Fahrenheit 9/11

Point taken about France but it wasn't my intention to say A was false but B true. I was simply throwing some facts into the debate.

The whole issue of eastern Europe joining the coalition is very complex and I don't claim to know the absolute truth. Very possibly money has changed hands but to forget how Romania endured one of the worst dictatorships of the last few decades would be missing one of the prime reasons for their involvment, I think.

Surely we haven't become so cynical that we no longer believe a democratic goverment acts out of a sense of history and experience, and is only persuaded by money? (I understand this contradics my remarks about France)

I know from knowledge of my own nation's history that Scottish politics is massively shaped by our history. The progressive social emphesis in our politics has allot to do with the way our country has been treated by our neighbour in the past. I dont see why Romania would be any different and I know that my country would never do somethng it considered morally wrong because of a large hand-out from the US - unfortunately my country still lacks the freedom to make its own foreign policies .

Anyway, I'm totally rambling now and think I should probably see the movie before Shang tries to kill me. /versus/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Peace all, I just enjoy a debate.

 

Today Tony Blair himself said that WMD may never be found in Iraq. But Vice President Dick Cheney still insist that he knows more than even the 9/11 commission.

I personally don't doubt that Dick knows something that rest of us don't. At least the point of the War has now been proven initially it was & still a huge Mistake. I just hope the rest of america see it & we'll see Bush & Dick get what they deserve. Yeah Right tough chance of that happening. /versus/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
MAXIMUM said:

Well those are fair points if true but I don’t buy this as the reason these countries helped the coalition. Again, this is how Moore tends to focus only on the facts that support his attempts to demonise Bush and the administration. By portraying Romania and Latvia as struggling post-communist states in need of cash he’s patronising their political views and importance in Europe. You only need to look at the last 20 years of Romania history to understand why the new political party (and the majority of public) supported this action. While Moore has probably lived a sheltered life free from repression his fellow human being in Romania have suffered the real horror of living under a government who murdered and humiliated its people.

But if you want to talk about countries acting in self interest look at France and Germany. Under the veil of being the outspoken pacifist nations in Europe they’ve hidden their own economic motives for supporting the old Iraq regime. France and Germany were the biggest trading partners with the thugs who ran Iraq. Yes, France and Germany would’ve been quite content to see Iraq rotting under another 10 years of UN sanctions due to their huge oil contracts with Baghdad.

I’ll still go see the film however, but I’ll be taking it all with a liberal dosage of salt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Romania: Mihai Tanasescu (Finance Minister): said the US will support Romania in recovering its receivables from Iraq. During his trip, Musetescu discussed issues related to the recovery of Iraq's debt to Romania with John Taylor (Under Secretary for International Affairs at the US Treasury). "The US officials said there was an open window for Romanian firms that want to participate in reconstruction projects alongside US companies in Iraq. Also, it is very clear that Romania will be among the states that will benefit from US support in recovery of commercial claims from Iraq," said Tanasescu. - 21st April (Bucharest Business Week)

Poland: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3525356.stm
Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski says his country was misled about the alleged threat from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Some polls suggest public support for Poland's role in Iraq has declined to 35%.

Tsjech republic the same, Bulgaria the same, estonia the same.
The vast majority in those countries is and always has been against the war, the governments however signed on for less altruistic reasons.

As for France and Germany you ARE talking out of your ass, both countries have argued to get sanctions lifted since the second half of the 90s only to be blocked at the UN by the UK and the US.

IC that you subscribe to the Fox brand of government isseud propaganda, I assume you also believe that Saddam kicked out inspectors in 98, that some WMD gave bee found and that Saddam had a link with Al queda.

A lie remains a lie no matter how many times it is proclaimed as fact.

 

Economics play a part in this BIG TIME.
The US is building 14 semi permanent millitary bases in Iraq, it is building the worlds largest embassy that will employ over 3000 people.
Now why would that be in a country that has almost no expatriates and a native population of only 30 million people?

 

Rereading your post I noticed you have your figures seriously fucked up to say the least.

 

DP

 

Looking back myself, you're right that my numbers are off a bit. Sorry. It was MSNBC, not Fox. Took my search a bit to find them. $18 billion, not $98. $180 million in fines, not $130.
Editing and correcting my previous post.

Link Here

 

Thats more like it

 

No Fishie I don't "buy" into the outpourings of a particular media outfit. I always strive to find a balance because generally speaking if you have two extreme views from two sides the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Anyways, I just found out the film premiers here on Friday....I'll make a point of seeing it on opening night,

 

Excellent, I look forward to discussing this with a less ignorant MAXIMUM.

 

Meanwhile here is another link to tde you over: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5601658&src=eDialog/GetContent&section=news

 

what debate? there is no debate. take the dick out of your mom and go see the movie. before you utter anymore nonsense

 

Here's more on venerable Mr. Nader:

http://www.observer.com/pages/conason.asp

Don't be fooled by his rhetoric, people. Fool us once.....uh...shame on you...er....um.....You won't fool me again.

 

[ QUOTE ]
Shang said:

what debate? there is no debate. take the dick out of your mom and go see the movie. before you utter anymore nonsense

[/ QUOTE ]

"ah shut up a ya face"...I happen to be chatting to Fishie and others. It may not be a debate as you see it but if you've nothing better to do than whine at my posts I suggest you go take a long wank over your comic book collection...you'll feel better.

Fishie, very few people believed Iraq was connected with Bin Laden, the main argument for war over here was the possibility of rogue states funding terrorists and/or giving them access to biological weapons. Clearly the intelligence was bollocks....but....go and ask the average Iraqi if they'd rather Saddam back in power and they'd probably tell you where to jump.

 

[ QUOTE ]
MAXIMUM said:

[ QUOTE ]
Shang said:

what debate? there is no debate. take the dick out of your mom and go see the movie. before you utter anymore nonsense

[/ QUOTE ]

"ah shut up a ya face"...I happen to be chatting to Fishie and others. It may not be a debate as you see it but if you've nothing better to do than whine at my posts I suggest you go take a long wank over your comic book collection...you'll feel better.

Fishie, very few people believed Iraq was connected with Bin Laden, the main argument for war over here was the possibility of rogue states funding terrorists and/or giving them access to biological weapons. Clearly the intelligence was bollocks....but....go and ask the average Iraqi if they'd rather Saddam back in power and they'd probably tell you where to jump.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thoughts in Iraq are evenly devided on that.
Thing remains, the vast majority didnt want any sort of US involvement to begin with even before the war even if it meant getting rid of Saddam.
They DIDNT forget the aid Saddam received from people like Rumsfeld and the elder Bush before Quweit, they DIDNT forget that after Halabja instead of aiding them the US decided to blame that one on Iran in order to protect Saddam, they DIDNT forget the popular uprisings in 91 and 92 after the first Gulf war when the US said they would give backup to a popular uprising only to leave the anti Saddam insurgence out to die once they actually started a revolt.
They KNEW that Chalabi was a traitor and a lyar whos only intrests were self serving and did not have Iraqi liberty in mind, they KNEW about the crimes this white house commited against the people they know claim to have liberated.

Its a sick sick history.

Oh and its not part of the movie but you have not reacted to the fact that yes France and Germany and indeed just about any other country in the world(including Dick Cheney I might add who up until 2000 was lobying for it on behalf of Haliburton) were trying to get the murderous sanctions on Iraq lifted only to see it blocked by the US and UK.

 

I agree 100% with your remarks about the US failing to support the uprising in the early 90s. Yes, that was a disgrace and something Bush should be appologising for as he eulogises about bringing freedom to Iraq etc. I'd have sooner seen the US arming a populor uprising than using an invasion force and in the process humiliating the average Iraqi.....but that's history now and I think the only option left to deal with Saddam was by using a foreign force of troops to remove him.

It's also worth pointing out that if the US had armed the Kurds and southern Iraqis to overthrow the regime the populor press and public would be crying out how evil America was for interfering in arab affairs and helping Iraqis kill Iraqis. A no win situation as far as populor opinion is concerned, you might say.

As for the whole sanctions debate, you're correct that France and Germany wanted sanctions lifted but that was never going to happen because the US would veto the clause. But to be honset they had good reason to.....if sanctions were lifted against Saddam he would almost certainly have used the money to build arms again and threaten his neighbours. By this stage I think most of the UN realised how dangerous Saddam was and just wanted rid of him completely. So basically what I'm saying is that by refusing to take decisive military action against Iraq with the coalition, France and Germany were in effect supporting continued sanctions because they knew very well their views on lifting sanctions would be rejected in the UN - hence another 10 years of sanctions begins.

 

I know that one of the many initial reasons for beginning the war (WMD) has so far been proven false. This info provided to Bush by the same intelligence that serves whomever is in office, so he is not to blame for this. However the primary objective for war, regime change, has already been fulfilled. Wasn't the war "worth it" for this point alone? The prison scandal was a blemish, as were other things (halliburton), but hopefully justice will be served in these areas.

My feeling is that Bush is a down to earth guy with average intelligence who was missused by his party for their political/corporate gain. I think it's totally wrong that Moore used a movie such as this to attack Bush when many of his views are not proven, or anywhere near proven facts.

I think the Republicans and Democrats are both corrupt but in different ways - the Republicans have a fake show of being moral to persuade the common blue collar worker, while really being in favor of corporations. Democrats however are truly immoral socialists who can't be voted for either.

At the heart of the problem, America really only has these two political groups to chose from and it's all because of money. Our entire political process needs to be redone but sadly, our population is to brainwashed by entertainment to do anything about it.

 

[ QUOTE ]
Nolte said:
I think the Republicans and Democrats are both corrupt but in different ways - the Republicans have a fake show of being moral to persuade the common blue collar worker, while really being in favor of corporations. Democrats however are truly immoral socialists who can't be voted for either.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is too general. The X number of people calling themselves Republicans don't all think the same way. The same goes for democrats. For instance, I think welfare should exist, but people shouldn't stay on it permanently. It does more harm to them and the economy than good. I want welfare with effective job training or re-training. I also own a business. Do I fit the mold of immoral socialist? I don't think so.

Bush... well, he says God is on our side and is telling him what to do. That scares me.

 

[ QUOTE ]
Plague said:

[ QUOTE ]
Nolte said:
I think the Republicans and Democrats are both corrupt but in different ways - the Republicans have a fake show of being moral to persuade the common blue collar worker, while really being in favor of corporations. Democrats however are truly immoral socialists who can't be voted for either.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is too general. The X number of people calling themselves Republicans don't all think the same way. The same goes for democrats. For instance, I think welfare should exist, but people shouldn't stay on it permanently. It does more harm to them and the economy than good. I want welfare with effective job training or re-training. I also own a business. Do I fit the mold of immoral socialist? I don't think so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify before any flaming occurs, I was beng extremely general by those views of Rep./Dem., but both parties are corrupt, that is all.

 

Urm like NO, remember the arming of the Mujahedin by the US, there wasnt much outright over that was it?
There wasnt becouse it was seen as the native people rising up against the communist Soviets, so why would there if there was a movement to oust Saddam from within with the west just giving millitary aid and protection?

Sanctions should have been lifted partially and in fact that was what the votes were about, not so that Saddam could rebuild his capabilities but to stop the needles suffering of Iraqi´s.
Thats a BIG nuance over lifting all sanctions outright(something that would NEVER have happened with Saddam in power).