All I said was, "They should push the U.N. into the East River, and then I would sell any medals on ebay." Considering the U.N. is probably the most corrupt international organization around financed primarily by the backs of hardworking U.S. tax payers, the idea of freeing up some very nice real estate in Manahattan makes sense to me. Bring out the bull dozers!
Aw, c'mon! Don't tell me you forgot about the Red Cross! They're totally the most corrupt int'l organization! But seriously, the UN might not be perfect, but it serves a purpose. To get rid of it would leave a void in our structure of international relations. As for it being corrupt, it is no more so than every government around the world. You must remember the old adage: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." It's true for a king, but it is also true for a large body of people. ~AJ
Maybe I would feel better if France DID NOT have a vote on the security council. Why they were considered a world power after World War II is beyond logic. Also, I just picked this up off of the AP news wire: "Be aware that the French government announced yesterday that it has raised it's terror alert level from Run to Hide. The only two higher levels in France are Surrender and Collaborate. The rise was precipitated by a recent fire which destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing their military."
Perfectly right. The US should not be a member of any organization or alliance it cannot fully control. Having to deal with, and maybe even give in to, what other governments may want, is a shame ... Fortunately the UN has some nice premises in Geneva, Vienna, and a few other places. Those could serve as the new HQ once the US leaves the UN. Christian
I disagree with your above statement. I'm at a loss to know why they were considered a world power even before World War II.
White flags and extreme arrogance, bad combination. You hear about the comments the French president was making at a dinner during the G8 conference just prior to the london bombings. Typical politician forgot to check if his mic was on...and translators were still translating. After he was done complaining about how horrible English food was he continued by stating Swedish food was even worse. I think he would have gone on but someone finally clued him. "Stupid French. The should come up with their own word for entrepreneur" - Homer Simpson
Starting a war (and pretending it has anything to do with fighting Al Qaeda) and extreme arrogance is a pretty bad combination too. Now as for Chirac, most French would love to see him out of office. And that is likely to happen in 2007. But I wonder if Sarkozy would be so much "easier" for the US administration. As for what you wrote about Chirac's remark about British food, well, that was not at the G8 summit but earlier, at a meeting with Putin and Schröder in the Kaliningrad area. Also, he did not say anything about Swedish food but claimed that Finnish food was worst. Sure, a dumb remark, but not really worse than what Berlusconi said about Finnish knowledge of food (particularly prosciutto) when he wanted the EU food safety agency to be established in Parma instead of some place in Finland ... Christian
Good thing for everyone that someone has the b---s to do it!!! Would the world be a better place if we ignored monsters like Saddam or Adolf? I think a person would have to be pretty stupid if they think that Saddam and Al Qaeda weren't connected in some manner.
Not that I mourn a single bit over the end of Saddam's regime, but as for that alleged connection ... remember how the US delegation, and particularly Powell, acted in the Security Council when it came to the "proof" that the US government supposedly had for Saddam's famous weapons of mass destruction? Having Chirac as a political ally can be quite embarrassing at times and I am not particularly fond of our own lame duck (Schröder) either. But the US defense secretary's remarks about "Old Europe", for example, certainly helped strengthening the ties between DE and FR ... to an extent that has made some other relations fairly difficult. Then again, as long as some people judge nations solely or primarily by how their governments acted two or three generations ago, I don't have much hope for improving those other relations these days. Christian
I hate to agree with ANYONE silly enough to be born French, but, Chirac is absolutely correct on this point. I spent Aug through Dec in Leeds, England about two years ago and the most popular restaurants in every food court in every mall were, #1 McDonald's, #2 KFC, #3 Pizza Hut. Have you ever read the ingredients in Yorkshire Pudding??? Yuck! Meat sauce. I'm not a big fan of the French, but you have to give them credit for keeping the British busy while we were fight for our countries independence. Their soldiers may wet themselves at the first whistle from an incoming mortar round but we wouldn't have beaten the British without them. I'm just saying...
IMHO, A weapon of mass destruction doesn't always have to refer to a bomb or a missle, etc.. I think when the U.S. found Saddam hiding in his little cubby hole they did indeed rid the world of one BIG weapon of mass destruction!!
You just have to ask yourself, Do you want to fight our enemies in their backyard or wait again till they attack us here? This is not a conventional war where great armies meet on a battle field. This is a war that has many fronts. Our enemy doesn't wave a white flag and surrender...they strap a bomb on to themselves as they hold a white flag trying to die for their religion. Whether it be Afghanistan, Iraq, or our borders, we HAVE to take the fight to them unless we wish to wait till they attack us here. Our fighting men and woman are taking on an enemy where future killers of Americans are pouring into Iraq and Afghanistan from the likes of Iran, Pakistan, Syria, etc. These killers know that a future free society is not in their best interest...especially right smack in the middle of the middle east. So instead of plotting the next 9/11 attack on our soil, they are pulling out all of the stops to defeat our troops. The big differance is that CNN is reporting every bit of bad news of this war 24/7. Thank God they were not reporting back in World War II. Could you imagine the reports from D-Day or the Battle of the Bulge if CNN reported those battles as they do today? If would have reported like this: by William A. Mayer Tragic French Offensive Stalled on Beaches (Normandy, France - June 6, 1944) - Pandemonium, shock and sheer terror predominate today's events in Europe. In an as yet unfolding apparent fiasco, Supreme Allied Commander, Gen. Dwight David Eisenhower's troops got a rude awakening this morning at Omaha Beach here in Normandy. Due to insufficient planning and lack of a workable entrance strategy, soldiers of the 1st and 29th Infantry as well as Army Rangers are now bogged down and sustaining heavy casualties inflicted on them by dug-in insurgent positions located 170 feet above them on cliffs overlooking the beaches which now resemble blood soaked killing fields at the time of this mid-morning filing. Bodies, parts of bodies, and blood are the order of the day here, the screams of the dying and the stillness of the dead mingle in testament to this terrible event. Morale can only be described as extremely poor--in some companies all the officers have been either killed or incapacitated,leaving only poorly trained privates to fend for themselves. Things appear to be going so poorly that Lt. General Omar Bradley has been rumored to be considering breaking off the attack entirely. As we go to press embattled U.S. president Franklin Delano Roosevelt's spokesman has not made himself available for comment at all, fueling fires that something has gone disastrously awry. The government at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is in a distinct lock-down mode and the Vice President's location is presently and officially undisclosed. Whether the second in command should have gone into hiding during such a crisis will have to be answered at some future time, but many agree it does not send a good signal. Miles behind the beaches and adding to the chaos, U.S. Naval gunships have inflicted many friendly fire casualties, as huge high explosive projectiles rain death and destruction on unsuspecting Allied positions. The lack of training of Naval gunners has been called into question numerous times before and today's demonstration seems to underlie those concerns. At Utah Beach the situation is also grim, elements of the 82nd and 101st Airborne seemed to be in disarray as they missed their primary drop zones behind the area believed to comprise the militant's front lines. Errant paratroopers have been hung up in trees, breaking arms and legs, rendering themselves easy targets for those defending this territory. On the beach front itself the landing area was missed,catapulting U.S. forces nearly 2,000 yards South of the intended coordinates, thus placing them that much farther away from the German insurgents and unable to direct covering fire or materially add to the operation. Casualties at day's end are nothing short of horrific; at least 8,000 and possibly as many as 9,000 were wounded in the haphazardly coordinated attack, which seems to have no unifying purpose or intent. Of this number at least 3,000 have been estimated as having been killed, making June 6th by far, the worst single day of the war which has dragged on now--with no exit strategy in sight--as the American economy still struggles to recover from Herbert Hoover's depression and its 25% unemployment. Military spending has skyrocketed the national debt into uncharted regions, lending another cause for concern. When and if the current hostilities finally end it may take generations for the huge debt to be repaid. On the planning end of things, experts wonder privately if enough troops were committed to the initial offensive and whether at least another 100,000 troops should have been added to the force structure before such an audacious undertaking. Communication problems also have made their presence felt making that an area for further investigation by the appropriate governmental committees. On the home front, questions and concern have been voiced. A telephone poll has shown dwindling support for the wheel-chair bound Commander In Chief, which might indicate a further erosion of support for his now three year-old global war. Of course, the President's precarious health has always been a question. He has just recently recovered from pneumonia and speculation persists whether or not he has sufficient stamina to properly sustain the war effort. This remains a topic of furious discussion among those questioning his competency. Today's costly and chaotic landing compounds the President's already large credibility problem. More darkly, this phase of the war, commencing less than six months before the next general election, gives some the impression that Roosevelt may be using this offensive simply as a means to securere-election in the fall. Underlining the less than effective Allied attack, German casualties--most of them innocent and hapless conscripts--seem not to be as severe as would be imagined. A German minister who requested anonymity stated categorically that "the aggressors were being driven back into the sea amidst heavy casualties, the German people seek no wider war." "The news couldn't be better," Adolph Hitler said when he wasfirst informed of the D-Day assault earlier this afternoon. "As long as they were in Britain we couldn't get at them. Now we have them where we can destroy them." German minister Goebbels had been told of the Allied airborne landings at 0400 hours. "Thank God, at last," he said. "This is the final round." ************************************************************* So the next time you see a G.I., THANK THEM for protecting us and taking the fight to them...and not waiting till we fight them HERE. Remember, we have to be right 100% of the time while terrorists have to be right only ONE time.
Right, which is why it may have helped to focus on fighting terrorism instead of starting a war in Iraq. So far, that invasion has resulted in even more terrorist attacks. Stabilizing the country is an urgent job that in my opinion should also include those countries whose governments strongly opposed the war, just as the continuous presence of our* military in Afghanistan helps bringing some stability and safety back to that country. (* in my case that refers to Germany but it could be any other ISAF country) As for that D-Day scenario, well, WW2 was (despite its dimensions and effects) a conventional war. Granted, media coverage was different back then, but this seems to be quite an ambiguous issue nowadays anyway: On one hand you want journalists to report, you supply material that TV stations can use, etc., on the other hand there are situations where they are in the way - in one way or another. Guess one has to live with that ... Christian
I'm sorry, I thought I was finished with this thread then someone has to post such a rediculous post as this!! I guess the citizens of Iraq were better off being terrorized by the brutal regime of Saddam and his sons. The world is just supposed to sit back and act as if nothing is happening. I'm so glad there are countries like the U.S. and the U.K. who will actually do something to stop attrocities that are going on around the world. Men and women who will go into harms way and risk their lives daily to help stop the madness and murder that was going on in Iraq. I guess there were countries that also thought the Nazi's weren't harming the Jews and they should have been left alone also. The war in Iraq WAS and IS a war against terrorism. The worst kind.. "terrorism against humanity"!! A monster that was getting enjoyment and wealth by terrorizing and murdering his OWN people!!! Mass brutal murdering of men, women, and children?? If you don't consider that terrorism, then what was it?? You explain to me why Saddam's actions should have been over-looked and left to continue while the world (or at least a few "other" countries) looked the other way. Evidently some countries feel that since he wasn't hurting their people, then they should leave him alone. You know, the highly successful negotiating strategy of telling him not to do it any more and he'll listen! I get so sick of hearing about not finding any WOMD. What about all the horror's they DID find? You never hear the "neutral" countries talking about them or the humanitarian side of what's going on in Iraq! Like I said earlier, they DID find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and they were named Hussein!! I just love the "others" who say how terrible Saddam was and that he needed to be stopped but when a coalition steps up and does just that, then the "others" do nothing but "attack" them for their actions. The day will come when Iraq will be a free and prosperous country but only because a small coalition of BRAVE countries decided to take action so it could happen. Freedom is won by the the blood of the brave and not the wimpering tears of cowards!! If you don't believe that then history was all a lie. Let the "others" throw their little tantrums, accusations and name-calling for now. We all know who they always call to "bale them out" when the need arises! How soon they do forget!!!! INVASION ?? Good choice of words. Especially when it comes from the country that, so many times, tried it, perfected it and failed at it!
There are basically two mind sets. Well three, if you count clueless people that answer Dianna Ross was a Supreme, but couldn't tell you the name of ONE of the serving justices. The two are those that want to take the fight to our enemies and others that want to emulate Neville Chamberlain. I am 45, and if push came to shove, and if my country needed me to fight against people that want to kill ALL of US, draft me. I will not run to Canada, but will fight with all of my life's blood. In the meantime, I will support our troops that are surgically fighting a war against those that hide within woman, children and churches. Frankly, I would not be patient as I would have already flattened the place (biblical fire bombs would be nice), dusted off my hands and state, "OK, let's start over." There will be a time when terrorists will be successful when they again attack our homeland. That is why I believe you MUST take the fight to them...to the root. You can cut a weed, but a weed still grows unless you take out the root. Back to the U.N. and Iraq. What was it? 12 years and 14 U.N. resolutions that basically stated, "Stop that...please". I would rather support action than no action at all. Evil wins when good does nothing. If you want your coin values to stay relative with the free marketplace, the last thing you want to see is another 9/11.
