KLAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1112 times:
I dunno about Blair, but Jack Straw is just an amazing speaker. His speech at the UN a few hours ago was spot on. He shifted the blame off the US and Britain, and onto Saddam's shoulders, where it should be. He countered all of Villepins silly arguments and laid the facts on the table in a clear and concise way.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1098 times:
Excellent speech, as usual, from Straw. I still find it amazing that people manage to ignore such powerful arguments. It's as if they have their fingers in their ears and going "La, la, la, la, la, la, la, la!!!"
CNN reported something interesting today.
Iraqi TV has, up to now, never broadcast speeches without complete voiceovers from the UN floor, usually lying about what was being said (For instance Blix's overdub said that Iraq is complying fully, Al Baradai says that he certifies that Iraq has no nuclear weapons at all.)
But today they have started to broadcast, for the first time, the actual speeches from the French and Chinese representatives to the UN. Apparently, the Iraqi propaganda ministry could not think of anything that the French and Chinese weren't saying for them.
All this will very soon be over. If war does not start within the next two weeks, it will become too hot in the Iraqi desert to conduct effective operations for a lightning war. Saddam will be safe from effective attack until next winter. Saddam, the French and others know that well, and have been doing everything to stall a decision at the UN. Because of the cost of maintaining troops in the Middle East, not to mention the cost of bringing them all back and then sending them off again next year, They know that the U.S. will not send them back. Either the war happens in the next 2 weeks, or it won't happen at all. And so another 100,000 or so Iraqis will die this year.
If it doesn't happen, anybody care to bet that Saddam all of a sudden gets difficult again?
KLAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1076 times:
Well, the French government is just doing an outstanding job protecting Saddam, and the world from *evil US Imperialism*. Villepin is saying progress has been made. Where? How much? Has Saddam disarmed? How do we know?
We don't. But Dominique insists inspections are working, just as they have worked in the past 12 years....
Charles the scariest part about your statement, is that, if there is no war in 2 weeks, Total Fina Elf will effectivley have 80 billion in oil contracts in the bag, doing buisness with good old' Saddam, while the Iraqi people continue to suffer...
Cyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1055 times:
Villepins silly arguments
Why do you consider Villepin's arguments as silly? You're completely biased, man. Villepin and Chirac think that this war will help terrorists, extremists.
If your government is so certain that this war will not fuel terrorism (and that Villepin's arguments are unsignificant), why is Bush so obsessed to get our support?
In fact the consequences of this war could be serious, and your govt knows it.
Instead of speaking about this possible consequences to the american public, Bush talks about an utopic middle east "were democracy would be spreading"...
Villepin is saying progress has been made. Where? How much? Has Saddam disarmed? How do we know?
Blix And El Baradei said that progress has been made. They said that inspectors now get an active cooperation from Iraq and ASKED FOR MORE TIME time to conduct their mission.
We, europeans, americans, all asked for the inspectors to go back to Iraq, and now their work is producing results, the US says "stop it, we'll do war instead".
This is purely ridiculous, and it is another proof that the US made their decision before they came to the UN.
But Dominique insists inspections are working, just as they have worked in the past 12 years....
Villepin never said that inspections worked over the past 12 years. It's a pure lie, and you know it. Shame on you.
while the Iraqi people continue to suffer...
I agree, the iraqi people is suffering, as the north korean are suffering, as the chinese are suffering, as the chechens are suffering, as the turkish kurds are suffering.
But the UN's role is not to overthrow regimes.
Aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1036 times:
Charles and Clovis,
Your arguments against Iraq may be mostly right, as far as people know. He certainly deserves to be taken out of power for being a horrible bully.
But it's not that simple anymore. If Saddam was a threat to the safety of the United States of America, there would be proof of it that the CIA and others could have provided. But apparently, they don't find any such proof. Yesterday, I watched a report (on German TV) about the orders the CIA is supposed to have been given by the Bush administration. Those were, according to that report, more or less like "Give us what we want, no matter if it exists! Or shut up!" I didn't really like the relatively lurid tenor of that report, but it did show the general problem many people have with that war: certain people are trying very hard to find a reason to begin a war, no matter if the war would be justified.
With all the talking, or, more exactly, yelling, that has been going on, the focus has been on international relations, not on Iraq itself. In the same report, a short commentary by FoxNews was featured. It read like "If we go on war, you (the American people) will have to support our troops or we'll look at you as enemies of the state." Similar things have been told France, Germany, Russia, and others, and this is what has cuased so much trouble.
Such behaviour, by a man (President Bush) who is thought to claim to be the leader of a "chosen" people (Has he really said that?) and says he was on a divine mission to bring peace and democracy to the world does remind some of the darkest parts of history.
I will not compare two persons, but their actions: It reminds me of Adolf Hitler. I know what I'm not to be talking about, since Bush is no dictator, no murderer, no fascist, so please remember I'm only talking about specific actions. Additionally, I can't imagine that Bush could cause any desaster similar to those Hitler caused.
Hitler annexed several countries to his "millenial empire", provoking foreign governments and seeking war. He even sign a treaty that gave him Czechia, stressing the nerves of the appeasers to the maximum.
Bush is seeking war, too. He has set off a chain of events that can hardly be stopped. He came up with a new UN resolution, trying to make war possible through it. He is coming up with a new one. This is like signing treaties while trying to begin a war. It is similar to what Hitler did.
I'm not comparing George Bush and Adolf Hitler personally. Their motives are not comparable.
But Bush is using very declamatory language, just like Hitler did. Hitler said, "Since 5.45 this morning we are shooting back. From now on we shall retaliate with giving bomb for bomb." on September 1st, 1939. The language George Bush is using sounds similar. What will we hear?
I'm just trying to explain why so many people offend a war in Iraq. They are remembering the events of 1933 to 1945, and they are afraid of them. They are listening to similar things again, and they fear that desaster might struck again.
Fear drives people mad. Fear is why people are mad at George Bush.
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
KLAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1021 times:
I agree Aloges, Bush is unjustly instilling fear onto the American people, and making us worried. I don't agree with the way Bush is going about this situation, but I strongly disagree with the idiotic stance of the French government. It is based on stupid reasons, and only aims at blocking anything the US tries to do in the UN. I dont think War is nessesary, or needed now, in our intrests. But I dont see why France must insist on blocking all pressure on Saddam, each time giving him a way out, so that he doesnt have to face the world. He has allies that are helping to drag this affair out, and IMO he hopes that France will eventually stall the whole operation as to avert war and let him stay in power. This is what I find unacceptable.
Mandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6921 posts, RR: 76
Reply 7, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 947 times:
With Bush and Rumsfeld being bad speakers in my opinion, no wonder there's little support for the war case...
1. If you speak correctly, others will follow you, whether you're right or wrong...
2. If you speak wrongly, no one will follow you, no matter how right you are...
Let's see how it fares with the pro war camp...
Bush Sr. = #1
Bush Jr. = #2
Rumsfeld = #2
Condie Rice = #2
Colin Powell = #1
Blair = #1
Straw = #1
Norman Minetta = #2 #2 #2 #2 #2 #2 (sorry, I just had to put him in since I think he's an idiot)
The Anti-War Camp:
The French Foreign Minister: #1
Josche Fischer (how the hell do you spell his name): can make up his mind
Igor Ivanov (last night) = #1 for war and #1 against war... Nice way to provide a way out for both sides...
Saddam Hussein... when his brain works... #1, when not, #2
The 2 most heard men at the moment...
Hans Blix: #1
El Baradei: #1
The 3rd party villain
OBL pre Nov2002 = #1
OBL post Nov2002 = #3 (U don't make a war... U provoke the 2 warring factions to gain more recruites for your purpose)
If the US wants support... More Powell speeches, and get Rumsfeld fired !
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !