Are We -Already- Conquered and Ruined?

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
European public showed sympathy when we were struck, but that changed as
soon
as we opted to do something about it in Afghanistan, even though many
european
countries are involved in Afgh.

Europeans are not stupid,they learned fast that 9/11 is nothing but
another US
PSYOP,

The only "PSYOP" you should be interested in is the kind that allows you to
stop being a paranoid conspiracy monger.

tim gueguen 101867

"Ron" wrote in message
...
Your point being what? .....that we've lost public support in Europe for our
reaction to 9-11 in Afghanistan even though we still retain the support of
the
governments that supposedly represent that public? Do you have any evidence
of
that and, if so, would you mind producing it? I'm not sure I understand what
you're getting at....it'd help if you rephrased what you said above a little
less cryptically because I'm not following you.

George Z.

Hal I meant it was UNpopular in Europe what happened in Afghanistan. Sorry,
the UN part seemed to not make its way from my brain to the keyboard. Typical
Keyboard Actuator error.

I guess we were reading different reports. I seem to recall that there was
considerable sympathy for us in Europe right after 9-11, and that it included
our assault on the Taliban and Al Qaida in Afghanistan following that event. I
wasn't aware that the European public expected us to do nothing overtly
following OBL's attack on us.

George Z.

"Ron" wrote in message
...
Your point being what? .....that we've lost public support in Europe for
our
reaction to 9-11 in Afghanistan even though we still retain the support
of
the
governments that supposedly represent that public? Do you have any
evidence
of
that and, if so, would you mind producing it? I'm not sure I understand
what
you're getting at....it'd help if you rephrased what you said above a
little
less cryptically because I'm not following you.

George Z.

Hal I meant it was UNpopular in Europe what happened in Afghanistan.

Irony Mode On
Which presumably is why France , Germany and Britain all
sent troops to Afghanistan to fight alongside the US.
Irony Mode Off

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Ron" wrote in message
...
Your point being what? .....that we've lost public support in Europe for
our
reaction to 9-11 in Afghanistan even though we still retain the support
of
the
governments that supposedly represent that public? Do you have any
evidence
of
that and, if so, would you mind producing it? I'm not sure I understand
what
you're getting at....it'd help if you rephrased what you said above a
little
less cryptically because I'm not following you.

George Z.

Hal I meant it was UNpopular in Europe what happened in Afghanistan.

Irony Mode On
Which presumably is why France , Germany and Britain all
sent troops to Afghanistan to fight alongside the US.
Irony Mode Off

My point exactly, Keith. And that's also why France and Germany declined to
take part in our little adventure in Iraq, which was my other point. Now, THAT
was what was REALLY unpopular amongst the civilian populace in those two
countries.

George Z.

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:
"Ron" wrote in message
...
Your point being what? .....that we've lost public support in Europe
for
our
reaction to 9-11 in Afghanistan even though we still retain the support
of
the
governments that supposedly represent that public? Do you have any
evidence
of
that and, if so, would you mind producing it? I'm not sure I
understand
what
you're getting at....it'd help if you rephrased what you said above a
little
less cryptically because I'm not following you.

George Z.

Hal I meant it was UNpopular in Europe what happened in Afghanistan.

Irony Mode On
Which presumably is why France , Germany and Britain all
sent troops to Afghanistan to fight alongside the US.
Irony Mode Off

Do the French or German troops ever leave the relatively stable areas around
Kabul?

The only "PSYOP" you should be interested in is the kind that allows you to
stop being a paranoid conspiracy monger.

1)"FDR stated that we were likely to be attacked perhaps as soon as next
Monday.The question was how we should maneuver them into the position of firing
first shot without too much danger to ourselves In spite of the risk
involved,however,in letting Japanese to fire the first shot,we realized that in
order to have full support of American people it was desirable to make sure
that the Japanese be the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt
in anyone's mind as to who were the agressors."
Henry Stimson,Nov.,25,1941

2)"..As America becomes an increasingly multicultural society,it may find it
more difficult to fashion a concensus on foreign policy issues,except in the
circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."
Zbigniew Brzezinski ,Grand Chessboard,1997.

3)"...the process of transformation..is likely to be a long one,absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event,like a NEW Pearl Harbor".
Rebuilding America's Defenses,Sep.2000

4)The other day a reporter friend told me that one of the highest ranking CIA
officials had said to him,off the record,that when the dust finally clears
,Americans will see that September 11 was triumph for intel community,not a
failure.
CIA Agent Baer,See no Evil,2002


5)What CIA translator Ms.Edmons told during her secret Congressional
testimony,so that US Gov't was forced to silence her after her testimony.

If somebody watches the same movie for the last 150 years and still dont know
director's name,then his/her shoe size must be bigger than his/her IQ number.

"Brett" wrote in message
.. .

Do the French or German troops ever leave the relatively stable areas
around
Kabul?


Yes, they both sent special forces troops in the early days and
the French flew air strikes.

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:
"Brett" wrote in message
.. .

Do the French or German troops ever leave the relatively stable areas
around
Kabul?


Yes, they both sent special forces troops in the early days

Well Chirac last year said French Special Forces would be sent in as part of
their peacekeeping contingent but the problem raised at the NATO summit
several weeks ago was that the Germans and French didn't stray very far from
"the relatively stable areas around Kabul?"

and
the French flew air strikes.

Keith

George Z. Bush wrote:

My point exactly, Keith. And that's also why France and Germany declined to
take part in our little adventure in Iraq, which was my other point. Now, THAT
was what was REALLY unpopular amongst the civilian populace in those two
countries.

Well I seem to recall "The WTC was really too bad, but...
the US got its comeuppance" reactions from Euros.

Now these particular Euros were probably Leftist fringe
types (relative to Europe) just as there were similar
sentiments coming out of the US from Lefties, who say
the only way to stop terrorism is to change foreign
policies (stop supporting Israel I presume).

Governments are more careful how they react, so any
opposition to US response would be more measured. But
there seemed to be a conviction amongst a sizable segment
of Europeans that quietly felt a bit smug about what had
happened. Maybe just bad reporting from this side of
the pond, or perhaps my own developing biases against
Europe coming to the fore.

Certainly the Euros were anti-Bush enough (even before
Iraq...hell, even while he was a candidate) to believe he
would nuke someone somewhere the next day in response.


SMH

It's not a problem in NATO's eyes.

Kabul is stable because of them. The rest of the country is insecure
because the Americans and Canadians don't spend any time minimizing
the power of the warlords. They play one against the other to keep the
number of battles high, and get the higher body count. Stability doesn't
get a good body count.

"Brett" wrote

Well Chirac last year said French Special Forces would be sent in as part of
their peacekeeping contingent but the problem raised at the NATO summit
several weeks ago was that the Germans and French didn't stray very far from
"the relatively stable areas around Kabul?"