News Is Supporting Troops More Important Than Protesting Government Decisions?

[FZ+]

Knowing all this as well as I do, you still think that France
threatened to veto because of anything other then self interest?

Chirac threatened to use the veto for the same reason the US threatened to invade Iraq with or without an UN resolution.

If you can't believe that Chirac is acting out of principle and the common opinion of his public, then there is similarly no reason to believe that the US is invading Iraq to remove Saddam.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by FZ+
Chirac threatened to use the veto for the same reason the US threatened to invade Iraq with or without an UN resolution.

If you can't believe that Chirac is acting out of principle and the common opinion of his public, then there is similarly no reason to believe that the US is invading Iraq to remove Saddam.

I was talking about the hypocrisy of the French government, which repeatedly sent its soldiers to foreign territories without UN approval when it decided it was in its national interest to do so, but decided to insist on the requirement for UN approval only when the US government decided it was in its interest to do so. That is a very blatant example of hypocrisy on the part of France regardless of who one would prefer to be his president (Schroeder perhaps, Chirac probably not), regardless of whether one voted for Bush or not (I did not), regardless of whether the American decision to go to war against Iraq is right or wrong (I think at this point it may be the lesser of evils), and regardless of whether the U.S. is equally hypocritical (which it is).

 

[Zargawee]

If you can't believe that Chirac is acting out of principle and the common opinion of his public, then there is similarly no reason to believe that the US is invading Iraq to remove Saddam.

The reason is obvios , US And UK Want the fields of Oil , and wants to remove the most powerful arab country .
There's also a reason for UK to follow US, which is that The English Currancy is Going Down because of the success of the Euro , and if the Euro completes it's success , this will lead to make the Euro competor to The US Dollar .

Here In Jordan , we rely on The Us Dollar , but some investors are changing into Euro , becuase they see a very bright future for this currancy.

Back to the main subject , I think we have the right to suport the iraqi side , Not becuase they defend Saddam , but Only becuase they are arabs , and arabs are brothers .

 

[russ_watters]

The reason is obvios , US And UK Want the fields of Oil

If we had wanted to keep the oil, we would not have put out the fires then GIVEN THEM BACK to Iraq and Kuait in 1991. You will soon see (again) how wrong you are.

 

[russ_watters]

I was talking about the hypocrisy of the French government, which repeatedly sent its soldiers to foreign territories without UN approval when it decided it was in its national interest to do so, but decided to insist on the requirement for UN approval only when the US government decided it was in its interest to do so.

France is in fact fighting an unsanctioned war in the Ivory Coast right now. No UN approval was sought or given. Are they wrong for fighting it? Does it make them hypocrites? Absolutely.

 

[FZ+]

The following are random examples:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2622511.stm
I draw your attention to the following line:

Former colonial power France has some 2,500 troops in Ivory Coast in a bid to enforce the fragile ceasefire.

http://www.iht.com/articles/85092.htm
See:

Virtually no one in France, Africa, the United States or the United Nations has attacked France's involvement in the Ivory Coast, its richest former colony in Black Africa, as neo-colonialist or unwanted. Indeed Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, and a number of West African chiefs of state, came to Paris as part of the supporting cast over the weekend that was meant to give the Ivory Coast accord a look of gravitas.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/2/5/235723/8626

meanwhile, what is the United States doing? where are the troops, the stealth bombers, the high-powered diplomats? dithering outside iraq. the French -the French!- are left to try and avert this potential catastrophe.

Now, there is a critical difference here. The French are here to enforce a ceasefire. They were called on regarding a conflict that was already occurring, and they are in agreement with the UN. The same is not true for america. The situations are explicitly different. So no hypocrisy.

 

[russ_watters]

Now, there is a critical difference here. The French are here to enforce a ceasefire. They were called on regarding a conflict that was already occurring, and they are in agreement with the UN. The same is not true for america. The situations are explicitly different. So no hypocrisy.

Is there a UN resolution in force regarding this action? Did France even seek one? Unless the answer to BOTH of those questions is yes, then France is indeed hypocritical on this issue. It doesn't matter WHY they are doing it, just that they are doing it WITHOUT UN SANCTION.

meanwhile, what is the United States doing? where are the troops, the stealth bombers, the high-powered diplomats? dithering outside iraq. the French -the French!- are left to try and avert this potential catastrophe.

Further deepening the hypocrisy. Whoever is expressing that opinion chastizes the US for making France go it alone. But France refuses to support the US - in fact France is actively HINDERING the US.

Clarification: I left out an important word in my last post.

Are they wrong for fighting it?

*NO!*

 

[Nicool003]

anyway, i hear a lot of people bad mouthing the american president about the possibility of war, here in hippie land (that would be orygun) there are many marches for peace...yet i don't see the same loud support for our troops that are away from home, their families, sleeping on the floors/sand/ground etc, away from any communication source to call their wife, their children...

so here's food for thought...instead of protesting how our government is making choices, lend some care, compassion and support to the men and women who are sacrificing by sending letters, care packages, pictures and words of love and support for the tremendous courage they have for being on the forefront of this nation's security...

you bet kerrie, even though I have a few friends stationed in the middle east I still support the war. we can't sit and wait for another act of terrorism. I just hope it can be quick, successful and with minimal loss.

I AGREE! I supposrt the troops and I too hope this war goes by quick, with minimal loss. Thank you for making this topic Kerrie I was looking for something like this!

 

[Nicool003]

FZ you have much of your post backwards. Like:

meanwhile, what is the United States doing? where are the troops, the stealth bombers, the high-powered diplomats? dithering outside iraq. the French -the French!- are left to try and avert this potential catastrophe.

Hmmm I recently recall the French getting caught with secret trade with Iraq along with a cetrtan number of suspicious things...


BTW FZ! THIS IS A THREAD TO OFFER SUPPORT TO OUR TROOPS AND I DO NOT SEE YOU DOING THAT SO PERHAPS YOU SHOULD GO POST THIS IN ANOTHER THREAD!

 

[Sting]

Hi Nicool,

Please try to refrain from yelling. It's likely to start flaming. Thanks.

Hi FZ+,

If you wish to discuss the political aspects of the current situation, feel free to start another thread or continue with another discussion concerning this (as I am sure there are plenty of them).

Thanks Nicool and FZ+

 

[kyleb]

Originally posted by russ_watters
I completely agree. It saddens me how few people can require that not supporting a war means not supporting the troops. Supporting the troops is ENTIRELY about hoping the come back alive. What they fight for or even IF they fight is irrelevant to the desire to see them return alive.

well if they were not going over to fight the war then supporting them would be different. for instance if they went simply to guard inspectors in an accelerated search program, that i could support. also, i should point out that i have a friend who will ship out any day; i am always supportive of people who do things that i believe are good and especially my friends; but i cannot support him on this, especially because he does not think the cause is just either. his argument is that he will not be in much danger himself, will make enough extra pay to buy a new computer, and will avoid going to jail. so basically he has been bribed/blacked-mailed into killing people. i cannot support our government for doing such things and i cannot support those who let our government do it to them. at least i can not do it and still feel like i am being a good person.

 

[russ_watters]

but i cannot support him on this,

But do you hope he comes back ALIVE or hope he DIES? That really is the question you need to ask yourself. Here is a reasonable opinion: "I don't support the war you are fighting or the reasons you are fighting it but I hope you come back alive."

 

[Laser Eyes]

Originally posted by russ_watters
But do you hope he comes back ALIVE or hope he DIES? That really is the question you need to ask yourself. Here is a reasonable opinion: "I don't support the war you are fighting or the reasons you are fighting it but I hope you come back alive."

russ, I completely agree. You have stated the only legitimate support you can give to the men and women fighting the war if you do not support the war. You can hope they return alive and healthy.

I do not believe it is possible to support troops in any mental or physical way whether it is by letters, care packages or anything else if you take a position in opposition to the war. Do you think your support even in such an apparently harmless manner can make no difference? If you do then you are fooling yourself. What if the comfort you give to a soldier improves his frame of mind so he fires his gun more accurately and kills someone who might otherwise have lived? By your goodwill support you have helped to kill other people. To show any support to troops and say you oppose the war is hypocritical. But like any decent person we should all hope they return alive and well and wish the same for all countries' forces.

Laser Eyes

 

[drag]

Greetings !

USA ! USA ! USA !

Originally posted by drag
It is fortunate that a super-power like the US exists
and can act without this corrupted institution.

Originally posted by zk4586
Fortunate? I find nothing fortunate in the fact that the US is a country which uses it's power to bully other nations into submitting to whatever suits the US. I find nothing fortunate in the fact that a country which was founded on the ideals of freedom and liberty would use its military strength and economic superiority so aggressively that its image becomes one of capriciousness, arrogance, and brutality.

The USA was founded on the ideals of freedom
and liberty. If you remember - this freedom and
liberty was achieved through force. We are not
living in a black & white world. Not all wars are
bad, some are very good.

The UN is a pathetic institute when it comes to
deciding upon military action at present. The UN
can only, and even then in a poor way, handle
a real war.

Is the UN your idea of freedom and liberty ?!
The UN, if I may remind you, is an organization
where all countries are represented. There are
many countries in the world where there is no
freedom or liberty. This corrupted organization
draws descisions based on the opinion of tyrants.
While the US follows real democracy, its ideals and
intrests, this organization abides to only one
intrest - its internal stability.

The US is freeing people from a tyrant. Perhaps,
if you were an Iraqi citizen and you knew how
life is there and in the US and "western" countries
by comparisson - you'd have a "slightly" different
opinion on the subject.

People living in democratic countries throughout
their lives can not understand this. Do you really
think that absolute rulers care about the UN and
its treaties or human rights ? They're absolute
rulers - they only care about themselves, their own
greatness and power, their life-style and feeling
of control. They, unlike democratic countries, have
no problem to lie, kill, cheat, produce whatever
weapons they like for their own protection
and for their plans of conquest for further greatness.
The people are there just for the ruler's benefit.
Saddam disarming himself due to UN "pressure" is
just a joke. What does such "pressure" do to him ?
Do you think that the sanctions hurt him personally ?

Of course, that the US also has other interests in the
area, except protecting itself and the "western"
world (some of which apparently just won't "get it"
until there are explosions outside their houses).
Of course, that when african countries kill each other
by the tens of phousands they could also
intervene and force settlements - although these
are not at all threats to US security, unlike Iraq
which giving it's weapons to terrorists can cause
even greater catastrophies. But, the world is not
black & white, like I said. So, does it make it a
bad thing - certainly not !

Live long and prosper.

 

[kyleb]

but drag, we got our freedom by fending of those who would rather kill us than see us have it, not by attacking others. just because things are not as black and white does not give anyone the right to go painting the world red with blood.

Originally posted by russ_watters
But do you hope he comes back ALIVE or hope he DIES? That really is the question you need to ask yourself. Here is a reasonable opinion: "I don't support the war you are fighting or the reasons you are fighting it but I hope you come back alive."

well if what leads up to coming back alive includes killing people who did not make the choice to fight, i cannot wish him back alive. he is making his own choice, and a self-admittedly selfish one. if i were to which him safe passage, i feel i should do the same for thieves, drunk drivers, murderers, terrorists, and all the others who act out of similarly selfish motives; i cannot bring myself to do that. besides, we all die so i do not see any reason to waist much time worrying one way or another about that; it is how we live that is important.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by kyleb
[well if what leads up to coming back alive includes killing people who did not make the choice to fight, i cannot wish him back alive. he is making his own choice, and a self-admittedly selfish one. if i were to which him safe passage, i feel i should do the same for thieves, drunk drivers, murderers, terrorists, and all the others who act out of similarly selfish motives; i cannot bring myself to do that. besides, we all die so i do not see any reason to waist much time worrying one way or another about that; it is how we live that is important. [/B]

Disgusting !
(I just don't have any other word for it.)

 

[kyleb]

you say it is disgusting to not support people in their selfish motives? are you recomending i do otherwise?

 

[Nicool003]

Kyleb what the heck. once again I am TRYING to refrain from yelling but I swear if sting hadn't asked me too...


They are not being selfish! they are doing their jobs and doing what the are asked to do. And their job is to protect us and also ungrateful annoying people like you.


There sting I didn't yell.

 

[kyleb]

Nicool003, it seems you missed my previous comment to which i was referring to:

Originally posted by kyleb
also, i should point out that i have a friend who will ship out any day; i am always supportive of people who do things that i believe are good and especially my friends; but i cannot support him on this, especially because he does not think the cause is just either. his argument is that he will not be in much danger himself, will make enough extra pay to buy a new computer, and will avoid going to jail.

and yes, i am by no means grateful to people who do things that i do not think should be done and still claim it is for me, especially when they use my tax dollars to do it. if you are annoyed by my opinion, i recommend you lighten up on the intolerance and learn to accept that individuals are different by nature.

 

[FZ+]

Originally posted by Sting
Hi Nicool,

Please try to refrain from yelling. It's likely to start flaming. Thanks.

Hi FZ+,

If you wish to discuss the political aspects of the current situation, feel free to start another thread or continue with another discussion concerning this (as I am sure there are plenty of them).

Thanks Nicool and FZ+

Hmmm... Wasn't it I who called for both pro and anti war people to support the actual soldiers in Iraq, only to be told that it was somehow "impossible" or "hypocritical"? I was merely responding to kat and other's implication that France is anti-war merely to be against us etc etc, which I vehmently disagree. Hmm... maybe I shouldn't have responded, I guess.
The fact of the matter is that now that the war has begun, it cannot be un-begun. We can say whether we feel it was wrong in the first place, but in terms of humanitarian and diplomatic effects it is best if the war is over quickly without many casualties. That's why when certain anti-war countries now wish for a quick victory, they are not being hypocritical. That's why anti-war marchers do announce on news their support for actual troops.
Because, in this case, a desire for peace and a desire for victory co-incide.

 

[kat]

ummmmm..

Originally posted by FZ+
I was merely responding to kat and other's implication that France is anti-war merely to be against us etc etc

Ummm I have never said that France is anti-war merely to be against us..I said their actions are reflective of self interest not Chirac's humanitarian concerns. I also gave several examples of past actions that show this and their hypocrisy. France taking the moral highground is the biggest joke I've heard all year, it's truly enough to make me laugh so hard I might just fall out my chair. France would never survive the scrutiny that the rest of the world gives the U.S.

 

[FZ+]

(and that is precisely the kind of off topic debate I shouldn't be responding to)

 

[Nicool003]

Yes FZ hmmm your also the one who then went against it by saying the french were doing things that they really weren't. Where did you get that? protectthefrench.com?

This is a pro soldier website so if you and kyleb want to go start your own thread all by yourselves please, do so.

 

[russ_watters]

you say it is disgusting to not support people in their selfish motives? are you recomending i do otherwise?

No it is disgusting that you wish someone you consider a friend would die.

I was merely responding to kat and other's implication that France is anti-war merely to be against us etc etc, which I vehmently disagree

You are correct. France's other motive is that due to this war they stand to lose a lot of MONEY by losing the ability to trade with a criminal.

France would never survive the scrutiny that the rest of the world gives the U.S.

The scrutiny the US gets is the price of being the world leader. As the world leader, EVERY action taken is analyzed to death and every motive questioned. History will show our unprecidented benevolence.

 

[zk4586]

They, unlike democratic countries, have
no problem to lie, kill, cheat, produce whatever
weapons they like for their own protection
and for their plans of conquest for further greatness.

Oh, yes. These things are strictly limited to undemocratic countries. We never have these things happen in democratic politics...where's that damn "eye-roll smiley"?

 

[kyleb]

Originally posted by russ_watters
No it is disgusting that you wish someone you consider a friend would die.

...

You are correct. France's other motive is that due to this war they stand to lose a lot of MONEY by losing the ability to trade with a criminal.

does it make you feel dirty when you go twisting my words around to suit your needs like a vial piece of filth? or have you been at such things for so long you have forgotten what is like to not feel like scum?

 

[Sting]

Kyleb what the heck. once again I am TRYING to refrain from yelling but I swear if sting hadn't asked me too...

There sting I didn't yell.

I see that Nicool. Thank you and I appreciate it.

Hmmm... Wasn't it I who called for both pro and anti war people to support the actual soldiers in Iraq, only to be told that it was somehow "impossible" or "hypocritical"? I was merely responding to kat and other's implication that France is anti-war merely to be against us etc etc, which I vehmently disagree. Hmm... maybe I shouldn't have responded, I guess.

I was only suggesting that IF you wanted to start another topic.

 

[Sgt.Hartman]

Bless all of our troops. I'm proud of them all.

 

[russ_watters]

does it make you feel dirty when you go twisting my words around to suit your needs like a vial piece of filth? or have you been at such things for so long you have forgotten what is like to not feel like scum?

LOL, wow, I really struck a nerve. If you do NOT wish your "friend" to die, could you please explain this:

well if what leads up to coming back alive includes killing people who did not make the choice to fight, i cannot wish him back alive.

It certainly sounds like you want him to die. Clearly I am not the only one who interpreted it that way.

 

[kyleb]

it certainly does sound like that if you completely close your mind off to the concept of being impartial. but you are only confuseing yourself by doing that.

 

[Zargawee]

Do You Agree With This : "Support Your Troops For War" ?

This Is What The topic About , to support soldiers to make a war !

 

[drag]

Originally posted by Zargawee
Do You Agree With This : "Support Your Troops For War" ?

100% !

 

[Nicool003]

Yes I agree! They are going into protect us from other terrorist attacks and attacks from a horrible dictator! So YES I support them!