Wimps, weasels and monkeys - the US media view of 'perfidious France'

Guardian ^ | 2/11/03 | Gary Younge in New York and Jon Henley in Paris

[Burkeman1]

Oh- Ok.

[Kip Lange]

You actually think we went to war against Germany to save the Jews?

I don't recall anywhere that I said that. The point about the death camps is that this is a war where the "absolute proof" will come AFTER THE WAR IS OVER. Already, we have Saddam turning over details on WMDs he claimed he originally didn't have.

The Pearl Harbor illustration, also, is apparently lost on you. I'm saying: You're asking for a Pearl Harbor in order to justify "concerns" you have.

Again- Iraq has not even been plausibly connected to 9/11 by Powell.

Does it need to be SPECIFICALLY, *incontrevertibly* linked to the 9/11 attacks? Not just following money trails, etc., no, I suppose that doesn't satisfy you. You won't accept numerous links from Iraq to al-Qaeda and God knows how many other terrorist groups? *What*, may I ask, would convince you? A Pearl Harbor? You want more American civilians dead to quiet your concerns? That's reprehensible.

I'm with Bush; I'm not willing to stake the life of *one* American citizen on the sanity of Saddam Hussein...or the hand-wringing of the doves who use the ideals of freedom for convenience and nothing more.

[garbanzo]

So a nuclear-armed Saddam doesn't bother you in the slightest? No chance that he'll give or sell a nuclear weapon or anthrax to terrorists in your universe I presume. Let's just keep believing that UN commissions will protect us from nuclear proliferation like they prevented India, Pakistan, and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. Of course Saddam can be contained - we'll hit back after he destroys New York and/or LA unless the peaceniks determine that we deserved it for attempting to remove him from power.

[Burkeman1]

No it doesn't bother me in the slitghtest. As it wouldn't seem to bother Bush either. If Iraq blasted off a nuke bomb test tomorrow suddenly we would engage in "constructive dialouge" with him like we are doing now with the far more unstable and insance North Korea and like we do with Pakistan and India. Any talk of war against Iraq qould evaporate tommorrow if Sadaam had a nuke are could really threaten us in any way.

[Miss Marple]

It is amazing to me that when someone posts a logical refutation to your comments, you immediately discount the evidence. While there have been fraudulent people involved in Japan's banking system recently, the entire system is not a sham. I actually take that comment a bit personally, as my mother's cousin helped set the system up during the occupation.

Japan's culture was a feudal, militaristic monarchy even more isolated from the west than is Iraq. Iraq has an educated population, a prior history of self government, and a willing group of exiles who want to return and rebuild their country.

While I think we will not get out of Iraq in one year (because we will be hunting down all the hidden munitions, chemicals, and bio-weapons), I also take this administration at its word. We go to liberate Iraq, not to colonize it.

[piasa]

The difference is that if Iraq had a nuke to test it would test it in NY City or Washington DC via its friends, or with one of its own agents. Iraq isn't just trying to blackmail us for money as North Korea is doing. Hussein wants revenge.

Hussein's government officials, his diplomats, have been engaged in assorted acts of terrorism wherever possible and they have worked with al Qaeda for years. Iraq's leadership is one which has expansionist aims, which is quite a contrast to Noth Korea's, for example.

TIraq isn't content to just isolate themselves behind a fence and paint aggressive posters to wave at "imperialists."

It's silly to even consider letting a regime like Iraq obtain those weapons. Iraq had the sense to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, and Israel had the sense to bomb Iraq's. The world would be a good deal better off if we had prevented nasty regimes from getting such weapons- if we had, North Korea wouldn't be the cesspool it is. An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.

[Burkeman1]

IT doesn't matter if the best of people set up their banking system along western lines. It is still an asian culture and was run along those lines. Sub contractors taking loses for decades and hiding them for their traditional benefactors and patrons. Not only the banking system but the entire accounting system in Japan is in a shambles. Only now is it getting better.

I can't help what you make personal. You posted an exmaple of why you thought it would be easy to remake Iraq in our image - I posted why I thought it not only a bad example but also how it was partly false to begin with. That you made it personal is your problem.

Iraq does indeed have an educated population of exiles. Are they all the same religion? From the same tribe? From the same clan and hometown? There is no "Iraqi" nationality. That is a farce. Iraq is a phoney nation cobled together by the British empire and since "independence" has only been held together by a brutal central strongman supported by western governments.

Again- to think we can make a nation out of a collection of tribes and groups that was never a real nation is folly. Haven't we learned from Wilson's "Yugoslavia"?

[Boot Hill]

(CLICK WILLIE)

--Boot Hill

[Kip Lange]

and Israel had the sense to bomb Iraq's

And thank God for that, it set them back several years in their WMD programs.

[The Great Satan]

The "petulant prima donna of realpolitik" is leading the "axis of weasels", in "a chorus of cowards". It is an unholy alliance of "wimps" and ingrates which includes one country that is little more than a "mini-me minion", another that is in league with Cuba and Libya, with a bunch of "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" at the helm.

In a nutshell.

[Kip Lange]

Haven't we learned from Wilson's "Yugoslavia"?

Haven't *you* learned from Chamberlain's Munich?

[Hugin]

No exit plan at all, no clear objective.

When war is thrust upon us, we cannot afford the luxury of insisting on a foolproof exit plan. We do have a clear objective, removing Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction as a threat to the USA. We can never seal our borders, and we cannot ever make America safe by defensive means alone. We must take the war to the enemy. Despite your skepticism there is ample evidence of Saddam's co-operation with Al Qaeda and many other terrorist groups. The Saudi government may give ideological support to terrorists, and some individual Saudis provide funding, but Saddam actively shelters trains and arms them. This is well documented to any who are willing to be conviced. As for whether you son will be based there 20 years from now, some parent could have asked in 1942 if his son would be based in Japan or Germany 20 years later. The answer might well be yes, but not in the way you mean it. I think Bush was quite clear when he said that any country that arms, supports or shelters terrorists will be treated as a terrorist. He also predicted some people would get tired and begin to question the need to wage the difficult, world wide war needed to prevail against them. Your post proves him correct.

[Burkeman1]

Since 1991 and the Gulf War Iraq has done next to nothing. North Korea on the other hand- has sent numerous commando raids into South Korea. Had numerous naval battles with South Korea. Outright lied to us and continued to develop a nuke program while we fed them (that was Clinton), fired an intermediate range missle over Japan, sold missle technology to Pakistan and Syria, and threatened to incinerate Seol South Korea. Meanwhile we want war with Iraq which has less to do with Al Queda than most of our Middle East "allies". Sorry- I don't quite get it.

[Kip Lange]

He also predicted some people would get tired and begin to question the need to wage the difficult, world wide war needed to prevail against them. Your post proves him correct.

Absolutely. I knew we could never keep the support for the WoT going strong for long...but I'm amazed at how quickly the worm turned. Truly.

[Burkeman1]

Sorry- I must have my histroy mixed up. Chamberlain gave Hitler carte blanche to take the Czechs out- or at least the German areas of the czech lands in exchange that he stop further aggression. We are talking about toppling a guy we booted out of Kuwait 12 years ago and have no intention of letting him invade anyone else. We are talking about invading him because of what he "might do"- and nothing more. Your comparison to chamberlain is a stretch to be charitable.

[metesky]

Burkeman1's problem with logic and apparant lack of gonads are explained on his profile page for all to see: Boston College!

[Miss Marple]

Saddam uses terrorism to extend his reach and influence. He isn't a fool, therefore he doesn't send little cards that say "I, Saddam, personally ordered this terrorist attack."

The whole point of his using terrorism is DENIABILITY. The connections Powell and others have made are quite clear enough for me. By the way, what do you call sending operatives into Saudi Arabia to assassinate the elder President Bush? It seems to me that THAT would indicate Saddam's intentions, and they aren't peaceful.

[Burkeman1]

Quite correct. To wage a "war against terrorism" in general is folly and unwinnable and I was tired of it when Clinton first announced it when he bombed Sudan the day Monica testified (yep- he declared a war against terrorism as well then). Just as the "war against drugs" and the "war against poverty" are proven unwinnable so will be the war against terrorism.

A war against a nation can be won. And we will win the war against Iraq. But against terrorism? No- we will only invite more with this war. I wonder who wants this war more? Bush or Al Queda?

[Kip Lange]

Hey, I like BC. ;-) And *I* went to UC Berkeley, go figure (made me even more conservative :p). Don't blame the school; blame the lack of backbone to stand up to the indoctrination from biased Profs and the inability to actually research something instead of spouting what your biased Prof told you was the truth. ;-) I walked out on more than one course (for good) at UCB because the teacher went on anti-conservative tirades that had nothing to do with, say, Shakespeare, while everyone else chuckled. Of course, they never tell ya about that kind of "walk-out" at a college/university. :-)

[MissAmericanPie]

France and Germany have lived far too long under the protective wings of the United States, which has allowed them to sink into welfare states. Throw them to the wolves. The only good thing that has come from this are the blinders that came off of every American as to the value of their being our "allies". We have no national interests there, let the radical Islamics have them.

They will come screaming for help of course, and we should turn our faces away from enemies who demanded that America attack a proven ally in WW2, Serbia, for the benefit of the lousy peace of old europe, in support of radical Al Queda Islamics raining terror in the Balkins. They scream foul every time we talk of defending ourselves. Throw them to the Islamic wolves they are so fond of. If 9-11 had happened in Paris, euro-trash hysteria would be on going.