What Goes Around Comes Around

Originally posted by alanH
Aghart: I think that "one dimensional" stuff is more the boilerplate of the anti-Bush crowd. It was kind of interesting, I was talking with my mother on Mother's Day, and she hates Bush like poison, but even she sees now that he's no idiot, like she originally thought.
Click to expand...


I admit I don't rate Bush very highly, but I still feel that moving US forces to new bases in Eastern Europe could open a can of worms. The governments of Bulgaria and Romania and other countries in the region may welcome the US with open arms but that's because all they have in their eyes are $ signs. All over the world this move will be viewed with tremendous suspicion.

The reason for this is as I've stated before, there is no military or political need for this redeployment unless the USA intends to dominate the middle and near east. Even restricting reaction to this site, this will be 'bread from heaven' for Allah's mathematics and his cronies. This could end up a huge 'own goal' with consequences for the whole world. If the US want's to cut costs and punish the german government, fine, send the forces in question back to the states.

I'm only one person and am not psychic, and if you have seen my posts dotted around you will know I am not anti US, but I tell you, this will be a huge mistake made worse because there is no need for it.
 
It's reasonable to assume that this has little to do with middle eastern domination and far more to do with Rumsfeld's reported statements that he was going to damage the German economy by withdrawing US troops and bases to punish them for opposing the US in the UNSC.
 
Aghart: those former satellite countries have a lot more than dollar signs on their mind. They are looking to, either banded together or singly, begin to exert more influence within the European continent. Aligning themselves with the world's strongest superpower certainly makes sense, and all the more so since they were recently rebuffed by the "old Europe."

I don't see why you think that having bases equals domination, either. With all the troops in Germany, the US sure couldn't get the Germans to agree with them on the recent war. And, of course, the US puts bases where it is welcome to do so, and leaves if it is asked. And Sparks is also right to some degree...part of the redeployment is a reaction to Germany's behavior.

And no, you don't seem reflexively anti-US like some here, although I don't see this realignment as necessarily malignant. The world is changing, after all, and it could shake out to be very bad, but it could also be good in some ways to. Would you agree that now is a rather transitional time in world affairs?
 
all the more so since they were recently rebuffed by the "old Europe."
Click to expand...
The rebuke came from France, not "Old Europe" (funny that you use that term given the fact that the nations you're calling "new europe" are far less modern than the "Old Europe" nations) - and the rebuke came AFTER they sided with the US against France's stance.

So,
1) Cause does not follow Effect, and,
2) It's hypocritical for you to be happy with the whole "freedom fries" attitude of congress, and condemn France for rebuking another nation.
 
Originally posted by alanH
Aghart: Would you agree that now is a rather transitional time in world affairs?
Click to expand...

yes, which is another reason why such a move should not take place right now.
 
Sparks: you mean it was France alone? Why, how awfully unilateral of them! Anyhow, as you know, the old Europe/new Europe characterization derives from traditional vs. newer spheres of influence, not internal modernity. Many of those countries have just been recently "reborn," after decades under the Soviet bootheel, so cut them a break.


_________________________________
"It's hypocritical for you to be happy with the whole "freedom fries" attitude of congress, and condemn France for rebuking another nation."
__________________________________


No, I think the whole "freedom fries" thing is pretty stupid, though I admit I'm a big fan of freedom kissing. That said, it works both ways. It's equally hypocritical to condemn the US for being "unilateral" while lauding France for doing the same.

And it's especially hypocritical for France itself to be posturing as if they're making a principled stand while telling those other countries to shut up.

At this point, however, France realizes it's overplayed its hand, and between the influence it will probably lose in the UN, the downgrading in relations with the US, and not to mention its burgeoning Muslim problem, they'll be busy enough. Couldn't happen to a nice bunch. :p

********************************************
Aghart: can you explain what you mean?
 
Sparks: you mean it was France alone? Why, how awfully unilateral of them!
Click to expand...
Agreed, I didn't think too much of that particular statement of theirs.

That said, it works both ways. It's equally hypocritical to condemn the US for being "unilateral" while lauding France for doing the same.
Click to expand...
I'm most assuredly not lauding france for their rebuke. But there's a difference between disagreeing with a thing and knowing it thoroughly.

At this point, however, France realizes it's overplayed its hand, and between the influence it will probably lose in the UN, the downgrading in relations with the US, and not to mention its burgeoning Muslim problem, they'll be busy enough. Couldn't happen to a nice bunch.
Click to expand...
Frankly, I think you've got an inaccurate appraisal there.
 
It came around, huh EI_SPARKS?

Originally posted by EI_Sparks
Hard to believe an American would be able to say "What goes around comes around" after september 11th ...
Click to expand...

Abdulla: I guess the US policy of bombing anyone and everyone that disagrees with us has made WTC unique in that finally the world has gone to the 800 lb. gorillas habitat and peed on his parade, huh EI_SPARKS? :eek:

AbdullaTheBomber.....
 
Alanb and moral compasses, (vomit!).

Originally posted by alanH
Sparks: what's your take on the French, or Russian, moral compass regarding this issue? Which country, do you believe, has a more on-target moral compass than the US. I'm curious.
Click to expand...

Abdulla: What on target moral compass? (US)

Financing Israeli terrorism conjoined with the Jewish owned and operated US media may make J. Q. public think we're really the true pillars of morality in this corrupt world is being delusional at best and a living lie at worst!

One has to go to Al Jazeera, El Monde or the BBC to get the true "facts" regarding the news.

AbdullaTheBomber....
 
Originally posted by alanH
At this point, however, France realizes it's overplayed its hand, and between the influence it will probably lose in the UN, the downgrading in relations with the US, and not to mention its burgeoning Muslim problem, they'll be busy enough. Couldn't happen to a nice bunch. :p
Click to expand...

Influence in the UN : are you sure that France will lose it ? I don't think so... The US credibility is no more, so you may target the bad country.

Relations with the US : :D

Burgeoning Muslism problem : what are you talking about ?
 
Slow down there Abdullah. Just because I understand why 9/11 happened, doesn't mean that I agree with the morality of killing 3000 innocent people and wiping out the civil liberties of 250 million others, thus giving far more wide-ranging powers to the minority in control of the US military.
 
SG: except the UN is nothing without the US. And when I speak of the burgeoning Muslim problem, I'm speaking of the 6 million unassimilated Muslims in France, who get more restless by the day. That powderkeg will go up one of these days or years.
 
Originally posted by alanH
SG: except the UN is nothing without the US. And when I speak of the burgeoning Muslim problem, I'm speaking of the 6 million unassimilated Muslims in France, who get more restless by the day. That powderkeg will go up one of these days or years.
Click to expand...

"6 million unassimilated Muslims" : Are you french ? Do you see them fighting in streets ? You should have a look here before saying that... One month ago, they elected a council that will help them to talk with our government. Thus even if there are still forgotten ones, we will try to integrate them.
We've got Islamists too, of course, but they didn't put bombs in our trains or anywhere else...
 
Originally posted by alanH
Oh, I've been following this story for awhile, and the fun is coming. No fun for the Paris Jews who are regularly getting beaten up by Muslims, and it won't be fun for the rest of the French soon enough.
Click to expand...
That's so often... what about Jews bitten by non-Muslims ? You're using a small fact to create a generality !

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=3&art_id=vn20030421071258694C653712&set_id=1
Click to expand...
That's not a problem ! They are living in France, so they follow our rules : Muslim women have to unveil on identity picture ! Why not don't we put sun-glasses, hat and chirurgical mask ?
Anyway, that's not a terrorism cause... and they agree with our other laws.
About the "extremists" that were elected (1/3), the other Muslims explained that it's because they are supported by rich organisations. Thus they were best known and best prepared but it should be different in 2 years for the next election. Then the other moderated Muslims will be ready too.

http://24.104.35.12/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/413xokzz.asp
Click to expand...
They are protecting US interests, not French people... and you give this articke showing that we are uniting !
 
AlanH,
The US may have the most vaunted military, the biggest foreign debt, the biggest trade deficit and the biggest PR machine - but it isn't the core of the UN. It is, however, the UN's worst debtor, worst obstructionist in the Security Council and the least supportive member of the general aims of the UN.
 
Sparks: what can the UN accomplish if the US pulls out, or ignores it?

SG: I'm getting to distinct impression you're French. If so, then you know that the dramatic increase in attacks on Jews in your country is largely due to the influx of Arab immigrants, and the French Jews serve as a proxy for Israel.

You might wish you ask yourself why the money is flowing to extremist groups, if that is indeed the case...and ask yourself what will change about that when the Muslims start flexing their muscles and try to change laws or worse.

Time will tell, of course. But I don't think it takes rocket science to see where you're going. Holland will get there first, probably. But it's happening.
 
Sparks: what can the UN accomplish if the US pulls out, or ignores it?
Click to expand...
Well, the UN accomplished a sufficent amount in the period of time where the US was not paying it's UN dues to convince me that the US is not critical. Important, yes - but not critical.
As to the US ignoring the UN and "doing it's own thing", remember what the UN actually is - an assocation consisting of every other nation on the planet. The odds of the US beating one major power are reasonable - but the odds of the US managing to stand alone against the UN without significant damage, economic collapse and the risk of a third world war are very, very, slim indeed.
However, I think that the intelligent opinion here is that the whole idea is a poor one and that a way forward needs to be found that allows the international community to avoid a major war, either trade or military. No-one ever really wins those.
 
Sorry man, I don't know where you're living but here (in France) we have lived with Muslisms for a long time (at least one century). We don't fear them as US do because we are living in peace (in general).
About Jews... I'm sorry for them ! It's due to young peoples. They are a problem that should be fixed and that's why the government is talking with Muslims leaders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top