is!
Saddam has killed far more people, and invaded far more countries than the Taliban ever did. Even after WW2 - Europe fought to keep him in power.. thats something to be proud about.. ~:rolleyes:
Quote:
Ahh, the man of constant sorrow. Betrayed by so many and loved by so few. And all you were trying to do is save the world from itself. The majority of my countrymen DO feel that way, even the ones who don't much like the United States. There is an element of anti-americanism in Canada. We couldn't exist as a nation if there wasn't IMHO. But that is a far cry from hating you, or not coming to your aid if ever you needed it.
Please refer to my thread about shifting alliances. Our so called "allies" in Europe and Canada would rather be allied with communist China. Considering those numbers, i think you are in the minority if you truly mean what you say about coming to America's aid. In any event, there are other countries in the world who havent taken their freedoms for granted.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
Its also interesting to note that the European allies had the soviets breathing down their necks. Now that an immediate threat is gone, theyre singing a different tune - as usual.
Do you talk about Europe or the US. When we both fought cold war there were common ideals. No one was thinking about preventive wars or hurting human rights. Yes, this has changed now that the threat is gone!
[QUOTE=PanzerJager]Please refer to my thread about shifting alliances. Our so called "allies" in Europe and Canada would rather be allied with communist China. QUOTE] Did you think before you wrote this?
They create deserts and call it peace.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgb
Actually, you are on a forum, of which the primary language is English, so the onus is upon you to write in a way that is vaguely comprehensible.
Regardless, as a trend I've found those who learn a language, as a second language, tend to have better grammar than native speakers, because they learn the technicalities of the grammar. So that argument really doesn't hold sway.
when some one is calling me (that is my nation , race , people etc') a murderer , a thief and so on, i really wont expect myself to be dr' grammar considering that english is not my language
and if you read my posts and did not understood it - that is your problem
and please don't be so arrogant like "primary language is english" ... give me a break i am not on trial here
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
when some one is calling me (that is my nation , race , people etc') a murderer , a thief and so on,
Yes Caesar , and your nation has a little dispute (well several really) over what land actually is your nation and what land is not .
If you take something that is not yours and claim it as your own , then thief is an appropriate word .
After all , your nation did sign up to the international agreements that forbid a country siezing territory did it not ?
Oh , and it signed up to the agreements that forbid the transfer and settlement of its civilian population onto occupied territories did it not ?
So as well as calling your nation a thief we can call it a liar too ~:cheers:
As for calling it a murderer , that would have to go on a case by case basis , sometimes it would be an appropriate label , other times it certainly would not be .
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Guys take a chill pill, head to the frontroom, gaze at the babethread and find out which one you both think is cute.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Israeli girls are cute. ~:cheers:
If Canada invades Israel, as one gentlemean put forth we might, it would only be for the food and the women. :chef: :kiss2:
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Israeli girls are cute, but why a bloke dressed as one for the Eurovision song contest???
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Well, if the historical stats of homosexuality are to be believed, 1 in 10 Israelis bats for the other team.
Maybe he's one of the one.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
when some one is calling me (that is my nation , race , people etc') a murderer , a thief and so on,
Yes Caesar , and your nation has a little dispute (well several really) over what land actually is your nation and what land is not .
If you take something that is not yours and claim it as your own , then thief is an appropriate word .
After all , your nation did sign up to the international agreements that forbid a country siezing territory did it not ?
Oh , and it signed up to the agreements that forbid the transfer and settlement of its civilian population onto occupied territories did it not ?
So as well as calling your nation a thief we can call it a liar too ~:cheers:
As for calling it a murderer , that would have to go on a case by case basis , sometimes it would be an appropriate label , other times it certainly would not be .
Wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwoooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!
Such a hard words , even for an arab ~:)
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
PzJg, when did Schroeder win the elections on American Bashing? He won the election on no war position… In doing that he just surfed on the Germans public opinion which is what we call normally democracy… ~;)
Ah, the US went in war to remove a dictator… So, why this one and why now (well, two years ago)? In my (humble) opinion, North Korea is more dangerous…
I thing you are right not to address the Bush-Bushing. Too difficult to defend the guy, who just lied, blackmailed, tried to bride, disdained all his potential allies and allies (see the poor Tony now) and was too quick to claim victory…
To re-elect a bad leader isn’t a proof by itself of quality: the French elected Chirac twice (for the same reason than the Americans, no better choice). ~D
For sure Saddam attacked his neighbours. But when it was Iran, the US didn’t care, in fact enjoyed it. I can’t blame them but… So, perhaps, you are also a little bit of a hypocrite. Because it wasn’t question to remove a dictator, it was question of WMD. Links with Al-Quaida, and immediate fears…
I can’t believe you wrote that; for me, just to approve an intervention without sending troops is even worse than to be against the operation. I think a song from the Green Berets says something like that: You have to believe what you are saying, and to speak only if you act, to be brave and to be proud, to win your Green Beret… Of course, the original words are probably better, but it is a translation from a translation… :book: :devil: :devil:
Yeah, the US is taking down dictators, like in Kazakhstan or Thailand for example…
I like your new poster. So France is part of the Axe of Evil now… Just because the French were/are reluctant to follow orders… What a promotion… They will love it… I just hope they won’t go for a pre-emptive action, they can nuke a large part (if not all) the US (at least, they have the capacity)… :devil:
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
PzJg, when did Schroeder win the elections on American Bashing? He won the election on no war position… In doing that he just surfed on the Germans public opinion which is what we call normally democracy…
You dont think I can get German media in the US? He took an anti-american stance.
Quote:
Ah, the US went in war to remove a dictator… So, why this one and why now (well, two years ago)? In my (humble) opinion, North Korea is more dangerous…
Saddam was both an enemy of the US and slaughtered his own people. Ive never said we went in simply to remove an evil dictator - our own interests are considered, but why didnt Europe take an opporatunity to help in removing an dictator?
Quote:
I thing you are right not to address the Bush-Bushing. Too difficult to defend the guy, who just lied, blackmailed, tried to bride, disdained all his potential allies and allies (see the poor Tony now) and was too quick to claim victory…
Blah Blah Blah. Thats called diplomacy..
Quote:
For sure Saddam attacked his neighbours. But when it was Iran, the US didn’t care, in fact enjoyed it. I can’t blame them but… So, perhaps, you are also a little bit of a hypocrite. Because it wasn’t question to remove a dictator, it was question of WMD. Links with Al-Quaida, and immediate fears…
If you hadnt noticed, the American government changes every 4 or 8 years. Bush wasnt in power when we supported Saddam..
Quote:
I can’t believe you wrote that; for me, just to approve an intervention without sending troops is even worse than to be against the operation. I think a song from the Green Berets says something like that: You have to believe what you are saying, and to speak only if you act, to be brave and to be proud, to win your Green Beret… Of course, the original words are probably better, but it is a translation from a translation…
If the Europeans had any sense of their own history, they would have at least taken an opporatunity to be supportive of removing an evil dictator from power. America wasnt even asking for troops, just support.
Quote:
Yeah, the US is taking down dictators, like in Kazakhstan or Thailand for example…
2 countries in 3 years isnt bad, especially since Europe is against the US.
Quote:
I like your new poster. So France is part of the Axe of Evil now… Just because the French were/are reluctant to follow orders… What a promotion… They will love it… I just hope they won’t go for a pre-emptive action, they can nuke a large part (if not all) the US (at least, they have the capacity)…
You need to check with the Lost&Found here at the .org. They may be able to help you find your sense of humor!
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Such a hard words
Do you dispute anything that I wrote in that post Ceasar ?
And if so on what basis ?
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
After all , your nation did sign up to the international agreements that forbid a country siezing territory did it not ?
Was that before or after the arab wars? Not disputing, just wondering.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Such a hard words
Do you dispute anything that I wrote in that post Ceasar ?
And if so on what basis ?
I tend to belive that people have perspective , and you certainly don't have it , your world is divided in to black and white , something like "the xxx are evil and the yyy are good" , you know , we are not talking about a new Hollywood movie here....
"Always ask questions" (socrates , ca. 400 BCE)
:book:
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
2 countries in 3 years isnt bad, especially since Europe is against the US.
Yes, Europe was really against the Afghanistan war ~:rolleyes:
Quote:
If the Europeans had any sense of their own history, they would have at least taken an opporatunity to be supportive of removing an evil dictator from power. America wasnt even asking for troops, just support.
The problem is that the Iraqi war project felt fishy.
It felt that the hole preparation for the was the WMD (remind you that the British reasons for support was much bigger in the media here), the Al-Quida links, threat to the US etc and then lastly it was like oh, and Saddam is a really evil dictator. Putting the evil dictator argument first (and not last) would have reduced that feeling quite much. That the humanitarian issue got more and more room when all other arguments was found to be more or less false, doesn't exactly improve the issue.
So as it stands now, it felt that the war was wanted and would have been started anyway, for unknown reasons (why do you think the oil argument is so popular?).
Would you jump on a big, important, long lasting project (war) that you in principle agrees with, but you can't trust the leader of this project?
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
we are not talking about a new Hollywood movie here....
Is what I wrote true or false Ceasar ? Its as simple as that .
I tend to belive that people have perspective , and you certainly don't have it
~D ~D ~D And your perspective is so clear and unclouded , maybe you should take a step back from your closeness to the situation to obtain a better perspective view .
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
You dont think I can get German media in the US? He took an anti-american stance.
Sorry to be that blunt - but that is nonsense. Brenus is completely correct - Schroeder managed to safe the re-election by taking a strong anti-war position, of which he knew that the vast majority of ther German people would agree on it with him.
I challenge you to show me any quotes that would support your claim that he had an anti-American election campaign.
I think you are (again) mixing up opposing the policy of the Bush-administration with being anti-American...
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
[QUOTE=Tribesman][B]
~D ~D ~D
Well , that is a good a argument...
Your views are so absolute , that arguing with you is like arguing some one who belive's that the Earth was build in 6 days... :wall:
But be my guest , and continue to throw accusations without asking any questions .
My comfort is in the fact that the conflict between israel and its enemies won't be solve by people like you ~:handball:
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
How i have not noticed that tribesman , you are an irishman and you are just angry because of the last football match between Ireland and Israel (2:2) ha ??? ~:)
I rest my case :duel:
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Your views are so absolute
When its a simple case of true or false then how can it be anything other than absolute .
I rest my case
I see you are mistaking me for someone that actually gives a toss about the results of a game like soccer and all the sectarian bullshit that goes along with it .
Great "perspective" you have there Ceasar .
and continue to throw accusations without asking any questions .
I stated an opinion , are you going to show me that the opinion is based on falsehoods ? Or what exactly are these questions that you would like people to ask ?
that arguing with you is like arguing some one who belive's that the Earth was build in 6 days...
Well it would help if you could raise any valid points in your arguements .
If you cannot then it does seem that you are pissing into the wind . ~:cheers:
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Your views are so absolute
When its a simple case of true or false then how can it be anything other than absolute .
I rest my case
I see you are mistaking me for someone that actually gives a toss about the results of a game like soccer and all the sectarian bullshit that goes along with it .
Great "perspective" you have there Ceasar .
and continue to throw accusations without asking any questions .
I stated an opinion , are you going to show me that the opinion is based on falsehoods ? Or what exactly are these questions that you would like people to ask ?
that arguing with you is like arguing some one who belive's that the Earth was build in 6 days...
Well it would help if you could raise any valid points in your arguements .
If you cannot then it does seem that you are pissing into the wind . ~:cheers:
Pissing ? not very academic word....
Questions ? OK ! here are some :
1. Why the palestinians were not satisfied when the British empire divided "palestine" in 1923 , that is 78% of the land as an Arab kingdom (Trans-Jordan) and the rest (22%) for the Jews and the "palestinians" ?
2. Why the "palestinians" rejected all (that is , ALL !!!) the the League of Nations proposals in the 20' and the 30' about dividing the 22% between the Jews and them ? (the Phill committee etc') ?
3. Why the "palestinians" rejected the UN 181 resolution about a Jewish state living side by side with a "palestinian" state in 1947 (that is 65% of the original 22% for the "palestinians" and 35% of the original 22% for the Jews) ?
4. Why , after the British mandate was over , in 1948 , 7 Arab states attacked Israel together with the "palestinians" even though israel was not holding Gaza , Judea , Samaria and Jerusalem (the so called "territories") ?
5. Why , in 1964 , the "palestinians" established the "Phatah" movement for creating a "palestinian" state in "palestine" even though the Arabs were holding the "territories" ?
6. Why 4 Arab states attacked Israel in 1967 while it was with out the "territories" ?
7. Why since 1967 the PLO always (that ia always) declared the its main goal is to eliminate Israel ?
8. Why since the beginning of the negotiations between the 2 sides ' in 1993 , the "palestinians" never ever stoped sending bombs and "holly warriors"
against israeli hospitals and schools ?
9. Why , in 2000 - 2001 , when Ehud Baraq gave to the "palestinians" 99% of the "territories" , they refused to accept his offer ?
10. Why , today , when Sharon is ordering the Israeli army and the Israeli settlers to move from Gaza with out requesting anything but peace , he gets "holly warriors" again and again ?
The unswear is very simple and if you will ask any Arab or Muslim , from Mauritania to Indonesia , you will get it - they want's to eliminate us ! simple , as I said , but a FACT ! no matter what Israel is doing , we still gets the same unswear - "we want you out of here !!!"
Now , who started ? this is the wrong question , because the unswear for that is meaningless and just preserve the situation . when you are dealing with people who sends their little childrens to explode on others , there is no future . to say "just give them the territories and it is going to be nice" is childish . but , still , the state of Israel is going to give to the "palestinians" every inch of the "territories" in the next few years , and then we are going to find ourselves in the same situation that was before 1967 - do you remember what happened then ?
"There is no country for the Jew to feal at home but the land of Israel" (A. D. Gordon)
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
The answer to many of your questions come from the mouths of the original Zionist leaders. Men like Hertzl and Ben-Gurion made it very clear from the beggining that the partition and sharing of Palestine was only a temporary measure, and the true goal was to take over the entire country. Don't you think the Palestinians living there could sense this? Don't you think they felt it? Don't you think they heard people talking about it?
So I don't think it's reasonable to say the original Zionist settlers were benevolent nice guys intent on being good neighbours and then getting all bent out of shape because the locals were nasty to them. In most cases invasions are not peaceful affairs. The Zionist invasion of Palestine is no different.
By the way, Israel has blown up it's fair share of hospitals and schools. And there are thousands and thousands of injured, maimed and crippled Palestinian children to prove it. Even at the farthest stretches of logic it cannot be said that Israel has taken the moral high ground. The only high ground Israel takes is the airspace over Gaza when they lob Hellfires into open markets full of civilians.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
The answer to many of your questions come from the mouths of the original Zionist leaders. Men like Hertzl and Ben-Gurion made it very clear from the beggining that the partition and sharing of Palestine was only a temporary measure, and the true goal was to take over the entire country. Don't you think the Palestinians living there could sense this? Don't you think they felt it? Don't you think they heard people talking about it?
Not this crap again.How about the fact that the Israelis asked them not to leave in the first place and that those who did became Israeli citizens and the fact that Israel could have easily taken all the land and chased the Palestinians totally out like the Jews have been chased out of the rest of the middle east. Ypur argument holds no water at all. You blame the Palestinians atrocities on what you call a few radicals while you seem to believe the state of Israel wants to take over all of Palestine. Again something they could easliy achieve if that was their goal. Maybe it was clear to you but it certainly begs the facts. Bye tyhe way even if Israel were as terrible as you make it out to be and stole the land from the Palestinians that still in no way justifies them using their children as human bombs to kill Israeli children. If I steal my neighbors home does that give him the right to strap bombs on his kids and send them over for a visit? The Palestinians are morally bankrupt at the moment. In fact Palestine reminds me very much of Sicily under the Mafia. The people are so terrorised by their own Mafioso. Their tactics are exactly the same.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Sorry to be that blunt - but that is nonsense. Brenus is completely correct - Schroeder managed to safe the re-election by taking a strong anti-war position, of which he knew that the vast majority of ther German people would agree on it with him.
I challenge you to show me any quotes that would support your claim that he had an anti-American election campaign.
I think you are (again) mixing up opposing the policy of the Bush-administration with being anti-American...
Come on, what other war would he be taking a stance against? Now I wasnt over there during the elections, but I dont think France was asking for another beating. ~;)
I dont blame him for saying what the German people wanted to hear, but dont try and tell me his stance had nothing to do with America.
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
Come on, what other war would he be taking a stance against? Now I wasnt over there during the elections, but I dont think France was asking for another beating. ~;)
I dont blame him for saying what the German people wanted to hear, but dont try and tell me his stance had nothing to do with America.
So, again, anti-iraq-war is equal to anti-American?
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Not at all. Of course you all were free to make up your own minds as to where you stood on the war. PJ's over simplifying the case (and dude, while some of your sigs are hysterical, the current one is pretty offensive).
But that's hardly the only issue Europe in general, and Germany in particular takes with us. It almost seems that whenever we exercise our rights of self-determination, on matters that don't even affect or impact you (personal firearm ownership for example), you're all worked up into a tizzy about what a bunch of barbarians we all are and how the UN needs to reign us in. I could get elected to almost any office over there, regardless of my political clout or party affiliation, but saying "And I will teach the Americans we are not going to lay down for them! I will show them they are every bit as responsible to the world government as we are". True?
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beirut
The answer to many of your questions come from the mouths of the original Zionist leaders. Men like Hertzl and Ben-Gurion made it very clear from the beggining that the partition and sharing of Palestine was only a temporary measure, and the true goal was to take over the entire country. Don't you think the Palestinians living there could sense this? Don't you think they felt it? Don't you think they heard people talking about it?
So I don't think it's reasonable to say the original Zionist settlers were benevolent nice guys intent on being good neighbours and then getting all bent out of shape because the locals were nasty to them. In most cases invasions are not peaceful affairs. The Zionist invasion of Palestine is no different.
By the way, Israel has blown up it's fair share of hospitals and schools. And there are thousands and thousands of injured, maimed and crippled Palestinian children to prove it. Even at the farthest stretches of logic it cannot be said that Israel has taken the moral high ground. The only high ground Israel takes is the airspace over Gaza when they lob Hellfires into open markets full of civilians.
So , no problems in Quebec ? no attacks on jews in Canada ? already forgat the native Americans ?
Oh , self-righteousness here I come again !!!!!!!!
By the way , is "History twisting" is your middle name ?
-
Re: America's irreplaceable ally
Caesar, do you ever post on the ornery american forum?
