Jump to content

Lost my sympathy for Bigley


Guest

Recommended Posts

Zorro:

 

I agree with your post. The problem I have is that people are too busy jumping on the bandwagon of ?blame the Americans?. A car bomber blows up 47 young Iraqis who wanted to join the police force and help create a new post-saddam iraq and get a paychek to feed their families. People then pull out the same old arguments about the american?s mistakes.

 

 

 

This does not help the people of iraq. A small minority (less than 1%) want to murder their way into absolute rule over 25 million Iraqis. The Americans are committed to stopping them, even at a cost of over a thousand American lives so far. It is in everyone?s interest to stop these people they are worse than saddam. Obsessing over the initial mistakes of the Americans seems to have influenced some euro nations to stay out of the fray and more importantly to continue to stay out. The Iraqis need help, not finger pointing. The blame game plays into the hands of the extreme militants. While Europe sits around blaming and not helping, the militants chance of success improves.

 

Annan said the war in iraq is illegal. He also said ?if the security situation does not improve the elections in iraq will not be legitimate.? This is a severe case of gloating. The Iraqis who are risking their lives laying the groundwork for an election of a legitimate post-saddam govt don?t need people in ivory towers to make subtle statements that sabotage their efforts. I wish annan would shut his mouth.

 

Someone will now come along and reply ?if bush did not go into iraq in the first place etc? . Which shows that I am not doing a good job of getting my point across ::

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply

>>>Obsessing over the initial mistakes of the Americans seems to have influenced some euro nations to stay out of the fray and more importantly to continue to stay out. The Iraqis need help, not finger pointing. The blame game plays into the hands of the extreme militants. While Europe sits around blaming and not helping, the militants chance of success improves.<<<

 

 

actually, not entirely correct.

europe does not want to be drawn into the complete mess bush and his clique have created by an invasion most european, and most countries of the world, have warned about. and especially as long as this same clique is pulling the strings. have a look at the neo con website, and their outrageus aims, their incredible arrogance. as long as this clique is in power, the US will be on their own.

if bush and his clique go, if power will be handed over to the UN, i am sure that europe will try to help sorting out that mess more actively.

opinion polls in europe have clearly shown that the vast, overwhelming majority of europe's population does not agree with the war and bush.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John kerry will not change policy so i don't see the rationale for not helping iraq now, other than a desire to rebuke bush (at the expense of iraq)

 

>>europe does not want to be drawn into the complete mess <<

 

Standing by will be disastrous for the iraqis.

 

>>as long as this same clique is pulling the strings. have a look at the neo con website, and their outrageus aims,<<

 

never mind the old aims whatever they really were, the current aim is for the iraqis to choose their govt and the US goes home (even tho the US really won't be able to because of the "suicide in the name of allah" brigade).

 

>>if bush and his clique go, if power will be handed over to the UN, i am sure that europe will try to help sorting out that mess more actively. <<

 

They will contribute troops? Money? The US has committed 18 billion to iraq, what has the UN offered? The US would welcome help from the UN but when asked the only response from UN leadership is to claim in advance that the elections are not legit. You are still on the blame bush mode even tho the current goals are to help iraq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, lets shlosh it out until the thread is closed ;)

 

 

 

>>>Standing by will be disastrous for the iraqis.<<<

 

yes. but under present US leadership europe believes that it will be equally desastrous. but a desaster europe is not involved in.

 

 

 

 

>>>John kerry will not change policy so i don't see the rationale for not helping iraq now, other than a desire to rebuke bush (at the expense of iraq)<<<

 

well, i personally believe that many in europe expect a bit too much from kerry. as you said, he won't change policy. but then, who knows, he has changed his stand lots of times already, and might do so again, and again... ;)

 

 

 

>>>They will contribute troops? Money? The US has committed 18 billion to iraq, what has the UN offered? The US would welcome help from the UN but when asked the only response from UN leadership is to claim in advance that the elections are not legit. You are still on the blame bush mode even tho the current goals are to help iraq. <<<

 

 

many people in europe see it that way: bush went in not even allowing a vote in the UN, against the advice of american keypartners in europe. now, after nearly all was exposed as lies, and his predictions were wrong, the UN is supposed to pull bush out of the mess he created? europe needs a bit more than summons from the US before getting involved. such as a real change in leadership and strategy, which bush is not offering.

sorry, but that's how we in europe see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...