or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › French and Germans to Kerry... hell no
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

French and Germans to Kerry... hell no

post #1 of 125
Thread Starter 
No TROOPS for you!

Quote:
French and German government officials say they will not significantly increase military assistance in Iraq even if John Kerry, the Democratic presidential challenger, is elected on November 2.

Mr Kerry, who has attacked President George W. Bush for failing to broaden the US-led alliance in Iraq, has pledged to improve relations with European allies and increase international military assistance in Iraq.

Hmmmm.... seems Kerry won't be able to deliver what he has contended was really just a matter of Bush, not a lack of ability or desire from the French and Germans on Iraq.

I wonder what the Kerry plan is now?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #2 of 125
Putting aside your spinning of statements like "I cannot imagine that there will be any change in our decision not to send troops" and "[France has] no plans to send troops either now or later" into "hell no" and "No TROOPS for you!" for the moment...bear in mind that 'international military assistance' is not limited to France and Germany. I expect Kerry's plan is the same: Work with the rest of the world instead of against it.
post #3 of 125
I don't know if Kerry promised French/German troops or not, it seems to me that his point is that he will work with our allies, not against them (as the Bush administration has).
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #4 of 125
France/Germany/Russia were against freeing Iraq from the start because it would ruin their lucrative business relationship with the anti-Semitic dictator.
post #5 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by kneelbeforezod
Putting aside your spinning of statements like "I cannot imagine that there will be any change in our decision not to send troops" and "[France has] no plans to send troops either now or later" into "hell no" and "No TROOPS for you!" for the moment...bear in mind that 'international military assistance' is not limited to France and Germany. I expect Kerry's plan is the same: Work with the rest of the world instead of against it.

Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
I don't know if Kerry promised French/German troops or not, it seems to me that his point is that he will work with our allies, not against them (as the Bush administration has).

Are you two reading from the same set of DNC certified talking points?

I posted this link before, but it is good because it shows the constant spinning and changing regarding Kerry and his Iraq position. It is why he has no credibility in this area.

LA Times-Allies Not in Formation


Quote:
In an interview with The Times last week, Kerry said that by building up international support, it would be a "reasonable goal" to replace most U.S. troops in Iraq with foreign forces within his first term. There are now about 140,000 U.S. troops stationed there, or 88% of a total international force of about 160,000.

In the last several days, Kerry has begun arguing that he could substantially reduce the number of U.S. troops within the first six months of a Kerry administration. In an interview with National Public Radio on Friday, Kerry said: "I believe that within a year from now, we could significantly reduce American forces in Iraq, and that's my plan."

The proposal could be accomplished by increasing the number of foreign troops and boosting the size of the Iraqi security force, Kerry aides say.

Also note this...

Quote:
Analysts said, moreover, that if the United States was able to reduce its military by substantial numbers in Iraq, at least one or two major nations such as France or Britain would have to accept a lead role.

But suppose I even give you the full benefit of the doubt. Kerry is going to have to find 140,000 people, obviously from a major military power, but of course not Germany or France, instead from some source that... well we can't name or identify.

That is supposed to make us feel better about something getting done? That is a "better plan" than what is going on now?


Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #6 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Are you two reading from the same set of DNC certified talking points?

That's rich.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #7 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
France/Germany/Russia were against freeing Iraq from the start because it would ruin their lucrative business relationship with the anti-Semitic dictator.

Of course they were. So were we once.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #8 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
Of course they were. So were we once.

I would assume that the point was that we no longer were, unlike them.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #9 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by kneelbeforezod
Putting aside your spinning of statements like "I cannot imagine that there will be any change in our decision not to send troops" and "[France has] no plans to send troops either now or later" into "hell no" and "No TROOPS for you!" for the moment...bear in mind that 'international military assistance' is not limited to France and Germany. I expect Kerry's plan is the same: Work with the rest of the world instead of against it.

Cut the sematics. The intent of the officials' statements were clear: No more toops. In addition, it seems to me that trumptman is not the only one has had some fun with his titles of threads.

Did you really believe they would send troops? What other countries will send troops? Russia?

Oh: And since Russia is "no longer a Democracy" and it's "Bush's failure", I guess Kerry will not deal with them either. They'll need their troops to oppress their own people.





I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #10 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
I would assume that the point was that we no longer were, unlike them.

You can't hold France and Germany to a standard we once were in violation of. You can't shake a finger at them for doing exactly what were doing fifteen years ago. Saddam was no worse or better when Haliburton was conducting business with Iraq then he was when France and Germany were.

Scott was just spewing more mindless GOP banter.

God I just wish we could elevate the national conversation to something that resembles reality. I'm really getting tired of all this "America is infallible...we've never ever done anything wrong or shady". It's insulting and intellectually dishonest.

We need to get our collective head out of our asses and wake up to the grim reality of the destruction we have wrought in order to fix the error of our ways.

May the Un-American jingoism commence...
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #11 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
You can't hold France and Germany to a standard we once were in violation of. You can't shake a finger at them for doing exactly what were doing fifteen years ago. Saddam was no worse or better when Haliburton was conducting business with Iraq then he was when France and Germany were

Actually, you can a shake a finger at them. Otherwise you are claiming that Germany couldn't shake a finger at anyone that has supported genocide in Sudan. Or Kosovo. Or Liberia...

Of course they can.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #12 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
God I just wish we could elevate the national conversation to something that resembles reality. I'm really getting tired of all this "America is infallible...we've never ever done anything wrong or shady". It's insulting and intellectually dishonest.

Oddly enough, I don't think you'll find one person who has claimed American foreign policy has forever been pristine and infallable, other then people like you who repeat that claim that was never made to begin with.

That said, and since reality is what you so crave, the real reality is that no country should be held hostage by their foregin policy of old. Yes, the United States once supported Hussein. No, that does not mean that in today's world we are not allowed to deal with him, and chastize others for being as stupid as we once were.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #13 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
The intent of the officials' statements were clear: No more toops.

These guys are politicians. A politician saying 'we do not currently anticipate sending troops' has a very different meaning from 'we will never send troops under any circumstances.'

In all honesty, it will be very difficult for Kerry to sell German and French leaders on selling the German and French public on going into Iraq. But if a sale is to be made it is going to be by Kerry. Bush wouldn't even be allowed put his foot in the door.


Quote:
In addition, it seems to me that trumptman is not the only one has had some fun with his titles of threads.

Spin is spin. The issue being discussed in this thread is interesting enough without pretending that European nations hold some kind of hostility or contempt towards Kerry.


Quote:
Did you really believe they would send troops?

Maybe, if they can see a valid reason for doing it or get something out of it. Like I said, it will be a difficult sell for Kerry.
post #14 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by kneelbeforezod
These guys are politicians. A politician saying 'we do not currently anticipate sending troops' has a very different meaning from 'we will never send troops under any circumstances.'

In all honesty, it will be very difficult for Kerry to sell German and French leaders on selling the German and French public on going into Iraq. But if a sale is to be made it is going to be by Kerry. Bush wouldn't even be allowed put his foot in the door.


Spin is spin. The issue being discussed in this thread is interesting enough without pretending that European nations hold some kind of hostility or contempt towards Kerry.


Maybe, if they can see a valid reason for doing it or get something out of it. Like I said, it will be a difficult sell for Kerry. [/B]

Here's the big difference too: Bush is LOSING the coalition of the willing. Kerry at least will have a tough time but has an opportunity to make this a world wide endeavor--not a kangaroo coalition. Opportunity V. No hope which will you choose come November?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #15 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Oddly enough, I don't think you'll find one person who has claimed American foreign policy has forever been pristine and infallable, other then people like you who repeat that claim that was never made to begin with.

That said, and since reality is what you so crave, the real reality is that no country should be held hostage by their foregin policy of old. Yes, the United States once supported Hussein. No, that does not mean that in today's world we are not allowed to deal with him, and chastize others for being as stupid as we once were.

\\

In an ideal world of which we don't live.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #16 of 125
What a bunch of tools. Do you really think France and Germany would say "yes, we will be helping in Iraq with Mr. Kerry, but not with Bush"?



It's no wonder the RNC mails out brochures telling voters that if the Liberals win they will ban the Bible.

post #17 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
\\

In an ideal world of which we don't live.

Wrong.

In an ideal world we would have the infallable foreign policy you cry about phantom people proclaiming exists now.

In the real world we deal with current situations, and can't handcuff ourselves with past erroneous decisions.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #18 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Wrong.

In an ideal world we would have the infallable foreign policy you cry about phantom people proclaiming exists now.

In the real world we deal with current situations, and can't handcuff ourselves with past erroneous decisions.

So are you saying "In the real world we would base or foreign policy on actual intelligence, and not on fabrications and half-truths"?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #19 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Here's the big difference too: Bush is LOSING the coalition of the willing.

Take note of that, all ye who think we aren't really going it alone. We all know that Jose Aznar lost his election, and Spain is no longer among our Iraq partners. Australia's John Howard is up for re-election on Oct. 9, and his opponent is making a huge issue of "misleading the country into war". If Howard loses, Australia might be right out, too. The UK public is so firmly against the war that Tony Blair has had to backpedal and now almost apologize for getting them into it. If he weren't a politician of Clintonian proportions, he would already be out of a job.

Bottom line: our "coalition" is falling apart. Bush can't even keep our few nearest and dearest allies in the fight, mostly because he never convinced any of the people of those countries to support us. Can Kerry? Yes, I think he can. Everyone likes the schradenfreude of seeing an arrogant giant stumble, but there are limits to cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. The right tone and the right President will go a long way, I think, to bringing others in to help.
post #20 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
So are you saying "In the real world we would base or foreign policy on actual intelligence, and not on fabrications and half-truths"?

Yeah, that's what I said. Precisely.

I am no longer going to address fabricted comments in an attempt to bait me into a pissing match.

You can read what I said specifically, and try and explain to me how it is wrong. I think you will find doing so rather difficult, but I don't doubt that you'll try anyway.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #21 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Yeah, that's what I said. Precisely.

I am no longer going to address fabricted comments in an attempt to bait me into a pissing match.

You can read what I said specifically, and try and explain to me how it is wrong. I think you will find doing so rather difficult, but I don't doubt that you'll try anyway.

I'm not baiting you, I'm calling your comment stupid if you want me to be blunt.

You said:
Quote:
Wrong.

In an ideal world we would have the infallable foreign policy you cry about phantom people proclaiming exists now.

In the real world we deal with current situations, and can't handcuff ourselves with past erroneous decisions.

in response to:
Quote:
In an ideal world of which we don't live.

Which was in turn a response to a statement made by you:
Quote:
Oddly enough, I don't think you'll find one person who has claimed American foreign policy has forever been pristine and infallable, other then people like you who repeat that claim that was never made to begin with.

That said, and since reality is what you so crave, the real reality is that no country should be held hostage by their foregin policy of old. Yes, the United States once supported Hussein. No, that does not mean that in today's world we are not allowed to deal with him, and chastize others for being as stupid as we once were.

I bring all of that up because you may have meant one thing; however, readin the thread leaves a distinct tast in ones mouth which is encased in my strawman response.

While I agree that foregin policies need to change with time, your statements in and of themselvs paint or current FP as a correct respones to past policy failings. Going to war with the wrong country is worse than handcuffing one's FP. Charging into Baghdad was a blunder to say the least and to present a shift in FP as the difference between handcuffed by the past and actually going to war over half truths is stupid. That is what you appear to have done because you where not clear with your responses.

In the real world we deal with current situations not trumped up situations as Bush has done. Remember, you may have meant one thing but when presented in the context of this Kerry/Iraq thread it comes off differently.

My 2¢.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #22 of 125
Well then you're just assuming I said our current actions were correct, which again is you reading something I did not write.

My sole point was that even if Rumsfeld met with Hussein in the 80s, that does not mean the US can't say that Russia, Germany, and France's business that was being done in pre-war Iraq was bad.

Yep. We did work with a bad man too. Does that mean we are no longer allowed to point out when others do?

No.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #23 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
In the real world we deal with current situations, and can't handcuff ourselves with past erroneous decisions.

And the current situation for both France and Germany is a difficult one. They can't upset Bush because he might be president again. They gain absolutely no benefit from announcing that they would help Kerry. Instead, Kerry will still have to earn their support if in fact they are willing to help.

Trumptman, you started a thread identical to this one a few months ago and it was wrong then just as it's wrong now. My first paragraph completely dismantles your entire argument. This thread should simply be closed.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #24 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Yep. We did work with a bad man too. Does that mean we are no longer allowed to point out when others do?

It simply means our opinion of right and wrong in this matter is irrelevant; untrustworthy.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #25 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
It simply means our opinion of right and wrong in this matter is irrelevant; untrustworthy.

Yup.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #26 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
It simply means our opinion of right and wrong in this matter is irrelevant; untrustworthy.

Then the same can be said for any ally of any significance. So I guess we should all just fuck around and do nothing.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #27 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Then the same can be said for any ally of any significance. So I guess we should all just fuck around and do nothing.

No, it just means you shouldn't give them the benefit of the doubt. If they can convince you with evidence, that's great. But "trust us" shouldn't do it.

It would have been more convincing, at least, if the cast of characters were a little different. But it was many of the exact same people who arranged the sale of chemical weapons precursors to Saddam in the 80s, who were the people now saying "trust us".
post #28 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
not a kangaroo coalition

Hey! Leave the roos out of it.

Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
Australia's John Howard is up for re-election on Oct. 9, and his opponent is making a huge issue of "misleading the country into war". If Howard loses, Australia might be right out, too.

Um he's not actually. Latham - he's not making a big deal out of it. Because it's not the best way for him to win the election. He has aid we'll pull out and the troops will be home by Christmas. But it's not the focus. Not because the majority aren't opposed to the war but because they're more interested in things like saving Medicare.

With one proviso. Any Australians die in Iraq or terrorist attacks between now and next Saturday, Howard is fucked.

I think Kerry might have had a chance of winning over France and Germany at some point had he been president. But not now. They're not stupid. They know the US is screwed in Iraq.
Tomorrow shall be love for the loveless;
And for the lover, tomorrow shall be love.
Reply
Tomorrow shall be love for the loveless;
And for the lover, tomorrow shall be love.
Reply
post #29 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
No, it just means you shouldn't give them the benefit of the doubt. If they can convince you with evidence, that's great. But "trust us" shouldn't do it.

It would have been more convincing, at least, if the cast of characters were a little different. But it was many of the exact same people who arranged the sale of chemical weapons precursors to Saddam in the 80s, who were the people now saying "trust us".

Gah I swear to God... I never said their word should always be taken at face value. Ah screw it. There's no dealing with people who can't just read what's written instead of reading what they want the hidden message to be.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #30 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by crazychester
Um he's not actually. Latham - he's not making a big deal out of it. Because it's not the best way for him to win the election. He has aid we'll pull out and the troops will be home by Christmas. But it's not the focus. Not because the majority aren't opposed to the war but because they're more interested in things like saving Medicare.

Sorry, all I know about Ozzy politics I learn from the Economist. My point is that our support in Aus rests on a single individual, as in Spain and the UK. If he loses, our coalition shrinks again. I'm curious, though, why Latham isn't making a big issue of Iraq? Is it simply not a front-burner issue for Australians (in the absence of a domestic terror attack), or is it considered such an obvious policy change that it's not worth wasting time on it?
post #31 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Gah I swear to God... I never said their word should always be taken at face value. Ah screw it. There's no dealing with people who can't just read what's written instead of reading what they want the hidden message to be.

What were you arguing again? I totally agree with your original point, which, I think, was that nations should never feel constrained by their past foreign policy choices. Nations are always free to act in their self-interest, and it doesn't have to be primae facia consistent with their past. Just because we fought a war with communist China didn't mean Nixon shouldn't have gone there. If you believe nations can act altruistically (I do), it's also never too late to do the right thing.

The issue, though, is how to apply that to Iraq. Was it actually in our national self-interest? Who decides that? And was it "the right thing to do"? Who decides that? Can we trust the people who decide?

Bush tried to cast the war in terms of self-interest, but he never really sold that to the American people, much less the world. And hindsight has been a killer. So he's now relying on the moral argument - it was the "right thing to do". It comes down to the "Saddam is a weapon of mass destruction" argument. He's so bad, that going to war now was necessary and right. Can we trust that judgement? Specifically, can we trust our own leaders, and can the world trust us? Credibility matters, and the past actions of our leaders and our nation affect credibility. That still doesn't mean we couldn't do whatever we wanted to do, but it certainly means other nations are free to sit out and watch us sink or swim - and we're free to throw out our leaders if we start to sink.
post #32 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
France/Germany/Russia were against freeing Iraq from the start because it would ruin their lucrative business relationship with the anti-Semitic dictator.

The world is simple for you.

There is only white and black photography with high contrast paper : small grey tones are not for you.
post #33 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
Sorry, all I know about Ozzy politics I learn from the Economist. My point is that our support in Aus rests on a single individual, as in Spain and the UK. If he loses, our coalition shrinks again. I'm curious, though, why Latham isn't making a big issue of Iraq? Is it simply not a front-burner issue for Australians (in the absence of a domestic terror attack), or is it considered such an obvious policy change that it's not worth wasting time on it?

Because people are more interested in their hip pockets. Medicare (free health care for all) enjoys huge support among the population regardless of political persuasion. Howard has been watering it down ever since he came to power. It's his Achilles heel.

And because people are resigned to the fact that both parties will always acquiesce to the US more than the general population would like.

Also, we don't trust politicians even if we voted for them. Just because they say they're going to do something, it doesn't mean they will. They're all lying, cheating mongrels. So why get too worked up about it. How about we grab half a dozen tinnies out of the fridge and go to the beach instead.

We are apathetic, leisure junkies, didn't you know.

Howard LOVES Bush. Thinks he's the bees knees. Strange really because, while I don't like Howard, he isn't an idiot and you'd think George's intellectual deficiencies would preclude such a sycophantic relationship developing. But the fact is, if George asked John to give him a blow job, Howard would try so hard to please he'd make Linda Lovelace look like a rank amateur.

As a side note, Howard was in Washington on 9/11/01. A friend of mine is in the press gallery and she was there reporting on the trip. Howard was giving a press conference when someone came in and told them all about the attack. They rushed into an adjoining room to see the Pentagon in flames. They were then stuck in the building for some hours during the general lock down.

She described how Howard was pretty much in a state of shock the whole time. That he sat glued to the TV all day, saying little, stunned by the events. Her theory is that this first hand experience has coloured Howard's view of things ever since - left a lasting impression and given him a different perspective. Hence, his unswerving loyalty to George.
Tomorrow shall be love for the loveless;
And for the lover, tomorrow shall be love.
Reply
Tomorrow shall be love for the loveless;
And for the lover, tomorrow shall be love.
Reply
post #34 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
The world is simple for you.

There is only white and black photography with high contrast paper : small grey tones are not for you.

What do you do when the mods are resorting to subtle personal insults?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #35 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
And the current situation for both France and Germany is a difficult one. They can't upset Bush because he might be president again. They gain absolutely no benefit from announcing that they would help Kerry. Instead, Kerry will still have to earn their support if in fact they are willing to help.

Trumptman, you started a thread identical to this one a few months ago and it was wrong then just as it's wrong now. My first paragraph completely dismantles your entire argument. This thread should simply be closed.

Please speak to your boss about the fumes in your workplace. They are affecting your reasoning.

They don't have to announce they would support Kerry. But they also don't have to announce that they WON'T support Kerry as well. That second distinction is one you have not addressed. They could show support simply by ignoring the question or not addressing it. Instead they have chosen specifically to announce that no matter who is president, they are not sending troops. Silence can speak just as loudly as words sometimes. Germany and France have specifically chosen not to be silent here. They have fully announced their intent and it is that if Kerry is president, their actions will not change in Iraq.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #36 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
What do you do when the mods are resorting to subtle personal insults?

Nick

Insult or observation?

You say Tomato I say tomato.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #37 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
What do you do when the mods are resorting to subtle personal insults?

Revel in the role perpetual victimhood, and go on proudly fighting back against the nasty liberal elite who's always trying to kick you good, patriotic, God fearin' conservative folk down?
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #38 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
Revel in the role perpetual victimhood, and go on proudly fighting back against the nasty liberal elite who's always trying to kick you good, patriotic, God fearin' conservative folk down?

I've noted on numerous occasions that only conservative threads are ever locked here on PO. I don't have to be a victim about it, but that doesn't mean I have to be silent about it either.

Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Insult or observation?

You say Tomato I say tomato.

Actually your intellect has much in common with a tomato.

But of course... that is just an observation.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #39 of 125
Quote:
Are you two reading from the same set of DNC certified talking points?

Unless the DNC talking points start with "I don't know if..." (which is what my post starts off with), then no.

Foreign != "French/German" either.

If you can show a link that says Kerry promises French/German troops then you'll have something. Hell, we have foreign troops in there now.

Is it impossible for you not to be an insufferable prick? I'm just curious.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #40 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
What do you do when the mods are resorting to subtle personal insults?

Nick

I don't know. But if you post something as inflammatory and stupid as did Scott, you deserve any criticism you get.

As if France, Germany and Russia were motivated to deal with Saddam because, like him, their governments were anti-Semitic. Do me a favour. Scott deserves it.

Maybe you could advise him on legal advice, Nick. There have to be grounds for libel there, no? Give him your lawyer's number, perhaps?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › French and Germans to Kerry... hell no