EU as joke (modified)

Alan Minyard wrote in
:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:29:38 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy"
wrote:

The Oslo "accords" were a sham, no one with any knowledge
of the region believed that they would work,

I take it you feel equally doubtfull of the religious
insight of the two signatorys, Arafat and Rabin, as well.

Oslo was a milestone and successful in that it brought
the two parts closer and establishing PA self rule.


What "self rule"?

Weren't you just claiming to be "quite well informed"
on the issue?


The religious "insight" of Rabin and
Arafat had nothing to do with it.

So you now say that Arafat and Rabin had no religious
insight whatsoever.


The Oslo accord was doomed from the start, Norway was
too naive to realize that.

You'll have to excuse me for saying you don't seem
informed on the issue.

I am quite well informed on the issue, in the US we tend to be
realists. We do not live in fantasy worlds, as Norway appears
to.

I do know from my contact with americans that your views
probably doesn't represent the majority.

Wrong.

I didn't expect you to adhere to that, no.


No, we will defend ourselves where ever we have to.
Military action in self-defense is explicitly allowed
under international law.

That's a no-argument. There was no self-defence, Iraq
was not a millitary threath to the US and there were
no Iraqi indications for war against either the US nor
its neightbours. This is soely something the US made
up for itself.


You do not think that 9-11 was an attack on the US??
Living in your fantasy world again.

If so it's a fantasy world shared by many. The Bush
administration has failed to show any proof linking
Saddam to 9/11.

There is a plethora of evidence that the money for the
terrorists was transshipped through Iraq, as well as training
camps for terrorists.

Can you site any of that evidence?

Where does Bush say Iraq was in on 9/11?


"Shared by many" is not an issue, what
some sniveling little euro countries "think" will not deter us
from defending ourselves.

"Think" is perhaps a key issue here.


The misconception is widespread though, here an excerpt
from the recent PIPA analysis of seven nationwide US
polls dealing with this.

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Ir...2_03_Press.pdf

"Study Finds Widespread Misperceptions on Iraq Highly
Related to Support for War"

[..]

"An in-depth analysis of a series of polls conducted
June through September found 48% incorrectly believed that
evidence of links between Iraq and al Qaeda have been
found, 22% that weapons of mass destruction have been found
in Iraq, and 25% that world public opinion favored the US
going to war with Iraq. Overall 60% had at least one of
these three misperceptions.


That is both a silly and a biased "pole". That is obvious
from the fact that PIPA was involved.

That's a typical denialist response, Alan. Do you have
any examples that show how these polls are supposed
to be wrong?


The ICC is ridiculous. We will not cede the liberty of US
citizens to a court with no laws, no checks or balances, etc.
The ICC was designed to attack the US, and that will not
happen.

Actually the US played a major part in the design of the
ICC framework had strong support from much of Congress.

No, it had, and has, virtually no support in the US, including
both houses or Congress.

If it had no support the US would never had been a major
contributor to its framework. There is certainly a
substantial number of americans who feel Bush is
going the wrong way on this, and that this kind of
isolationism will ultimately only damage US influence
and intersts in the world.


Yes decades. The Nordic social velfare system and
equality is renound throughout the world.

That is ridiculous.

We're not called "welfare states" for nothing. Here is an
easy to read summary if you want to learn something about it:

http://sdd.disp.dk/SDD01/main/isabelle/wefare.html


Regards...

A "welfare state" is hardly something to be proud of. It merely
means that a lot of people who choose not to work are
supported by those who do.

A gross simplification, and I suggest you read up on it.
Perhaps more than anything, the Scandinavian welfare model
promotes a humane philosophy of fair and equal treatment
for anyone, including those who are in a weak financial
position. It becomes part of the national soule to try to
treat all people with respect, even those who might not
deserve it at first glance, because we believe that every
person has something positive to bring into our society.

I also know from my own experience that if a person feels
respected and welcomed they are usually more productive
and better contributes to their suroundings.


In the US, people try to avoid
welfare.

You might want to take a look at the unemployment rates
of both countries again.


Regards...