Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Guess What Countries Would Support Troops In Iraq  
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 7915 posts, RR: 12
Posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1403 times:

Surprise (?):

"Fifty-seven percent of Americans support troops in Iraq, Europeans are divided. Majorities in France, Germany, and Spain would back their country’s participation in a U.N.-mandated peacekeeping force in Iraq, despite their government’s resistance. Support in each country falls if such a multinational force were to be under U.S. command."

Source: German Marshall Fund of the United States (http://www.gmfus.org, http://www.transatlantictrends.org) Direct link to the report (PDF!)

At the risk of boring those familiar with the situation: Europe (incl. Old Europe) is already involved in "rebuilding Iraq", it is just that Old Europe refused to deploy forces, while Spain pulled its troops out of Iraq.

Comments are welcome as long as they don't contribute to that rabid transatlantic mudslinging.

[Edited 2004-11-08 11:16:55]


I support the right to arm bears
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAndreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 32
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1385 times:

No mudslinging???? A lot of people will downright refuse to answer  Big grin

The question remains though: What are you trying to say? It looks to me as if you were trying to tell America that Europe is there to help and that under UN mandate everything could be ok.

Actually I don't think that is the case. There's tons of problems in Iraq that don't get easier to solve under UN regime. Besides there are politicians like Mr. Alawi who love to hear themselves babble like "Germany and France will be spectators when it comes to rebuilding Iraq".

Oh yeah, is that so?? Well then, there are some billion USD debt that Germany announced to cancel, help building up police forces..and all that WITHOUT UN mandate, but obviously this doesn't count anyway. Fortunately this was one of the few occasions when Schroeder gave the right answer  Big grin

I'm somewhat fed up with a certain group of Americans who believe they can call us weasels whenever it fits their agenda, and then try to bully us into helping. Let the US government deal with it, and let them do it all alone, they told us they know what they do...as a matter of fact, they didn't, and they still don't...turning Iraq into a Western-style democracy?? Ridiculous, whoever came up with this spectacular "out-of-the-ivory-tower" nonsense has never ever dealt with the Arabian region.

Sorry if this doesn't sound as pro-American as the usual posts of Europeans who are eager to tell the Americans that we love them dearly except their government: No, not in my case! This so-called against terrorism was a mistake right from the very first second, a dead-end, as dead as it gets, you have re-elected those who made this mistake and not ready to say it was a mistake...ok, deal with it!

This is NOT anti-Americanism btw, but reality that sucks, quite and simple.

btw: A colleague was in Berlin, I sent him to Cafe e gelato...he was enthusiastic Big grin



I know it's only VfB but I like it!
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 7915 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1369 times:

Um .. no, that's not what I was trying to say. I was simply surprised by the outcome of the poll and actually don't have an opinion on that, yet, even though I'm no member of the We-love-Americans-with-the-exception-of-their-Administration Club, either. True, I like the US but dare to disagree with the political stance of roughly 50% of its citizens.

btw: A colleague was in Berlin, I sent him to Cafe e gelato...he was enthusiastic

Now you are talking ... Big grin  Big grin



I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineAndreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 32
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1359 times:

It was the quantities that represented severe problems Big grin Big grin Big grin

Well yes, I like Americans, too, but not THE Americans, that is, not all of them, but then, the same goes for Germans, French, Brits... too, at least in my case. Some non-governmental Americans here on the Forum indicate on a daily basis that there is absolutely nothing to like about them, nothing at all, and unfortunately it's those that scream loudest.

What the poll shows is (at least I believe!):

1. Germans did see the necessity to to something about Saddam.

2. They wanted the UN to take care of it, and accept the fact that this doesn't come for free (see Afghanistan).

3. Germans do not want to be bullied.

4. Germans do not want to be called weasels because they have an opinion that is slightly different form that of the resident Bully on the block, especially in cases when everybody knows they are dead wrong.

5. Germany will NOT say sorry to the US government and accept all now just to be Washingtons pet again, but still they accept the fact that something needs to be done in Iraq.

Um...That's all I guess


Kirkie, you useless shit-faced braindead Scot...ok, sorry that seems to be rather redundant, Scot and the rest..but hey...Congrats!!

 Big grin Big grin Big grin

Now if we take away all non-sensical posts you ever placed here, and only keep the good ones, that'll be...um...er... minus 2,000 or so!  Big grin

[Edited 2004-11-08 13:32:11]


I know it's only VfB but I like it!
User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24811 posts, RR: 56
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1347 times:

Since when have people called Germans, weasels?  Laugh out loud
Krauts - yes. Confused French people - yes  Big grin
Weasels - Never heard that one  Confused

And that be 10,000 posts  Wink/being sarcastic  Wink/being sarcastic  Laugh out loud

[Edited 2004-11-08 13:25:28]


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

RE: And that be 10,000 posts

Never has so much been said to so little effect !  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Congratulations...

[Edited 2004-11-08 13:32:24]

User currently offlineAndreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 32
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1335 times:

Indeed...see my edit above!  Big grin Big grin


I know it's only VfB but I like it!
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21353 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1335 times:

GKirk: Since when have people called Germans, weasels?  
Krauts - yes. Confused French people - yes  
Weasels - Never heard that one


Probably because you´re never sober while the americans are online.  Wink/being sarcastic

GKirk: And that be 10,000 posts

Congratulations! (Well, so much for sober, I guess... Wink/being sarcastic)


User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1325 times:

Than it probably won't happen, as most US Troops and the general population here doesn't won't the UN in harge of our forces. The UN has proved time and time again how truely ineffectual they are, it would just put our troops in more of harms way and tie their hands.


"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1296 times:

Galaxy5:


"The UN has proved time and time again how truely ineffectual they are, it would just put our troops in more of harms way and tie their hands."

With all due respect Galaxy, but regarding Iraq the UN and its policies and sanctions have been far more effective regarding WMD's than the U.S. invasion. The lack of any WMD's in Iraq is a direct result of the effective policies adopted by the UN regarding Iraq. There were no WMD's, there were no active WMD programs, Iraq wasn't a threat to the West and, most important of all, there was no Iraq-terrorism link Bush told you about, over and over again.

Now switch back to the actual situation in Iraq: major combat operations are still ongoing, terrorism is flourishing in Iraq, a 60 day State of Emergency has been declared, and now, on top of the U.N. and IAEA denouncing the disappaerance of nuclear material & equipment and the looting of 380 tons of high explosives, some 4,000 Iraqi Surface-to-Air missiles are 'missing' (1), and all this while the U.S. is fighting its version of the "War on Terrorism" which the Rest of the World rejected and still rejects.

Think about those missing Surface to Air missiles next time you catch a flight and ask yourself whether Bush's comments that the U.S. is 'Winning the war on Terror' is really true or not



(1) http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20041107-102112-9541r.htm (Note the source; not the typical Liberal-site)



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1290 times:

Now switch back to the actual situation in Iraq: major combat operations are still ongoing, terrorism is flourishing in Iraq, a 60 day State of Emergency has been declared, and now, on top of the U.N. and IAEA denouncing the disappaerance of nuclear material & equipment and the looting of 380 tons of high explosives, some 4,000 Iraqi Surface-to-Air missiles are 'missing' (1), and all this while the U.S. is fighting its version of the "War on Terrorism" which the Rest of the World rejected and still rejects.

Yup. the UN was really effective in keeping hazardous weapons out of IRAQI hands. The UN is a joke and not a very good one for that matter. I think they should move the UN HQ out of NewYork and place it in Paris or Frankfurt.



"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1279 times:

Galaxy5:

"Yup. the UN was really effective in keeping hazardous weapons out of IRAQI hands."

Apparently you've forgotten which country provided such hazardous weapons as Sarin to Iraq in the first place.

And it real nice to see how you, as Bush, continue to ignore the harsh reality of this whole situation. You continue to ignore what Bush told you about Iraq before the invasion, you ignore (for the sake of your own credibility) to admit that you and 200 milion other Americans have been lied to by your very own president and, for the sake of not admitting the UN was right after all, you continue to blame that same UN for all problems. That's pathetic but you'll probably also ignore that.

Keep on dreaming Galaxy5. Keep on dreaming that Bush is succesfully fighting terrorism in Iraq, keep on dreaming that the looted nuclear material will never reach U.S. soil in a cargo-container which are hardly screened, keep on dreaming that killing a 100 terrorists in Falluja today, will prevent another 1,000 from wanting to attack U.S. jetliners with 'Surface-To-Air' -missiles tomorrow.



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1265 times:

And you keep on forgetting how ineffectual the UN has been for decades. How about Somalia, Sudan, Korea, most of africa. The palestinian issue. How the UN was on the take and greased by IRAQ during the "food for Oil" program. Also when did the US ship sarin to Iraq, again another fabrication of reality. Its great to see how you continue to stick your head in a hole and hope that the terrorism will just go away, you see thats the problem with the UN and the likes of you, you just hope things will get better but refuse to do anything to make it so. Well, face reality, it isn't going to happen that way. And you can't even see the joke about the UN in your own posts, the UN did nothing to limit Iraq from building a huge stockpile of weapons, explosives, missles etc... Your own posts show how bad the UN was at keeping Iraq in check, all they did was give Iraq 12 years to build up the largest arsenal in the M.E.


"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 7915 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1258 times:

Another derailed thread ...  Sad

Galaxy, the UN need more teeth but that doesn't mean the only legal representative of the world community was useless. And of course they didn't give Iraq 12 years to build up a new arsenal of weapons. What do you think? With the exception of a couple of months they weren't even there!

If you contribute to letting this thread derail, please at least check your facts. The country with the strongest army in the M.E. is still Israel (nothing wrong with that), that of Iraq was pretty weak.

[Edited 2004-11-08 15:36:54]


I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1249 times:

Yeah the iraqi's managed to get 400,000+ tons and 10,000 weapons caches within those "couple of months". BTW israel has no where near those kinds of supplies of weapons. Yes Israel has better more advanced weapons and are far better trained and more capable to use them. But they don't have those kinds of stock piles, were the hell would they put it?


"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineOYRJA From Denmark, joined Feb 2007, 78 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1247 times:

NoUFO,

Why do you even bother arguing with guys like Galaxy5 about things like this. We might as well face it. It will never be the US fault according to guys like him.
It's always the UN's fault for being incompetent and so on. Never the US. We just have to live with it.


[Edited 2004-11-08 15:39:43]

User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 7915 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1237 times:

Between 1991 and 1993 the inspectors spent a couple of months in Iraq. This way they are hardly responsible for weapons SH had in stock.


I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24811 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1234 times:

Another derailed thread ...
-------------

Did you have to say that? (Dont know if you know what happened in the UK recently or not)
 Sad



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1227 times:

How is this derailed, the thread was about US and foreign troops and what the outcome would be if they were UN or US controlled. My opinion is that the UN shouldn't control US troops, plain and simple.


"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 7915 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1209 times:

Sorry, Kirkie, your're right.

Galaxy, what if other governments say that they don't wish to see their troops under control of the US?
Not only aren't US American troops very effective right now (whatever "effective" may mean in this context) nor could it be that a dozen countries keep the command over their own troops, since that would probably result in a mess.

But doesn't it come as surprise that the German Marshall Fund lists exactly these three countries as supporters? At the same time it says that those countries that contributed lives to "Post-war" Iraq want to see their troops pulled out of Iraq.



I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineStaffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1192 times:

I think this is part of what makes so many people fed up at the moment. Why should other countries as members of the UN, help the US solve the situation in Iraq when all they hear is how much they suck at doing so?

Staffan


User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 26
Reply 21, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1184 times:

Galaxy5:

"And you keep on forgetting how ineffectual the UN has been for decades. How about Somalia, Sudan, Korea, most of africa. "

And you still don't understand not only what the UN stands for but also how it works. The UN hasn't got hundreds of thousands of its own forces it can deploy rapidly where needed. The UN depends on its member nations to 'offer' their troops. And if these nations don't offer troops, there isn't very much the UN can do about it.

"How the UN was on the take and greased by IRAQ during the "food for Oil" program."

How was the UN greased by Iraq during the "Food for Oil" program, Galaxy? The investigation into this alleged fraud is still ongoing (by US Paul Volcker, what more do you want), yet you, as happened with the WMD issue, have already made up your mind before getting the actual facts.

" Also when did the US ship sarin to Iraq, again another fabrication of reality."

My misstake. The US didn't ship sarin to Iraq, only Anthrax, Botulinum, Histoplasma Capsulatam, Brucella Melitensis, Clostridium Perfringens and Clostridium tetani. Sarin-ingredients were provided by your allies the British. (1)

" Its great to see how you continue to stick your head in a hole and hope that the terrorism will just go away..."

On the contrary, Spain for instance has recently prevented more terrorist-attacks from taking place on its soil, and we didn't have to carpet-bomb Falluja to achieve that.

"...you see thats the problem with the UN and the likes of you, you just hope things will get better but refuse to do anything to make it so. "

Now here we have the core-issue of the "Fight against Terrorism". You believe the UN or I aren't doing anything at all against terrorism, which is bullsh!t. An illustration of just how wrong you are are the numerous anti-terrorism efforts going on around the world today without you apparently knowning about it. Falluja-like assaults might give you the idea something is actually done about terrorism, in the real world and in the real war on terrorism its effects are completely counter-productive.

Unfortunately, terrorism isn't something new in Spain. The country has been living with it for ages and has learned the hard way that the only way to fight it succesfully is through international cooperation. That is one of the core items one needs to fight terrorism effectively and to prevent other attacks from taking place. Unfortunately, the US is approaching this Global problem not only completely wrong, it is also completely isolated, except for a few 'allies' such a Britain. There is a War on Terror outside Iraq Galaxy. It's just not as flashy as an Assault on Falluja you can see on the evening news.

"And you can't even see the joke about the UN in your own posts, the UN did nothing to limit Iraq from building a huge stockpile of weapons, explosives, missles etc..."

??? The UN did nothing when Iraq was building a huge stockpile for the simple reason that a number of countries, such as yours, didn't want the UN to do anything about it. Iraq was fighting a war with Iran, remember? Saddam's Iraq at that time needed all the weapons it could lay its hands on and the U.S. under Ronald Reagan assisted Saddam as much as possible, even when U.S. Congress opposed. The only country which was actually doing something about Saddam's weapons build-up and the use of Chemical Weapons was Iran, and your country specifically did everything it could to prevent Iran from getting their weapons. The National Security Archive has got some great declassified official documents on this and the infamous picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam comes from this period. Did you know Rumsfeld gave Saddam a personal letter from Ronald Reagan, the President of the US of A at that time?




(Source: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq31.pdf)

"Your own posts show how bad the UN was at keeping Iraq in check, all they did was give Iraq 12 years to build up the largest arsenal in the M.E."

Bullsh!t. Even the Duelfer report has acknowledged that during those 12 years Saddam's WMD program was insignificant if existant at all. It also admits that the effectivity of the UN sanctions were greatly underestimated by the U.S.



(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ttt4-article_7-eng
http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-09-30-iraq-ushelp_x.htm



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 22, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1139 times:

The really sad thing is - the UN will always only be as strong as the weakest link in the chain... and the link that's constantly weakening the UN is: the US.

The US complains again, again and again about how useless the UN is, but instead of doing something to strengthen the UN, all they do is to further weaken it...

... only to again complain about how weak the UN is...

Really sad behavior.

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Majority Of Troops In Iraq Support Withdrawal posted Wed Mar 1 2006 17:41:55 by AeroWesty
Army Chief Of Staff: U.S. Troops In Iraq Till '10 posted Wed Oct 11 2006 22:16:42 by Falcon84
Troops In Iraq Interfere With Religion! posted Sat Jun 24 2006 16:59:43 by Mrmeangenes
What Celebrity Would You Send In Space & Leave? posted Wed Oct 2 2002 18:42:52 by 727LOVER
I Need To Talk About What Happened Here In Iraq posted Thu May 11 2006 04:20:27 by UH60FtRucker
What Does "Support The Troops" Mean? posted Thu Dec 29 2005 23:13:33 by Tbar220
Beginning Of Permanent Troops Cuts In Iraq? posted Sat Dec 24 2005 04:58:27 by ANCFlyer
So What About The Assyrians In Iraq? posted Sat Sep 24 2005 18:50:01 by Marco
What Is More Important In Iraq Than MS Or LA? posted Sat Sep 3 2005 03:16:13 by MD-90
4 Women Among 6 Troops Slain In Iraq Bombing posted Sat Jun 25 2005 22:31:00 by TedTAce