French soldiers shooting unarmed demonstrators

[Prone]

Actually I wasn't talking to you, I was talking to the Europe hater. If you have friends here you can't hate all of Europe. I don't think they will have warned you about me though As I have said nothing in this thread that would indicate my position towards the video.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Actually, I was just saying it because I thought it would be the cool thing to say.

 

[seinfeldrules]

"It's worth noting that on 60 Minutes, Albright made no attempt to deny the figure given by Stahl--a rough rendering of the preliminary estimate in a 1995 U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report that 567,000 Iraqi children under the age of five had died as a result of the sanctions."

So the US was the only one to provide the sanctions? Why didnt your Canadian gov't pick up the slack? Why didnt the UN? Ah yes, as usual you require the US to fix all your problems.

 

[Prone]

lol, right. Sorry to interfer with the topic then. Will watch the vid later (haven't seen the other one either, the one with the US soldier), firewall in here...

Edit: damn, this topic is growing so fast, said this as response to cool thing to say

 

[CptStern]

Actually I wasn't talking to you, I was talking to the Europe hater. If you have friends here you can't hate all of Europe. I don't think they will have warned you about me though As I have said nothing in this thread that would indicate my position towards the video.

Seinfeldrules is no better than gh0st. He's just as anti-european, especially the french :E

 

[CptStern]

So the US was the only one to provide the sanctions? Why didnt your Canadian gov't pick up the slack? Why didnt the UN? Ah yes, as usual you require the US to fix all your problems.

stop deferring blame, you are directly responsible, that's something you'll have to live with. Of course you can always put your blinders on as so many americans have over the issue

 

[seinfeldrules]

stop deferring blame, you are directly responsible, that's something you'll have to live with. Of course you can always put your blinders on as so many americans have over the issue

Nope your country is just as guilty as ours would be. Sorry if that realization just set in. In reality, neither country is guilty because Saddam is the one to blame. He wouldnt allow the shipments through even if they came, as shad0whawk mentioned. He was the one who ran a regime parralel to that of Stalin and Hitler.

 

[CptStern]

Nope your country is just as guilty as ours would be. Sorry if that realization just set in. In reality, neither country is guilty because Saddam is the one to blame. He wouldnt allow the shipments through even if they came, as shad0whawk mentioned. He was the one who ran a regime parralel to that of Stalin and Hitler.

nope canada was opposed the unilateral aggression by the US in desert storm, they only joined to coalition after the americans made the case that Saddam had ..WMD (Doesnt that sound awfully familiar? ..cant these spin doctors come up with something new?) Canada officially condemned the sanctions pretty much from the get go

btw the US thwarted iraq's attempts to get crucial parts for water desalination plants that were crucial to the population of Iraq ...plants that were deliberately targeted and destroyed by the US during desert storm. Lack of clean drinking water led to the deaths of 40,000 children under the age of 5 in the first few months ..I suppose you'll say saddam was hiding the parts in huge warehouses just for his family and friends :upstare:

here is an official document highlighting the severe reprecussions should the US continue to block the import of the crucial parts vital to the welfare of the people of iraq

 

[seinfeldrules]

nope canada was opposed the unilateral aggression by the US in desert storm

So Canada was opposed to freeing Kuwait from Saddam? How exactly was US the aggresor there, let alone the sole aggresor? Are you forgetting the coalition that freed Kuwait along side the American soldiers?

Canada officially condemned the sanctions pretty much from the get go

Then why not send food anyways if you felt so strongly about it? Do you honestly think the US would have invaded Canada to prevent these shipments...
Besides, Iraq had the oil for food program, but we all know how corrupt and unreliable that program became. Let me guess though, that was the US's fault as well.

 

[CptStern]

So Canada was opposed to freeing Kuwait from Saddam? How exactly was US the aggresor there, let alone the sole aggresor? Are you forgetting the coalition that freed Kuwait along side the American soldiers?

oooohhh poor kuwait, what about rwanda????? canada sent troops there, where were your great "defenders of freedom"?

by 1997 some 970,000 iraqi children (36%) were malnourished ...a rise of 72% ..before the war Iraq had the lowest infant mortality rate in the middle east by the time the oil for food program was implemented.

source

Then why not send food anyways if you felt so strongly about it? Do you honestly think the US would have invaded Canada to prevent these shipments...

I did my part, many a cold night protesting in front of the US embassy

Besides, Iraq had the oil for food program, but we all know how corrupt and unreliable that program became. Let me guess though, that was the US's fault as well.

you mean the same oil-for-food program that 3 top UN delegates in charge of the program quit in protest of US interference? Google dennis halliday, Jutta Burghardt or Hans von Sponeck

 

[el Chi]

And you are the people my friends in Europe warn me about.

Your bi-polar tendancy to swing from informed debate to petty bickering is so swift it's almost impressive.
You started this little argument with Stern for no reason other than it's the path you always go down, it's just you usually have the courtesy to make it somewhat relevant.
And I have no idea why you in America (I aim this at both gh0st and seinfeldrules) should be at all anti-Europe. If it's because they decided not to go to Iraq too, then that's rather childish. If it's because you have genuine concerns about the EU then that interests me but I don't see that it will affect you that much. Certainly not at the moment.

 

[Prone]

el Chi, he said that to me, not to Stern

 

[el Chi]

el Chi, he said that to me, not to Stern

I know I'm just quite interested to hear what their objections are specifically.

 

[CptStern]

they smell like croissants!!!

sorry in america they're known as "freedom buns" :E

 

[Shad0hawK]

I dont freaking care if it was the libertarian neo cons

read this slowly:

"we think the price is worth it" - Madeline Albright

"we" being the collective adminstration at that time,as made evident by the context.

however, she was not speaking for myself and many other americans so trying to include all americans just because albright said "we' in your blame is oversimplistic at best, self delusional at worst.

 

[Shad0hawK]

you mean the same oil-for-food program that 3 top UN delegates in charge of the program quit in protest of US interference? Google dennis halliday, Jutta Burghardt or Hans von Sponeck

thank you for demonstrating what a failure the sanctions were. i could not be in more agreement! i never agreed with them, and saddam should have been taken out in 91

as for the oil for food program, i suppose "blood for oil" is okay as long as europe gets the oil(or more accurately the wealth from it) and a few UN fatcats get rich...as long as it is not americans...(ahh double standards are great, eh?)

i have noticed the same old pattern, when it is pointed out what the UN and europe does wrong(like french soldiers mowing down unarmed people) the answer is always the same, simply point the finger back at the americans and ignore it.

 

[CptStern]

"we" being the collective adminstration at that time,as made evident by the context.

however, she was not speaking for myself and many other americans so trying to include all americans just because albright said "we' in your blame is oversimplistic at best, self delusional at worst.

you're putting words in my mouth ..."we" implys the US government

 

[CptStern]

thank you for demonstrating what a failure the sanctions were. i could not be in more agreement! i never agreed with them, and saddam should have been taken out in 91

no, you should have minded your own business and not invoved yourself with saddam. Why was there no reaction to saddam gassing iranian soldiers? Why did you sell them in the first place if you knew they were being used to gas iranians? why did the US block Iranian attempts to pass a resolution in the UN to bring saddam to justice?

as for the oil for food program, i suppose "blood for oil" is okay as long as europe gets the oil(or more accurately the wealth from it) and a few UN fatcats get rich...as long as it is not americans...(ahh double standards are great, eh?)

really? is that why Chevron, Mobil, Texaco and Bay Oil all profited from the oil-for-food-program?

really? is that why Cheney attempted to get the US to allow haliburton to do business in Iraq? Isnt that why haliburton is being investigated for breaking federal sanctions? Is that why bush and cheney soon after taking office said they wouldnt punish US companies that did business with Iran and Libya? even though the previous administration labeled them "terrorist states"? Haliburton comes to mind, they provided Iranian national oil with $228 million drilling rig, or how about GE that is building hydro electric plants in Iran?

i have noticed the same old pattern, when it is pointed out what the UN and europe does wrong(like french soldiers mowing down unarmed people) the answer is always the same, simply point the finger back at the americans and ignore it.

you're dilusional, there's no evidence that the french soldier shot into the crowd ..it's circumstantial at best. I watched a number of times yet couldnt identify what you say you saw

 

[gh0st]

shad0hawk, im sorry but saying the french mowed down anybody is just rediculous.

the freedom _____ thing went out of style awhile ago.

i dont hate europe. just think of me as very 19th century in this regard. all i want is for us to stay out of their business and us to stay out of theirs. neither can quite get it right though.

 

[el Chi]

i dont hate europe. just think of me as very 19th century in this regard. all i want is for us to stay out of their business and us to stay out of theirs. neither can quite get it right though.

Please exaplain. Do you mean Europe to not tell you what to do? What exactly does that encompass? Would the Kyoto summit (and that wasn't just Europe) fall into that?

 

[Eg.]

stern, why do u bring up rwanda if u guys did nothing and pulled out? tribesmen a little to tough for u?

 

[el Chi]

stern, why do u bring up rwanda if u guys did nothing and pulled out? tribesmen a little to tough for u?

Don't try and make a point unless it's sensible, which yours - as a childish, snide jab - is patently not. It does you no credit.

 

[Kangy]

I think pretty much anything Eg. says is discredited and ignored in my eyes. He's got a ridiculous bias against Canada, and anything he says will be hinged around that.

 

[Eg.]

I think pretty much anything Eg. says is discredited and ignored in my eyes. He's got a ridiculous bias against Canada, and anything he says will be hinged around that.

i just think the canadian health care system is crap, the rest of canada is fine, unless u mention quebec.

 

[Kangy]

i just think the canadian health care system is crap, the rest of canada is fine, unless u mention quebec.

What's the matter with Quebec?

 

[CptStern]

no no! dont do it man!! dont open the door to wide eyed bigoted ignorance!!

 

[Eg.]

What's the matter with Quebec?

its french... ill admitt i have a biase towards the french, they turned my grandpa over to the germans, damn french

 

[el Chi]

i just think the canadian health care system is crap, the rest of canada is fine, unless u mention quebec.

Oh good God. Do you actively aim to destroy any credibility you may have?
What do the Canadian healthcare system and Rwanda have to do with one another?
I mean for Christ's sake, that sounds like the opening line to a bad joke, how can it possibly work in a political debate!?

its french... ill admitt i have a biase towards the french, they turned my grandpa over to the germans, damn french

Yes, all of them. Especially the ones that are alive nowadays. I can understand being annoyed, but at the entire French-speaking world for all eternity?

 

[Eg.]

yes.

so sue, i hold grudges

 

[gh0st]

Please exaplain. Do you mean Europe to not tell you what to do? What exactly does that encompass? Would the Kyoto summit (and that wasn't just Europe) fall into that?

whats to explain. im tired of europeans telling me who i can vote for, etc etc. im aware of our status of superpower but im tired of being hated when were not needed. in that respect id just like them and us to stay out of each others beans.

 

[seinfeldrules]

oooohhh poor kuwait, what about rwanda????? Where were your troops?

Meh, I dont know. Probably either liberating Kuwait or attempting to help out in Somalia or Bosnia.

 

[seinfeldrules]

And I have no idea why you in America (I aim this at both gh0st and seinfeldrules) should be at all anti-Europe.

I am not really anti- Europe. I am just 'anti- people who are anti- American all the time'. It just so happens that a good proportion of those people are from Europe. They dont bash the US only for going into Iraq. They blame us for doing pretty much everything that is wrong in the world, without looking at anyone else first. Many of those people seem to hold their opinions as being holier than God, and that gets to me. I followed that up with the 'i thought it was the cool thing to say' comment just in case you missed it.

 

[CptStern]

that's generalizing ..how many people are we talking about? 5? 12? 38? 177? 20,000? it's still not accurate in the least.

 

[seinfeldrules]

that's generalizing ..how many people are we talking about? 5? 12? 38? 177? 20,000? it's still not accurate in the least.

However many people fit that description, I cannot give you an accurate number, nor even an estimate.

 

[gh0st]

However many people fit that description, I cannot give you an accurate number, nor even an estimate.

98.9% of this forum

 

[CptStern]

98.9% of this forum

easy now, you're not in Kansas anymore you know ...this be brit country



god save the queen!

 

[^Ben]

The Brits hate everyones goverment especially ours, I like to think it keeps them on their toes.

If they told us the sky was blue I would be skeptical of Tony.

 

[el Chi]

whats to explain. im tired of europeans telling me who i can vote for, etc etc. im aware of our status of superpower but im tired of being hated when were not needed. in that respect id just like them and us to stay out of each others beans.

I am not really anti- Europe. I am just 'anti- people who are anti- American all the time'. It just so happens that a good proportion of those people are from Europe. They dont bash the US only for going into Iraq. They blame us for doing pretty much everything that is wrong in the world, without looking at anyone else first. Many of those people seem to hold their opinions as being holier than God, and that gets to me. I followed that up with the 'i thought it was the cool thing to say' comment just in case you missed it.

Okay, my understanding of your gripes goes along the lines that you don't want "Europe" sticking their noses in when they're not wanted, correct?
Well, I'm tired and so I don't want to get into a big thing about this but you're expressing some stereotypical views. Now please don't take this the wrong way. You're both intelligent people, so hear me out, as I'm not going to lower this to petty insults. Please hear me out.

"im tired of being hated when were not needed"
This expresses the stereotypical view of the American believing with all heart and genuineness that what the USA is doing around the globe is for the good of other countries, that their acts are of benevolence. After 9/11, a great deal of people could not believe what could anger people to commit such atroscities (and they were atroscities - but cause and effect...) when the US had done so much for the rest of the world. Ironically, part of al-Qaeda's problem is just that - what the US is doing throughout the rest of the world.
People get pissed off at the US's self-appointed "World Police" role and I can understand why. However I can also understand that, after seeing your fellow countrymen put their lives on the line for the government's new adventure, you would be offended when someone decries those actions.

In that same line of thought I can understand being angry when people are so constantly down on your country. The criticisms snowball and one could feel angered or even slightly bullied (there is definitely a wounded tone under a lot of these sentiments, and understandably so). Feelings that your country is under-appreciated and hard done by.
Especially difficult to deal with when some of the people saying such things are members of countries with less-than-saintly foreign policies, for example. However, they are not necessarily in support of said foreign policy and in turn that might be why they are at odds with your nation's policies.

You see the problem is that by saying "I'm anti-Europe" it's exactly the same as someone saying "I'm anti-America." Seeing as it's this latter phrase that pisses you off so much, don't you see the contradiction?
Why not just say, you're pissed off at people who constantly deride your country for no informed reason?
Because not everyone in Europe hates the US. Not everyone in Europe disagrees with the current US foreign policy. And if someone disagrees with you but at least seems to be capable of sentient thought, then at least you know someone isn't having issues with your country for the mere sake of it.

You can never have it as black-and-white as you just said. It's something we all forget from time to time.

 

[Shad0hawK]

no, you should have minded your own business and not invoved yourself with saddam. Why was there no reaction to saddam gassing iranian soldiers? Why did you sell them in the first place if you knew they were being used to gas iranians? why did the US block Iranian attempts to pass a resolution in the UN to bring saddam to justice?

oh so, basically you want to bitch about the status quo(regardin the sanctions), then bich when it gets changed...alrighty then! there was plenty of reaction to the use of poision gas.as far as the US blocking the resolution you mention, what does that really mean in the grand scheme of things what would the UN have done? they are next to useless except as a humanitarian aide organization, and even that does not work most of the time, i guess your reaction will be "BLAME AMERICA!!" ROFL!!!

BTW a few eurpean countries did much of the suppying,but of course you do not mention that..oh no... "BLAME AMERICA"!

what makes this tragically funny is you deride other people for "deferring blame" but that seems to be YOUR main tactic...as follows:

really? is that why Chevron, Mobil, Texaco and Bay Oil all profited from the oil-for-food-program?

sure they did! they are international companies after all! does this somehow excuse the UN and europe? if so, why?

really? is that why Cheney attempted to get the US to allow haliburton to do business in Iraq? Isnt that why haliburton is being investigated for breaking federal sanctions? Is that why bush and cheney soon after taking office said they wouldnt punish US companies that did business with Iran and Libya? even though the previous administration labeled them "terrorist states"? Haliburton comes to mind, they provided Iranian national oil with $228 million drilling rig, or how about GE that is building hydro electric plants in Iran?

better haliburton than companies from nations that really did nothing to help other than gripe about the sanctions than want to keep them preserved so a few europea fatcats can make money off all the suffering...but blood for oil is okay as long as it's europe! "BLAME AMERICA" it's all america's fault somehow!

you're dilusional, there's no evidence that the french soldier shot into the crowd ..it's circumstantial at best. I watched a number of times yet couldnt identify what you say you saw

yes, that's it! i am delusional! those dead and maimed people are simply figments of my imagination, the french(those icons of ne'er do evil) were not in any way responsible whatsoever, they just happened to be there, the french snipers were not shooting people, but instead were keeping crows of some fields just out of view the enempty shells casings left behind at teh french positions were not real either, what really happened is all those people shot each other..or...or americans did it! while the unquestionablely honest and good(dare i say "virignally innocent"?) french troops simply watched....yes that seems a much more rational explanation!

i know!!! "BLAME AMERICA"! it is somehow the americans fault! the french..err...i mean "unknown" people shot the ivorians! i bet it was evil imperialist americans hiding in the bushes trying to make the french look bad!

yes! that makes sense because we all now the french would NEVER do anything wrong! it must have been american CIA agents!

ROFL!!!

 

[gh0st]

You see the problem is that by saying "I'm anti-Europe" it's exactly the same as someone saying "I'm anti-America." Seeing as it's this latter phrase that pisses you off so much, don't you see the contradiction?
Why not just say, you're pissed off at people who constantly deride your country for no informed reason?

ok, i hate people who constantly deride my country for no informed reason. which, judging by these message boards, is most of europe :cheese: