Salam,

It’s a direct splash

France/Germany/Belgium Opposed what USA asks for sending kinds of support to Turkey,
As USA affect on most of other NATO countries using its public blackmailing style.
Turkey was convinced By USA to ask for this support as it will be targeted in case of War against Iraq.

France/Germany/Bel by doing this, show:

 They r free countries with independent decision, not USA followers.
 Respect their public/general opinion for not going for War option & allow more chance for peace options.
 Know how to practise politics without loosing their intrest in ME region.:wink:


What u think ??
:o

Without the support of the Belgian military, I fear all is lost.

Hahahahahahahaha

The New York City police department could defeat the Belgians on the field of battle. This would, of course, cause the French to seek surrender - under the condition that they be able to keep their uniforms and their new, brightly coloured, Ivory Coast campaign ribbon.

The Germans would occupy Prague in self-defense.

Originally posted by The brain.
France/Germany/Bel by doing this, show:

 They r free countries with independent decision, not USA followers.



That's quite a silly assumption. How shall you know if the rest of Europe made independent decisions or not to agree to the US requests ?

How do you know that Belgium's decision was not because two relatively powerful neighbors, who have fought in their country in recent history, decided to hold back?

The Belgians are just thankful that the Germans and French agree for once and do not plan on settling their differences in Belgium again :)

So perhaps Belgium's decision wasn't really "independent" at all !!

Originally posted by The brain.
France/Germany/Bel by doing this, show:
 Respect their public/general opinion for not going for War option & allow more chance for peace options.

Interesting idea.

How is Saddam allowing for "more chance for peace options" - and how much of his agreement came before the threat of militay action?

Why is this expected of the last war's victors and not of the defeated ?

How many chances are necessary to satisfy your requirement - or are we faced with an unending stream of "just one more chance" ?

Wanderer, Salam

I feel a shame to defend the idea that USA going for this War against Iraq just to show the world How powerful is USA covering the weakness both outside/ inside after 11th Sep + Controlling the Oil market after attacking Iraq.

Back to ur comments

‘That's quite a silly assumption. How shall you know if the rest of Europe made independent decisions or not to agree to the US requests ? ‘
U again assume that my assumption is silly which is again shows some weakness in ur argument.
Justification: Regarding those 3 countries, U can see General opinion statistics matching with government votes, for others the other way around  must be something/somebody behind the screen putting pressure.

‘How is Saddam allowing for "more chance for peace options" - and how much of his agreement came before the threat of military action?’

Peace option is not for Saddam, it is for whole Iraqi ppl/all soldiers who will be exposed to this war.

USA should not involve in giving chances, that’s a UN work, UN should represent all world not representing USA needs.



:o

Originally posted by The brain.
..that USA going for this War against Iraq just to show the world How powerful is USA

:o Hardly. We would all rather save our money. We have nothing to prove.

Originally posted by The brain.
.Justification: Regarding those 3 countries, U can see General opinion statistics matching with government votes, for others the other way around  must be something/somebody behind the screen putting pressure.

I am prepared to read this "General opinion statistics" information you claim to have. Please provide it. It is possible that the leaders of the "yes" countries have small militaries and would prefer that NATO (and thus their protection) continue to be funded by the US.


Originally posted by The brain.
‘How is Saddam allowing for "more chance for peace options" - and how much of his agreement came before the threat of military action?’

Peace option is not for Saddam, it is for whole Iraqi ppl/all soldiers who will be exposed to this war.

Then they can remove Saddam, or we will. Saddam is the Iraqi government; he makes the decisions, not the Iraqi people. The point is, he needs to be removed, and since only the UK and the US have the necessary backbone, it's falling to us.

Originally posted by The brain.

USA should not involve in giving chances, that’s a UN work, UN should represent all world not representing USA needs..

The US is simply saying that enough chances have been given. If a man touches a woman without permission, she will tell him to stop. If he tries again, shouldn't she slap him, or would you rather she just keep saying stop ? Answer me this.

A few members of the UN and NATO reject immediate military action against Iraq. It is incorrect to suggest that the US and UK stand alone in the world as the only countries perceiving the necessity of military action against Iraq.

France have said that they will fulfill their obligation to NATO if Turkey are attacked

The French will fall into line

Last week a French armada including an aircraft carrier, nuclear submarine and other warships slipped out of Toulon and headed for the eastern Mediterranean.

Good that u start answering ur doughts urself,


'The US is simply saying that enough chances have been given. If a man touches a woman without permission, she will tell him to stop. If he tries again, shouldn't she slap him, or would you rather she just keep saying stop ? Answer me this.'

Where is that touch ??

If Iraq represnt a threat to USA intrests or threat to Israel ' is that the touch" ?? u mean

Originally posted by mr pinnochio

Last week a French armada including an aircraft carrier, nuclear submarine and other warships slipped out of Toulon and headed for the eastern Mediterranean.

There is some speculation that France intends to attack Apple Computer Corp. in retailation for Apple taking the 2.4 GHz band for use in AirPort and BlueTooth wireless net technologies back in 1999. Apparently that bandwidth was used by the French military.

Push came to shove and, expectedly, France surrendered.

Please note that Apple is still using the 2.4 GHz band for AirPort Extreme - wireless networking.

The California National Guard and GreenPeace plan on aiding the Cupertino, Calif. computer company, though the French Navy is expected to surrender and seek meaningful employment in the California wine industry.

Originally posted by The brain.
If a man touches a woman without permission, she will tell him to stop. If he tries again, shouldn't she slap him, or would you rather she just keep saying stop ? Answer me this.'

You: Where is that touch ??

It doesn't matter where. She has the right to demand that he stop touching.


Originally posted by The brain.

If Iraq represnt a threat to USA intrests or threat to Israel ' is that the touch" ?? u mean

Why didn't you mention Iraq being a threat to Kuwait, KSA, and Iran?
The interests of many countries are threatened by Saddam's WMD programs.

Maintaining WMD development programs and earlier stockpiles is "the touch".

When push comes to shove, Belgium, France and Germany will fall into line with their allies. What we are currently observing is a reaction by Big Guns in "Old Europe" against the clear desire on the part of the reliable friends of the US - i.e. Her Britannic Majesty´s United Kingdom and new NATO members from Central and Eastern Europe - to support the US. "Old Europe" is having a fit of pique, but it will pass.

You :’ Why didn't you mention Iraq being a threat to Kuwait, KSA, and Iran?
The interests of many countries are threatened by Saddam's WMD programs’.

‘Maintaining WMD development programs and earlier stockpiles is "the touch".’


If Iraq Threatened Kuwait, KSA, Iran interests, where is the touch on USA??:confused:
Why these countries u mention not stand in UN and ask for War against Iraq then ?

Why USA only ( followed by Blair) ask for War ?

The touch must be on them only : Oil + power show

Shakoosh :‘France/Germany ‘ old Europe’ ,

France nowadays is teaching USA how to practice the diplomatic work.‘



If USA & England sure about WMD program of saddam they can help UN inspectors to do their work.
But going through War knowing Saddam might used WMD ( if he still have) in the War --> will cause millions of life causality.

Originally posted by The brain.

If Iraq Threatened Kuwait, KSA, Iran interests, where is the touch on USA??:confused:

You certainly picked the wrong Sabla name, my friend. Potential loss of oil sources.

Originally posted by The brain.

Why these countries u mention not stand in UN and ask for War against Iraq then ?

Your Princes do everything behind closed doors so that they can aviod appearing weak and frightened, and so that they can deny any responsibility for inviting western powers into the region to do their dirty work later.

Originally posted by The brain.

If USA & England sure about WMD program of saddam they can help UN inspectors to do their work.
But going through War knowing Saddam might used WMD ( if he still have) in the War --> will cause millions of life causality.

If Saddam has WMD he is in violation and adding all of the inspectors one can imagine does nothing to change that. Because Saddam is in violation of the inspection program requirements and weapons material accountability, he must be removed, Iraq occupied, and all WMD programs dismantled and all WMD, if found, destroyed.

Originally posted by Wanderer

If Saddam has WMD he is in violation and adding all of the inspectors one can imagine does nothing to change that.

Because Saddam is in violation of the inspection program requirements and weapons material accountability, he must be removed, Iraq occupied, and all WMD programs dismantled and all WMD, if found, destroyed. [/B]

Wanderer, you are an American and may be an official one. So arguing with you will make no sense because you can not at this 'point in time' be satisfied with whatever proposal for Iraqi situation gets presented by neutral nations and the entire civil ppl of the world including those of the United States.

This war is a Bush own war. As an oil dealer himself, his oil ambitions in this region including central Asia is a longer term benefit to the family company or should I say interests ?

France including all the rest of the WORLD COMMUNITY have come up with a humanitarian suggestion over the Iraqi issue. This suggestion can not therefore be accepted by both the USA and it's staunch supporter for simple reason which is vested in Bushes family interest. Therefore; France and the rest see no reason for military intervention at this time when chances of further diplomaticy exist. Why then are Blair's and Bush administrations pushing for war ?

Iraq has accepted UN's Inspectors to avoid war under the UN's ambrella. So why not send an Army of Inspectors including Agents of both CIA and MI6, with minders from French, Russia, China and other countries including South Africa ?

Here for those of us standing against war on Iraq, we want to see that innocent lives, of Iraqi and invading soldiers, are spared from this personalised war of the Bush family.

__________________________________

Do not ask what your country has done for you
But ask what have you done for your country

Yes, I am officially a citizen of the United States of America, though I frequently think of obtaining a passport from Belize.

France does not speak for the rest of the world, nor the rest of Europe - much to their chagrin.

Iraq only accepted UN inspectors under threat - by the UK and US !! So the big stick is necessary, as uncle Teddy suggested.

Saddam is for war, so the US and UK are for war.

You will need to explain how the President's family benefits from defeating Iraq - as you accuse. Just saying so carries so little weight.

Desert_Sloath, thnx

Well explination I must said.


I must add:

Nations should Fight for Peace till last minute and should not let few Cow Boys exposed world to War.!!:fire:

Originally posted by The brain.
Nations should Fight for Peace till last minute

What happens at the last minute ?

‘Last Minute’

USA ( Cawboy gov)DON’T KNOW WHERE & WHAT IS LAST MINUTE FOR PEACE,

Cus they start fighting for War since 1st Minute, trying to justify this War with all kind of faked & old info, spoiling information systems with duplicate facts

Last Minute again has to be decided by UN. So just Wait till that time …

OOOOH forgetting that U can’t wait any more :fire:

You failed to answer my question, didn't you , Brain. Just jabbering. Try agin.



What happens at or after "the last minute" ?

Should i prepare a full report to answer ur Question

How proud u r with ur Q ??

why cant say u failed to uderstand my answer, at leat I will feel sorry u did not understand me & i could repeat again


we have saying
' Repeating teaches.....)

You have stated the following:

Originally posted by The brain.
Nations should Fight for Peace till last minute ...

... and I am asking you to explain what would happen then - at or after the "last minute".

If you cannot answer, then your comment above is meaningless and I will suggest you re-read my signature line.

OK

When u ask ur Q, it seems that u sure that my answer will be the war,
but not



What happened ' last minute" is always or most of the time depends on what happened before that ' last minute'

So if nations keep Peace options open , ' last minute' it might not War it might be Peaceful solution.

But if one Part keep pushing for war and only War what u expect after last minute ???







W.bas
:wink:

There can be peace AFTER the war.

Saddam has always had the chance to give up WMD and be left alone.

He chose otherwise.

12 years is long enough to give peace a chance.

Brinkmanship diplomacy must be demonstrated to be a very poor choice. This will hopefully be noticed by a Kim Chee eating dictator elsewhere.