Europe as joke

Cub Driver wrote:

: For fifty years, the U.S. poured men & money into Europe. If you have
: not created a credible military force in half a century, when will you
: ever manage it?

About now, apparently. Decades of pleas from US
presidents to achieve a stronger European defence
have failed to achieve what the hostile behaviour
of this US administration towards its former allies
has produced: A serious drive to come towards an
European defence. Actively sabotaged from Washington,
of course, but one can't have everything...

Emmanuel Gustin

Stephen Harding wrote:
: Emmanuel Gustin wrote:

: I think the US made it quite clear this was not going to be the
: case. Full transparency in how the money is spend, with an
: outside board making the decisions. None of the money going to
: support the US presence.

There are serious doubts about the impact this 'outside
board' -- which IIRC consists of the UN, the World Bank,
and Iraqi representatives -- wil be able to have on the
spending. It does seem to be little more than a front
end.

: "Paying for its own foreign policy"? That's a real hoot coming
: from Europe!

True, the USA is spending a considerably smaller part of
its GDP on foreign aid than Europe.

: Anyways, I personally believe there will be more glory for the
: US doing this ourselves, without significant help from anyone.

You can't. The only ones who can do it are the Iraqis
themselves. Foreign assistance should be strictly that,
assistance.

Emmanuel Gustin

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 22:26:48 +0200, "Emmanuel Gustin" wrote:

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
news
"No taxation without representation."

I agree that it would be wiser for to EU to invest more
in rebuilding Iraq, but on the other hand this fund amounts
to giving cash to the US administration of Iraq to spend
as it sees fit --- there are more fun ways to waste money.

In the end, the USA is rich enough to pay for its own foreign
policy. EU aid money should go to countries that are in more
urgent need of it.

Like Belgium??

Al Minyard

On 24 Oct 2003 22:26:04 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote:

It's easy. Don't forget why Irak has to be rebuilt. We didn't invade Bosnia.

Military forces were "permitted" to enter Bosnia through an agreement, Kosovo
and Macedonia as well. This doesn't change the fact that Europe demanded US
involvement even though the situation in the former Republics of Yugoslavia had
no impact on US national security. As a side note, ground forces were deployed
under "peaceful" circumstances, but air forces bombed targets in Bosnia, Kosovo
and Serbia, once again, with US forces making up the majority.

If it were up to me, I'd pull every US military member out of the Balkans to
ease the Iraq burden. Europe doesn't want to help out in Iraq, fine we can
ease our burden at their expense.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Buf

We should pull all of our Forces out of Europe, and state that they will never
return. We have defended those weak kneed little ****s long enough, time
for them to do their own dirty work!!!! We should also kill any arms deals with
France and Germany.

Al Minyard

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 00:54:40 +0200, Roman J. Rohleder wrote:

(BUFDRVR) schrieb:

You were unable to handle a uniquely European problem in the Balkans, why must
we continue to pay?

Since when is a genocide a "uniquely European problem"? It happened in
Europe, but it could have happened anywhere else.

It is a problem that concerns any nation. Nobody should be allowed to
turn away from it and every nation which is up to the task has to take
the responsibilty to fight the genocide.

Europe lacked the structure and abilities at that moment - but this
was a result of the cold war, of policies made in the USA _and_ in
Europe.

BUFDRVR

Gruss, Roman

Unless, of course, the genocide is taking place in Iraq, while the French
Premier is making money from the Iraqis.

Al Minyard

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 02:48:04 +0200, Roman J. Rohleder wrote:

Chad Irby schrieb:

You were unable to handle a uniquely European problem in the
Balkans, why must we continue to pay?

Since when is a genocide a "uniquely European problem"?

Well, it's much more *professional* in Europe....


It´s not a topic jerk with.

First, genocides are not limited to Europe (just a glimpse.. besides
german crimes in 1930/1940s, there had been genocidal events in all
parts of the world: Turkey/Armenia, North and South America,
Indonesia, and many more. :-( ).

Second, I was referring to those who had the chance to interact and
prevent more cruelties. It is a crime to stand by if you have the
ability to jump in as much as it is to leave before the task is done.
The Balkan isn´t settled yet as the Kosovo and recent rumours and
events in Serbia prove.

Gruss, Roman

It is a EU problem, let the EU fix it. You cannot expect the US to act like
a servant of the EU. You do not support us, you can go to hell when
you want help.

Al Minyard

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 15:04:52 +0200, Roman J. Rohleder wrote:

Cub Driver schrieb:

Since when is a genocide a "uniquely European problem"? It happened in
Europe, but it could have happened anywhere else.

Since when has Europe been worried about genocide?

Since we have learned from WW2. Since it is common ground to tread
genocide as an international crime ("...against humanity"). Do you
discern on this position?

You did not learn anything from WWII except to call for the US to
defend you.

We (those you mentioned) try to face our history and approach pardon
and respect.. other nations still neglect their record. Nations who
are members of "the coalition".

That explains the discrimination against the Turks, etc. in Germany?

You worried about Serbia only because it threatened
European interests.

In which aspect? The civil war blocked the land route to the EU member
Greece and the closed Danube, but what else besides threatened morale
and justice? Involving surrounding countries in the civil war?

The spread of a war is not uncommon in European history.

I am not worried about Serbia, I am worried about the radical
nationalists of any given group in the Balkans, no matter if they rant
for "Great Serbia", "Great Albania" or whatever.. the UCK isn´t any
better then the bosnian serbs and the mercenaries who fought along
them.

You are not worried about anything, after all, the US will come and
clean up your mess, as usual.

The moment we pull out of Bosnia, Sarajevo will be back to the times
of sniper alley and bloodbaths on market places. Do you (demanding
"PULL OUT THE US FORCES!") really want that?

We no longer care. If the EU wants to be anti-US, then they can
take care of their own problems.

Saddam killed more Muslims than Slobo did. Why wasn't that genocide?

Who says it wasn´t? If you consider the actions against Kurds, thats
genocide. And it is a shame that our society (you, us, everyone
dealing with that dicator in the 1980s) accepted it without taking
direct initiative.

And the Euroweinies did exactly what about it???

His absolute numbers ("more Muslims") probably result of the Gulf War
I... a war fought in times when Saddam Hussein shook hands with
Rumsfeld, when the Iraq was used as a glancing example of stability
and development in the middle east.

Killing Persians was obviously appropriate at that time.

Arafat is waging genocidal war against the Jews (picking up where
Europe left off). Why haven't you intervened in the Middle East
against him?

Why haven´t the USA?

You do not get out much, do you? The US has been the strongest
supporter of Israel for the last 50 years.

And do recall what country provided the great weight of men and
weapons to fight in the Balkans. (Hint: it wasn't France, the rare
European country that actually has a military worth respecting.)

This is about those who demand "Pull out of the Balkans" - you don´t
start a war with Iraq when you haven´t finished another job
(stabilising the Balkans or Afghanistan - that country isn´t done yet,
as the only "secured area" is Kabul and the absolute proximities of
the capital).

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9

Gruss, Roman

Any the despicable Europeans have done what? Oh, yes, that is
right, they have done *nothing*. (Except of course, the Brits and the
Poles).

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard schrieb:

It is a EU problem, let the EU fix it. You cannot expect the US to act like
a servant of the EU. You do not support us, you can go to hell when
you want help.

You didn´t read what I posted before, did you?

It is irresponsible to act like this. And imorale.

Al Minyard

Gruss, Roman

From: Cub Driver look@

(I'm
not sure about the Dutch record in Africa--not nearly as bad,
evidently.)

The Dutch were most active in the East Indies. "Java or How to Manage a
Colony," by English lawyer JWB Money, showed how a small country like Holland
had perfected the technique of exploiting vast colonies. Money concluded that
the huge profits made from Java depended on forced labor and brutal
suppression; in effect the Dutch East Indies were a vast slave plantation.
Belgium's King Leopold II read Money's book and "improved" on the methods it
described to rape the Congo, where, under Belgium rule, between 5 and 8 million
inhabitants perished between 1885 and 1908. France, Germany and Portugal
adopted Belgium methods in their own African colonies A novel was written
about the Belgians in the Congo by some guy named Joseph Conrad, who visited
the Belgian Congo in 1890. He gave his book the appropriate title, "Heart of
Darkness." It's most famous line is, of course, "The horror...the horror."
Conrad, commenting on the fact that his novel was an effort to convey the
enormity of the reality, wrote of Belgium's action in the Congo that it was
"the vilest scramble for loot that ever disfigured the history of human
conscience." Not bad for a pipsqueak country enjoying its 15 minutes as a
world power.


Chris Mark

Alan Minyard schrieb:

Since when has Europe been worried about genocide?

Since we have learned from WW2. Since it is common ground to tread
genocide as an international crime ("...against humanity"). Do you
discern on this position?

You did not learn anything from WWII except to call for the US to
defend you.

How do you know what I have learned?

We (those you mentioned) try to face our history and approach pardon
and respect.. other nations still neglect their record. Nations who
are members of "the coalition".

That explains the discrimination against the Turks, etc. in Germany?

What does this have to do with neglecting genocides?

And:Which discrimination? Immigrants are granted double citizenship,
equal rights, equal education.

A problem is the integration, but thats based upon decisions made by
the affected - if you don´t want to integrate yourself (like learning
the language, as many turks of the first and second generation did).

You worried about Serbia only because it threatened
European interests.

In which aspect? The civil war blocked the land route to the EU member
Greece and the closed Danube, but what else besides threatened morale
and justice? Involving surrounding countries in the civil war?

The spread of a war is not uncommon in European history.

So, where are Europes interests affected=

That is exactly why we are careful about declaring and pushing towards
war. We see it everyday what war does to nations, people, cities and
even landscapes. We don´t want it.

Man, your spreading buzzwords, but you aren´t argueing.

I am not worried about Serbia, I am worried about the radical
nationalists of any given group in the Balkans, no matter if they rant
for "Great Serbia", "Great Albania" or whatever.. the UCK isn´t any
better then the bosnian serbs and the mercenaries who fought along
them.

You are not worried about anything, after all, the US will come and
clean up your mess, as usual.

Again, How do you know what I am worried about? You love to simplify.

The moment we pull out of Bosnia, Sarajevo will be back to the times
of sniper alley and bloodbaths on market places. Do you (demanding
"PULL OUT THE US FORCES!") really want that?

We no longer care. If the EU wants to be anti-US, then they can
take care of their own problems.

If the USA wants to be isolationist, it may do it, but it will harm
itself and others.

And again, it is immorale. You don´t care if people suffer?

Saddam killed more Muslims than Slobo did. Why wasn't that genocide?

Who says it wasn´t? If you consider the actions against Kurds, thats
genocide. And it is a shame that our society (you, us, everyone
dealing with that dicator in the 1980s) accepted it without taking
direct initiative.

And the Euroweinies did exactly what about it???

Nothing. Or as much as the USA.


Arafat is waging genocidal war against the Jews (picking up where
Europe left off). Why haven't you intervened in the Middle East
against him?

Why haven´t the USA?

You do not get out much, do you? The US has been the strongest
supporter of Israel for the last 50 years.

Wrong. The USA/Israeli cooperation lasts only about 35 years. Until
about Rabins time as ambassador in Washington and until the Nixon
administration gained power Israel cooperated with Europe in terms of
weapons development and cooperation.

What have the USA done to intervene against Arafat, his Fatah or
Hamas? Nothing. Or as much as Europe.

Any the despicable Europeans have done what? Oh, yes, that is
right, they have done *nothing*. (Except of course, the Brits and the
Poles).

And Spain, and Czech Republic, and Denmark, and Italy, and... well,
even Germany. AWACS and the Fuchs in Kuwait.

Al Minyard

The world isn´t black and white. It´s shades of grey.

Gruss, Roman