Arab + European media spoiling coalition efforts in IRaq?

[Luxembourger]

I don t know but it seems to me that the media , european newspapers and tv channels enjoy it only to select the bad things going on in iraq , inciting then the viewers who watch the news to get more and more a bad opinion of the coaltion and come to the conclusion that IRaq is Vietnam and that the bad guys is the coaltion and that Bush and Blair are the worst leaders in history.

Next, there are so many pictures being made in IRaq , we only see the ones in the newspapers where you see explosions or iraqi insrugents lying dead on the flloor which makes the viewer think that the dead bodies are all civilians.

You and me have certainly seen many pictures too about the colation restoring eletricity, providing kids with new school stuff, rebuilding infranstructures. But I never saw such pcitures in any european newspapers none! The media wants to brainwash more the reader in europe by spreading the idea that the iraq mission is doomed and that the Coaliton army is a gang of iraqi POw spankers.

The pictures of the iraqi pows are being aired everyday now ton tV , what about the videos being made of iraqi police during saddam s regime where police beat the hell out of iraqis ?

[gilgoul]

A lot, with their air of "I told you so", they delect themselves of any US casualty, like they did before and still do with any IDF casualty.

[HELEX]

So what about the russian Media which is even more critical than the european, the Indian is more critical, the chinese is, the African is, south american is.... rest of the World is?

You are complaining that the world Media is not as biased as the American/Coalition? :cantbeli:

[Midav]

Lot's of it is making a mountain out of a molehill.

It's ok to ignore that many of the soldiers have built homes, schools and the like.

It's ok to to keep quiet the money for oil bribes that transpired over the years.

Yet, have some bad apples in the military, or not everything work out 100%, man, that's just gotta make the headlines.

[henksmoeder]

Objection Luxembourger, I see both types of pictures in the european news. Even in the leftist press. I have a leftist newspaper at home (as well as a more moderate one) and both have room voor photos/cartoons/columns etc from both sides. Dutch news is pretty opbjective about these things, since they have 2 interests. One, they have troops in Iraq and are a long time ally of the USA, so that provides the pro-OIF news. Secondly, we believe in the European Union and we have a large group of moderate left wingers, so we also have the anti-OIF news. Fine the way it is, it let's you choose.

[WanderingNomad]

Most Europeans see themselves vindicated in what's happening right now in Iraq. The US was arrogant, self-righteous and didn't want to listen, so this is the result and now they have 2 options: a. continue (along with their mighty coalition of the willing, haha) and fail or b. concede they've made a few mistakes and can't do it alone and perhaps rescue this sh*tty operation that should have started completely different in the first place.

As long as it's an US occupation most european media will cover it with a certain anti-war bias.

Anti-war europeans pity every innocent death, but it's Bush and the hawks who are responsible for the situation as it is today. No one else.

(Luxembourger: an lo so nemmen et ginn och Letzebuerger déi fir deen Krich an pro-Bush sinn! :cantbeli: )

[-Max2-]

Btw, there is something wrong with your quote "Luxembourg supports USA" ( :roll: ), Luxembourger. You CAN'T speak for all your country.

AFAIK, Luxembourg was against the war in Iraq...

[Luxembourger]

Luxembourger: an lo so nemmen et ginn och Letzebuerger déi fir deen Krich an pro-Bush sinn

JO dei gin et och du wells et just net wessen , dir passt et eben net an de kroom , ech wees ganz genau dass zu letzebuerg et och dei gin dei dogeint sin dat hun ech net behaapt , mais dei dei geint de krieg sin sin och dei deii sech nie ze wuert mellen wan an aner lanner volkermord sin wei ruanda or aner conflikter . der hun just de mond grouss op wan eng westlech nation enzuerg agreift. Et get net nemmen www.tageblatt.lu wou informatiounen kommen.

Sorry seems that we have a second guy from luxembourg (WanderingNomad) here and I had to answer him .

you should go to www.infoladen.lu my friend

[Luxembourger]

Luxembourg supports USA"
1st look at the background , my avatar where I stated this
secondly, : we have elections in Luxembourg in june

How is that the left parties here are now claiming that our conservative government did not have a real postiion on the iraq issue and that was so reluctant to tell it s opinion `? The people who will vote for the conservative party in june are aware that this party is pro american for years .
and I am going to let you know about the elections result in june .

the left party here haven t won the elections for over 20 years!! a bit of frustration for them huh,

[Luxembourger]

you call the us media and the pentagon personal media propaganda,

well how do you call it when you show only one side of the conflict in order to get more flame on the US ?

[WanderingNomad]

Luxembourger, I'm a bit more sophisticated than that ;)

And of course the UN, along with the US, should have intervened. But neither did. For multiple reasons. The lack of oil and potential profits sure was one of then.

As for Luxembourg: as every other country in Europe (exception perhaps the UK), the majority of the population was and is against the way this war was started and under what conditions/premises . And it has nothing to do with our election!? And it's true that our conservatives are pro-american (nothing wrong with that!), but they sure are not pro-war and pro-Bush.

And you'd be surprised where my votes will be going to.

[-Max2-]

you call the us media and the pentagon personal media propaganda,

well how do you call it when you show only one side of the conflict in order to get more flame on the US ?

You exaggerate. Not all European media are like that.

And speaking of media, remember how the US media have bashed the "Old Europe" last year about the war in Iraq. Very professional... :roll:

[Luxembourger]

pro-war and pro-Bush.

wel then ask them if they are happy or not that saddam was caught?
And before the war started last year in march , our prime minister was invited at a german show "christiansen" and he was not anti Bush .

I did support the war , well actualy my opinion is that dictators should no more belong to the 21st century therefor a war against them is in my eyes justified whether there are oil interests yes or not . Of course oil is always an issue in some conflicts I am aware of it .

Then you check out some of my old posts , I stated clearly x times that the plan that was for the after war period was not so good and too rushy but the coalition is doing it s best , and yes I would be glad too to see finaly more intenrational troops in IRAq too.

But you always keep on blaming the efforts and only base your statments on the bad things going on in iraq,,,,and if you blame the coalition don t forget to blame the radical muslim fanatics who want to provoke a civil war there and AL Qaeda who likes to see a clash between west and Islam !

Instead of blaming here and there and beliving everything what our glorious press shows and tellls us from the iraq front why not praise , even if it s only once , the tough work the coalition does .,

And concerning Bush and his hawks as you stated , I sated a message today in the issue about the pciture of Bush huging the kid, that Bush is ok and that it s only Rums and Chen who I don t like it so much .

If you critisize the UK US led coalition I am aware of it that you are not necessary anti american , but if you keep on going to flame the coalition and the Americans for everything they do without stating once sth good , then I have reall doubts whether one is anti american or not

[WanderingNomad]

I won't discuss all that in detail here now with you. Perhaps in private or an other time.

[Luxembourger]

the majority of the population was and is against the way this war was started and under what conditions/premises . And it has nothing to do with our election!

the position of the ruling government on the issue whether supporting a war or not plays an incredible role, you saw that in Germany and in SPain .
Because those who don t want to engage in a war always ask the question
" are you for or against a war " and of course people reply with " aganst"

The best thing is to ask and talk to anyone who was in iraq .rebuilding and helping to restore security. They know far more than we know. I got the chance to talk to an US sodlier stationed in Germany a good friend who came back from iraq recently and I praise what they did over there. IT was not only killing foes or demolishing houses what most people think by reading the daily newspapers.


I won't discuss all that in detail here now with you. Perhaps in private or an other time.
no problem , have a nice day . :hug:

[HELEX]

pro-war and pro-Bush.

wel then ask them if they are happy or not that saddam was caught?
And before the war started last year in march , our prime minister was invited at a german show "christiansen" and he was not anti Bush .

I did support the war , well actualy my opinion is that dictators should no more belong to the 21st century therefor a war against them is in my eyes justified whether there are oil interests yes or not . Of course oil is always an issue in some conflicts I am aware of it .

Then you check out some of my old posts , I stated clearly x times that the plan that was for the after war period was not so good and too rushy but the coalition is doing it s best , and yes I would be glad too to see finaly more intenrational troops in IRAq too.

But you always keep on blaming the efforts and only base your statments on the bad things going on in iraq,,,,and if you blame the coalition don t forget to blame the radical muslim fanatics who want to provoke a civil war there and AL Qaeda who likes to see a clash between west and Islam !

Instead of blaming here and there and beliving everything what our glorious press shows and tellls us from the iraq front why not praise , even if it s only once , the tough work the coalition does .,

And concerning Bush and his hawks as you stated , I sated a message today in the issue about the pciture of Bush huging the kid, that Bush is ok and that it s only Rums and Chen who I don t like it so much .

If you critisize the UK US led coalition I am aware of it that you are not necessary anti american , but if you keep on going to flame the coalition and the Americans for everything they do without stating once sth good , then I have reall doubts whether one is anti american or not

What is about all the other Dictators in the Persian Gulf, the american "Allies"....? Kuwait, Saudi Arabia... Why do they belong to the 21st century?

[n.ignomo]

I don't know about other countries which were against the war, but France didn't have nothing against fighting in Irak if there had been some real reason. I am telling you that our government were looking for laws which would lead to war. Don't tell us anti-war and all this ****. If WMD had been found in Irak before 4/2003, France certainly would have sent troops and most certainly more than UK actually did. We were just waiting for the US to give us legitimate reason (at the UN), other than fight against terrorism.

Now i can't tell you whether GW 2 shifted terrorism and what, but it didn't made it disappear. If you are interested the most about islamism, you can't fight all of them at once, and some just can't be fought by the US of A but by their own government !

[Luxembourger]

What is about all the other Dictators in the Persian Gulf, the american "Allies"....? Kuwait, Saudi Arabia... Why do they belong to the 21st century? you mean Lybia too which is now becoming a great firned of Europe again?????

OF course they don t have a place here ! the US will focus on those too once how to distant them selves , the new economic relations with Russia are one first step forward.

[WanderingNomad]

The whole Iraq war was started under FALSE and UNTRUE premises. That's the point.

And 99,99% of the anti-war people don't love Saddam. So don't answer in that vein.

If Saddam had really been an imminent threat to his neighbours or even the whole world, then the other countries would have participated like in the First Gulf War.

But this time around, they just didn't want to participate in Bush's war against the guy who wanted to kill his daddy.

End of story.

[Midav]

Not end of story.

There have been times in history when people could and should have risen to stop a threat from starting, yet they never did.

No, Saddam may not have been a threat in the near future.

Yet, how long could the NFZ's have lasted? Oil for food?

What about the UN or even nations themselves stopping the bloodshed in Rwanda? Nigeria?

It's easier to criticize and let something happen, than get off ones ass and do something about it.

Yeah, saw a lot of help there. Hey, then again, neighbours weren't threatened now were they?

[Threelions]

Lot's of it is making a mountain out of a molehill.

It's ok to ignore that many of the soldiers have built homes, schools and the like.

It's ok to to keep quiet the money for oil bribes that transpired over the years.

Yet, have some bad apples in the military, or not everything work out 100%, man, that's just gotta make the headlines.

Just for the sake of argument, I'm sure that Saddam did a few things for his people, like perhaps build schools and homes, but all we hear about is his abuse of people. Your argument is weak.

Cheers

[Threelions]

So what about the russian Media which is even more critical than the european, the Indian is more critical, the chinese is, the African is, south american is.... rest of the World is?

You are complaining that the world Media is not as biased as the American/Coalition? :cantbeli:

In regards to the original topic of this thread i have to agree 100% with helex here! Complaining because the majority of the world is against all of this seems very silly to me.

Cheers

[gilgoul]

So what about the russian Media which is even more critical than the european, the Indian is more critical, the chinese is, the African is, south american is.... rest of the World is?

You are complaining that the world Media is not as biased as the American/Coalition? :cantbeli:

Helex, the question is not about your opinion, because USA couldn`t care less, since they had the power to go for it alon, ethey didn`t have to give anyone any excuse, and the time that russia and Europe bought tothe Saddam regime allowed it to prepare carefully and hide or distribute any kind of weapons it had.
Now the fact medias are not reporting about positive things going on in Irak, the the only subject is now the shamefull abuse of some Irakis POWs, but not the fact that child mortality has been divided by two in only a year.
That when you read "Le Monde" or "the Guardian", you will find full pages about the "plight" of "poor-irakis-under-OCCUPATION", and jubilatory bdy count when reporting coalition casualties, but a mourning tone while talking about "civilians", or "resistants" who died under the "unfair" american fire power, THIS IS PURE BIASED REPORTING.
Not that the american media are free of any accusation, between the "YES SIR" fox to the sensasionalist and hypocrit saudi financed CNN, it seems to be pretty hard to get some real news over there.

[HELEX]

So what about the russian Media which is even more critical than the european, the Indian is more critical, the chinese is, the African is, south american is.... rest of the World is?

You are complaining that the world Media is not as biased as the American/Coalition? :cantbeli:

Helex, the question is not about your opinion, because USA couldn`t care less, since they had the power to go for it alon, ethey didn`t have to give anyone any excuse, and the time that russia and Europe bought tothe Saddam regime allowed it to prepare carefully and hide or distribute any kind of weapons it had.
Now the fact medias are not reporting about positive things going on in Irak, the the only subject is now the shamefull abuse of some Irakis POWs, but not the fact that child mortality has been divided by two in only a year.
That when you read "Le Monde" or "the Guardian", you will find full pages about the "plight" of "poor-irakis-under-OCCUPATION", and jubilatory bdy count when reporting coalition casualties, but a mourning tone while talking about "civilians", or "resistants" who died under the "unfair" american fire power, THIS IS PURE BIASED REPORTING.
Not that the american media are free of any accusation, between the "YES SIR" fox to the sensasionalist and hypocrit saudi financed CNN, it seems to be pretty hard to get some real news over there.

And you are not biased? Child mortality is divided by two because the Sanctions are lifted. And not because of the occupation. :cantbeli:

And the Coalition has a higher kill per time ratio than Saddam so far.... :roll:

It seems to be pretty hard for you to find news you like? News are not meant to satisfy anybody!
I read the full american, european and Arabic news Spectrum and construct my opinion on it.

[SeanAshi]

Regardless of your views on the conflict in Iraq, No one can claim that Saddam Hussien complied with International law, ie UN Resolution 1441. From 1998-March 2003

[chopsticks]

And you are not biased? Child mortality is divided by two because the Sanctions are lifted. And not because of the occupation.

Would that number still be divided by two if Sadam was still in power and the sanctions had been lifted? What makes you think he didn't spend that extra money/goods on other things?

[HELEX]

And you are not biased? Child mortality is divided by two because the Sanctions are lifted. And not because of the occupation.

Would that number still be divided by two if Sadam was still in power and the sanctions had been lifted? What makes you think he didn't spend that extra money/goods on other things?

The people would have bought what is needed, do you think Saddam is the general Buyer for all Iraqis? Does your chancellor, President, prime misiter buy everything you need? :cantbeli:

[SwissGrenadier]

in my opinion, taking out saddam was the right thing to do.

in 2003 he, obviously, didn't have any WMD, but who knows maybe today he would be fostering alliances with al qaeda.saddam was known for changing his mind to benefit from a certain situation.

Helex wrote:

What is about all the other Dictators in the Persian Gulf, the american "Allies"....? Kuwait, Saudi Arabia... Why do they belong to the 21st century?

as long as they don't threaten or attack other countries,why should anyone have a problem with them?
many of the terrorists involved in 9 11 were saudis but the country itself isn't launching scud missiles at other countries like irak did...

[weedman]

in 2003 he, obviously, didn't have any WMD, but who knows maybe today he would be fostering alliances with al qaeda.saddam was known for changing his mind to benefit from a certain situation.

They were real ideological enemies, so I personally don't believe this.

Pre-emptive strikes against states able to produce or obtain WMDs? Nuke the world :roll: :lol:

[SwissGrenadier]

in 2003 he, obviously, didn't have any WMD, but who knows maybe today he would be fostering alliances with al qaeda.saddam was known for changing his mind to benefit from a certain situation.

They were real ideological enemies, so I personally don't believe this.

Pre-emptive strikes against states able to produce or obtain WMDs? Nuke the world :roll: :lol:

that's not the point

let's say my country, Switzerland, which is one of the most advanced countries in terms of technology, which could easily produce nuclear weapons,produced them would u think the US would nuke us?

NO THEY WOULDNT and why wouldn't they? because we aren't a country that poses a threat to world peace.we would never threaten holland or greece to attack or even launch some missiles at them like saddam did.

i usually don't like george bush, but the war in irak wether it was because of ideological reasons or the WMD's, was IMHO the right thing to do!

btw i don't like Kerry either

[American Patriot]

I don't like Bush but I can't waste a vote on the Libertarian candidate. Too much is at stake.

[SwissGrenadier]

hey i would like to vote libertarian too woot

unfortunately i don't live in america anymore and didn't manage to get naturalized :(

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Just to get back on topic " Arab + European media spoiling coalition efforts in IRaq?" well are they or is just maybe the pictures of prisoners cuffed to the bars of their cells with womens panties over their heads that is spoiling the coalition efforts in Iraq.
:(

[Argyll]

Just to get back on topic " Arab + European media spoiling coalition efforts in IRaq?" well are they or is just maybe the pictures of prisoners cuffed to the bars of their cells with womens panties over their heads that is spoiling the coalition efforts in Iraq.
:(

Do you think these were "soiled panties"?
I'd like to know where one can purchase a pair of new looking female pants in an prison in Iraq?

[HELEX]

in my opinion, taking out saddam was the right thing to do.

in 2003 he, obviously, didn't have any WMD, but who knows maybe today he would be fostering alliances with al qaeda.saddam was known for changing his mind to benefit from a certain situation.

Helex wrote:

What is about all the other Dictators in the Persian Gulf, the american "Allies"....? Kuwait, Saudi Arabia... Why do they belong to the 21st century?

as long as they don't threaten or attack other countries,why should anyone have a problem with them?
many of the terrorists involved in 9 11 were saudis but the country itself isn't launching scud missiles at other countries like irak did...

What are you talking about? Saddam wasnt threatening anybody since 1992 and firing Missiles at nobody. He was no good one, but that justifies in no way the sudden attack and occupation. And we all know what happened to all reasons for the war... rofl

[Argyll]

in my opinion, taking out saddam was the right thing to do.

in 2003 he, obviously, didn't have any WMD, but who knows maybe today he would be fostering alliances with al qaeda.saddam was known for changing his mind to benefit from a certain situation.

Helex wrote:

What is about all the other Dictators in the Persian Gulf, the american "Allies"....? Kuwait, Saudi Arabia... Why do they belong to the 21st century?

as long as they don't threaten or attack other countries,why should anyone have a problem with them?
many of the terrorists involved in 9 11 were saudis but the country itself isn't launching scud missiles at other countries like irak did...

What are you talking about? Saddam wasnt threatening anybody since 1992 and firing Missiles at nobody. He was no good one, but that justifies in no way the sudden attack and occupation. And we all know what happened to all reasons for the war... rofl

Here we go again! :roll: Do you never get sick of repeating yourself to a forum that just doesn't give a rats ass about what you think?

[SwissGrenadier]

helex be honest, even YOU, have to admit that "the world is better off without him"

[HELEX]

helex be honest, even YOU, have to admit that "the world is better off without him"

Yes, but many iraqis arent sure about that right now... :roll:

[SeanAshi]

****ing Euro pussies takeing over Militaryphotos.net

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Do you think these were "soiled panties"?
I'd like to know where one can purchase a pair of new looking female pants in an prison in Iraq?
I think one of the female guards might play along on that one.
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/WORLD/meast/04/30/iraq.photos/story.point.cbs.jpg

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

f*** Euro pussies takeing over Militaryphotos.net
Nah just some folk that know right from wrong. ;)

[SwissGrenadier]

helex, do you honestly think the iraqis prefer living under saddam's regime????

well the generals etc sure do but does the average iraqi??????

:roll:

[American Patriot]

Plan of action should be to give all offenders 10 years in Leavenworth. The moderate Arab world will rejoice while no real damage would be done since no one cares about a bunch of sadistic NG pogues anyway :lol:

[SeanAshi]

We Americans are unappreciated..we do more to help other people/countries out then the world combined.

[TALOS]

f*** Euro pussies takeing over Militaryphotos.net
Nah just some folk that know right from wrong. ;)

And you guys say americans are arogant, cuz you say its wrong it must be eh? :cantbeli:


We Americans are unappreciated..we do more to help other people/countries out then the world combined.
that can actually be backed up with stats too, and I know some of you wiull say" thats just cuz they have the most money" so what, they have it and everyone asks for it and the US usually shares it in forms of loans and assistance, even countries generally considered enemies..

[Midav]

Lot's of it is making a mountain out of a molehill.

It's ok to ignore that many of the soldiers have built homes, schools and the like.

It's ok to to keep quiet the money for oil bribes that transpired over the years.

Yet, have some bad apples in the military, or not everything work out 100%, man, that's just gotta make the headlines.

Just for the sake of argument, I'm sure that Saddam did a few things for his people, like perhaps build schools and homes, but all we hear about is his abuse of people. Your argument is weak.

Cheers

Ok, point taken. I'm sure most dictators have done some good things. Yet, are you implying the man was a good leader that honestly won his last election with a 99.9% vote....?

That speaks for itself.....

Remember, Saddam controlled his nation. These soldiers are single individuals. Not the US military as a whole.

[Argyll]

helex be honest, even YOU, have to admit that "the world is better off without him"

Yes, but many iraqis arent sure about that right now... :roll:


Have you personaly spoken to people in Iraq?

[ronin2172]

helex be honest, even YOU, have to admit that "the world is better off without him"

Yes, but many iraqis arent sure about that right now... :roll:


Have you personaly spoken to people in Iraq?

whoa there argyll u have the nerve to challenge the infinite wisdom of Helex, a legend in his own mind? The self apointed consicence of the world (no to mention unoffical spokesman for all HK products).

How dare u argyll, the nerve! Now drop and give me 25 push ups! I swear these moderators who have real world experience are really arogant if they think they can tell those armchair diplomats the realities of a situation in which these armchair diplomats r intimately acquainted to thanks to the magic of Sat TV! THE NERVE OF U!!!!!!LMAO rofl

[cut]

We Americans are unappreciated..we do more to help other people/countries out then the world combined.

stop whinging you're as bad as helex

[TALOS]

Lot's of it is making a mountain out of a molehill.

It's ok to ignore that many of the soldiers have built homes, schools and the like.

It's ok to to keep quiet the money for oil bribes that transpired over the years.

Yet, have some bad apples in the military, or not everything work out 100%, man, that's just gotta make the headlines.

Just for the sake of argument, I'm sure that Saddam did a few things for his people, like perhaps build schools and homes, but all we hear about is his abuse of people. Your argument is weak.

Cheers

three lions, the US and coalition have done much work to rebuild, the work that hasnt progressed has been due to insurgents tryin to mess things up, and when they do all sorts of people on this forum take great delight in it. :cantbeli:
As for the abuse, there have been some abuses but the administration got on it with investigations right away and they will deal with it, in old style Iraq Saddam and his administration encouraged and demanded the abuses which were substantially worse then this.

So his argument isnt the weak one.

[usa320]

OKAY THATS IT...im gonna settle a few arguments bluntly, right now.

1. The US Does do more than any country as far as humanitarian aid goes. Im not going to argue about us being underapreciated, im just going to tell the facts here. In 2002 alone, the US gave out some 14.2 Billion dollars in foreign aid. That means medical, welfare, food, infrastructure, security diplomatic and housing programs. I reckon Japan gives out the second largest amount of Foreign aid.

2. The war in Iraq, as stated by the United Nations, was justified. Iraq failed to compley with UN resolutions 686,687,688,706,707,1051, 1060, 1115,1134,1137,1154,1194,1205,1284,1441,1454. Iraq defied the UN's resolutions for a decade. They gave monetary and moral support to terrorists. They slaughtered their own people, they abused the Oil For Food programme and posed a growing danger. There were weapons tagged and accounted for in 2002 that were gone months later. Stuff that the UN knew was there was no longer there. Proof of destruction would have changed everything. Unconditional cooperation with UNMOVIC, including the use of U-2 spyplanes, access to leadership compounds and interviews with officers and scientists would have changed everything. Had Saddam Hussein and his two sons left Iraq on March 18, things would have been very different. But they failed to comply, and after years of playing rope a dope someone finally had the balls to uphold the UN resolutions. Over the past decades the UN's power as the world body as drastically decreased because of its inability to uphold its own demands.

[TALOS]

OKAY THATS IT...im gonna settle a few arguments bluntly, right now.

1. The US Does do more than any country as far as humanitarian aid goes. Im not going to argue about us being underapreciated, im just going to tell the facts here. In 2002 alone, the US gave out some 14.2 Billion dollars in foreign aid. That means medical, welfare, food, infrastructure, security diplomatic and housing programs. I reckon Japan gives out the second largest amount of Foreign aid.

2. The war in Iraq, as stated by the United Nations, was justified. Iraq failed to compley with UN resolutions 686,687,688,706,707,1051, 1060, 1115,1134,1137,1154,1194,1205,1284,1441,1454. Iraq defied the UN's resolutions for a decade. They gave monetary and moral support to terrorists. They slaughtered their own people, they abused the Oil For Food programme and posed a growing danger. There were weapons tagged and accounted for in 2002 that were gone months later. Stuff that the UN knew was there was no longer there. Proof of destruction would have changed everything. Unconditional cooperation with UNMOVIC, including the use of U-2 spyplanes, access to leadership compounds and interviews with officers and scientists would have changed everything. Had Saddam Hussein and his two sons left Iraq on March 18, things would have been very different. But they failed to comply, and after years of playing rope a dope someone finally had the balls to uphold the UN resolutions. Over the past decades the UN's power as the world body as drastically decreased because of its inability to uphold its own demands.

Thank you! ;)

[HELEX]

helex be honest, even YOU, have to admit that "the world is better off without him"

Yes, but many iraqis arent sure about that right now... :roll:


Have you personaly spoken to people in Iraq?

And do you Argyll really believe what those you had spoken to told you? You know what "making good weather" means? Can you see in their heads? :D

[Mark Sman]

The actual numbers for foreign aid are very hard to quantify. Here in America, a large proportion of aid comes from private sources. These numbers aren't tracked the same way as government sources, nor should they be.

I think the Japanese may actually be the largest source of government delivered foreign aid. Even that number is hard to track and open to interpretation.

Some folks have espoused the opinion that Iraq would be better off without the American occupation.

OK, follow up question. Would Iraq be better off without the insurgency?

That one was easy.

Other folks have expressed the opinion that Iraq would be better off with UN forces moving in and helping out. Fair enough.

But the folks in Iraq, on all sides, will beleive it when they hear the world's boots on the ground. Not while their leaders are jabbering at home.

The world is on formal notice. Its gut check time. You can lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.

I know which one most of the world has picked now. Do you think that will change?

[Luxembourger]

The US Does do more than any country as far as humanitarian aid goes. Im not going to argue about us being underapreciated, im just going to tell the facts here. In 2002 alone, the US gave out some 14.2 Billion dollars in foreign aid.

exactly, but those who don t like so much the US for any reasons don t want to hear that , because for them truth hurts and only if the US and the UK does something wrong you hear from them because they see it in the media and jump to conclusions .

they are blind , anti americanism is like a disease in the mind.

Hellex can you prove me that Saddam had destroyed all his Wmds till the invasion or that he didn t have anymore. While the colalition can t right now find them , there is no proof at all that Saddam destroyed them .

[Mark Sman]

I think Saddam ordered everything questionable he had destroyed in those oil fires that ringed Bagdad for days during the invasion. Records, materials, people he wanted gone. If he was a real bastard the crews that did it got feed into the same fires.

Personally I think he was a real bastard.

The only hope of finding WMDs will be if some turn up in the hands of groups that were cut off from central command.

Those weapons could turn up inside or outside Iraq. Will the world beleive it if they do? Maybe. Especially if it can turned into the U.S.'s fault somehow.

Hell if I was some evil f'n terrorist I might fake up a WMD to look like it did come from Iraq, even if it didn't. Especially if the occupation force starts to really quiet things down in Iraq.

[-Max2-]

The US Does do more than any country as far as humanitarian aid goes. Im not going to argue about us being underapreciated, im just going to tell the facts here. In 2002 alone, the US gave out some 14.2 Billion dollars in foreign aid.

exactly, but those who don t like so much the US for any reasons don t want to hear that , because for them truth hurts and only if the US and the UK does something wrong you hear from them because they see it in the media and jump to conclusions .

Actually, the EU give more money in foreign aid than the US... ;)

EU foreign aid in 2003 (US$m): 36 825 (0.35% of GNI)
US foreign aid in 2003 (US$m): 15 791 (0.14% of GNI)

It is more than double...

source: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/61/31504039.pdf

[mustamato]

Actually, the EU give more money in foreign aid than the US... ;)

EU foreign aid in 2003 (US$m): 36 825 (0.35% of GNI)
US foreign aid in 2003 (US$m): 15 791 (0.14% of GNI)

It is more than double...

source: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/61/31504039.pdf

Of course US gives much aid seen in cash because it´s a large country with many
tax-payers. But the U.S. is the smallest contributor of foreign aid among major
donor governments in terms of national wealth (GNP). According to the Organization
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the top donors in relation to
GNP in 2001 were Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Sweden.

http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/action_foreignaid.html

Also I have my doubts about the US aid, when they give cash to countries like Israel,
it´s not like there are any famine victims there. And Israel (followed by Egypt) is
the countries that get most US aid.

[Pyle]

the main reason why europeans are against the war in iraq is simply because the US ruined their party. iraq and arab states who hate america are the milking cows of these european nations...special mention to France...before the sanctions was lifted france was the one who benefited the most with cheap oil, on top of that they are the main contractor for military and other infrastructure in iraq. they also sell military products to us-uk friendly arab states...just like the US they sell weapons to good and bad guys..its a business..i europe was pissed because they just lost another client.....and not those self righteous mumbo-jumbo they are blabbing about....its really hard to be second to none..and so the saying goes.....

[Argyll]

helex be honest, even YOU, have to admit that "the world is better off without him"

Yes, but many iraqis arent sure about that right now... :roll:


Have you personaly spoken to people in Iraq?

And do you Argyll really believe what those you had spoken to told you? You know what "making good weather" means? Can you see in their heads? :D
Tell you what HELEX why don't you become the ruler of the whole foking world ,seems you know everything there is to know,only thing you don't know is when to keep you stupid mouth shut,I have talked to Iraqi's involved in projects such as the rebuilding of Babylon,the irrigation and regeneration of the Marshes in the South,the distribution of Medical aid,and when they explain to me their passion for their work,and their hopes for the future............you're foking right I listen,respect and believe them,which is something you constantly criticise me about,but oh no you know better..............hail HELEX the Oracle of the World.
When I speak to a Col. in the old Iraqi AF who flew Mig29's, every morning who has lost more than you could possibly imagine,or suffer yourself,and he tells me all he wants to do is fly again,you can see it in his eyes,the pride he felt,on how he is glad that Saddam,and the regime that gave him quality of life,has gone,so that his people can rebuild their lives,without fear of the secret police,without fear of displeasing the Party,without fear that his children will be taken in the night by the Fedayeen .................then you better foking believe it I believe him,and you know what,his wish to return to flying duties is shortly to be fulfilled,and that is done through the company I'm contracted to.

once again you have contributed nothing by assinine remarks to a descent topic

[henksmoeder]

word, mustamato

[catdat]

Getting back to the thread here...

I'd like to make the point (again) that I think some of the Arab media are possibly closer to the insurgents than might be realized. How does a photographer consistently be right there every time a Humvee, truck, civilan massacre, eid incident occur?

Don't give me the lame excuse that he's Iraqi therefore he knows where to be.

Here's a link - look at the incidents and the dates. How can someone be at all thses places? What part in these crimes might this so called photographer have?

http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=news_photos&p=Khalid+Mohammed

This guy is responsible for more front page photos than anyone else. amazing.

catdat

[mustamato]

Getting back to the thread here...

I'd like to make the point (again) that I think some of the Arab media are possibly closer to the insurgents than might be realized. How does a photographer consistently be right there every time a Humvee, truck, civilan massacre, eid incident occur?

Don't give me the lame excuse that he's Iraqi therefore he knows where to be.

Here's a link - look at the incidents and the dates. How can someone be at all thses places? What part in these crimes might this so called photographer have?

http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=news_photos&p=Khalid+Mohammed

This guy is responsible for more front page photos than anyone else. amazing.

catdat

Hint: BOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!

(The sound of a explosion in case you didn´t get that).

Hint: RRRRRRRRMMMMMMRRRRRMMMMMMMMMMRRRRMMMM

(The sound of a old car driving in 150 km/h to the crime scene).

_______________________

Khalid is a good photographer by the way

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040508/capt.bag11105081410.iraq__bag111.jpg

[Argyll]

Getting back to the thread here...

I'd like to make the point (again) that I think some of the Arab media are possibly closer to the insurgents than might be realized. How does a photographer consistently be right there every time a Humvee, truck, civilan massacre, eid incident occur?

Don't give me the lame excuse that he's Iraqi therefore he knows where to be.

Here's a link - look at the incidents and the dates. How can someone be at all thses places? What part in these crimes might this so called photographer have?

http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=news_photos&p=Khalid+Mohammed

This guy is responsible for more front page photos than anyone else. amazing.

catdat

Hint: BOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!

(The sound of a explosion in case you didn´t get that).

Hint: RRRRRRRRMMMMMMRRRRRMMMMMMMMMMRRRRMMMM

(The sound of a old car driving in 150 km/h to the crime scene).

_______________________

Khalid is a good photographer by the way

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040508/capt.bag11105081410.iraq__bag111.jpg

Yeah right Musty they don't drive at that speed mate otherwise they'd get "brassed" by a US convoy.The only people who drive at those speed are CP teams and insurgent trying to get away! ;)

Oh I've seen the press perched on a flyover when a device has just gone off...............telepathy..........or colusion?

[catdat]

mustamato wrote:

Hint: RRRRRRRRMMMMMMRRRRRMMMMMMMMMMRRRRMMMM

(The sound of a old car driving in 150 km/h to the crime scene).


Yea mustamato I just fell off the bus yesterday. You can explain it that way to a bunch of kids who's idea of driving across town is whatever they experience in their own western fantasy world. I think Khalid is a piece of excrement that works with the insurgents so that he can bring you these "fantastic" pictures of burning Humvees and people stringing up dead americans on bridges.

Hint: SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
(the sound the snake makes as it slithers upstairs to the roof with the insurgents to watch them blow up americans)

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040426/capt.bag10404261055.iraq__bag104.jpg

[usa320]

EU foreign aid

Saying the EU donated more money to foreign aid than the united states is like saying that NATO gave more military aid then Russia. Id hope more then a dozen countries would be able to put out more than one country.

BOttom Line is...the US gives out more European aid than any other COUNTRY. The EU aint a country.

[HELEX]

EU foreign aid

Saying the EU donated more money to foreign aid than the united states is like saying that NATO gave more military aid then Russia. Id hope more then a dozen countries would be able to put out more than one country.

BOttom Line is...the US gives out more European aid than any other COUNTRY. The EU aint a country.

But measured on Population or GNP the USA is far behind all european Nations..... :roll:

You are stating that a group of 5 People hat spends 5 coins is more generous than a group of 2 People that gives 4 coins... :cantbeli:

Or should I do that example with Apples for you?

[Luxembourger]

When I speak to a Col. in the old Iraqi AF who flew Mig29's, every morning who has lost more than you could possibly imagine,or suffer yourself,and he tells me all he wants to do is fly again,you can see it in his eyes,the pride he felt,on how he is glad that Saddam,and the regime that gave him quality of life,has gone,so that his people can rebuild their lives,without fear of the secret police,without fear of displeasing the Party,without fear that his children will be taken in the night by the Fedayeen .................then you better foking believe it I believe him,and you know what,his wish to return to flying duties is shortly to be fulfilled,and that is done through the company I'm contracted to.


and that s exactly why I blame the media they don t tell us that stuff or make simple interviews with iraqis who want to build up together with the colaition a new future .

The media just interviews Saddam supporters who tell their hate towards the colaition , making us viewers think that every iraqi is anti coalition ,

THe media there they see the coallition efforts rebuilding the country, why don t they show those things ?????? don t they want to let us know europeans the good stuff , oh yeah of course if they would show the good things going on in iraq we woudl consider it as PENTAGON or MOD propaganda.

[-Max2-]

Saying the EU donated more money to foreign aid than the united states is like saying that NATO gave more military aid then Russia. Id hope more then a dozen countries would be able to put out more than one country.

BOttom Line is...the US gives out more European aid than any other COUNTRY.

The US give only 0.14% of its GNI on foreign aid compared to 0.35% for European countries. Some countries like Luxembourg and the Netherlands even spend 0.80% of their GNI on foreign aid...


The EU aint a country.

Almost one...

[He219]

Interestingly enough, European Governments like Germany and France are also very generous in their 10% Church Taxes requirement collocated by the State!

http://www.dw-world.de/english/0,3367,1432_A_1168497_1_A,00.html


I suppose the various interpretations make Europeans more humanitarian than Americans. (*whips cracking in the background*)
;)

[esl]

No justification going to war ever. THis is actions of politian who see easy kill. Germans say 'war is politic by other means'. But politics 'art of comprimise'. What you gain must be worth cost. Is it worth cost? What was reason for war? Could it achieve by other means?

Reasons for war are given to people in form of 'pablum' [baby food]. Called 'manufacture of concent'. REasons only important to fool general public.Polititian see people as sheep who will believe anything told. THis called propaganda. media most important tool here. Lesson. never believe any thing politican say.speak out of corner of mouth.

WMD reason . None found, still looking :roll: . Reason for abuse of prisoners .to get WMD information "use all possible means" say Rummsfeld . German in WW-II say "just following orders".

Connection to Alquada . none before war , now breeding ground. America stupid cause they bring target right to Alquada back door and paint big target sign on each man. Make it very easy to attack . America destroy iraq but not Alqada. America kill iraq people and look bad while Alquada go around world and kill. America shoot wrong target. Alquada not country so how can you make normal war ?


Threat to neighbour. Iraq army collapse on first week.only 15% soldiers show up to fight. Most equipement not use. Little threat even to neighbour. No threat to USA.

History of Iraqi. Country not exist in 19th century but made by British to mine oil. No country jusdt tribes and only way to rule trhough massacare. British do this in 1922. Saddam do this since 1970s. America do this in 2003/4 ? Since only tribe history , how can democracy work? religion mean more to Iraq people than Freedom and democrasy .

No fly zone = prison for Iraq , but only for other tribe not Saddam tribe. UN stupid , should make No fly zone = no army zone after 1991. Patrol by UN troop and give aid to tribe. UN fault. America tell Shia tribe to raise up but leave people to die in 1992. This is abuse ? Shia tribe don't have reason to trust AMerica any more.UN fault and Bush fault!

Media fault for bad america image? If america not in Iraq , no bad report any more. If bad report problem , get out of Iraq! Funny that media is important to 'manufacture concent' to go to war , but end up anti war. How do we explain ? ;)

[Mark Sman]

Of course, once again, the massive amount of aid private citizens in the U.S. gives out goes overlooked.

[Truthsayer]

Of course, once again, the massive amount of aid private citizens in the U.S. gives out goes overlooked.

Yes, no other country ever has any citisens giving private aid.

[usa320]

No justification going to war ever

Iraq failed to comply with UN resolutions 686,687,688,706,707,1051, 1060, 1115,1134,1137,1154,1194,1205,1284,1441,1454.

Here is UN resolution 687

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/undocs/gopher/s91/4

And 1441.

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/undocs/scres/2002/res1441e.pdf

The Iraqi government, under the leadership of Saddam Hussein failed to comply with the demands of some 19 UN security council resolutions. Iraq failed to comply with measure that were unanimously approved by the International community.

Iraq knew the consequences of failing to comply with the United Nations mandates, and they failed to act upon them.

[Mark Sman]

Yes, no other country ever has any citisens giving private aid.

Oh you're right, how could I have missed that a citizen somewhere else might have given money. Thank you for pointing that out.

Its a cultural thing in the US to give more money to charity than the freakin government.

[esl]

No justification going to war ever

Iraq failed to comply with UN resolutions 686,687,688,706,707,1051, 1060, 1115,1134,1137,1154,1194,1205,1284,1441,1454.

.

These are excuses to go to war.Legal has nothing to do with war. Again that is pablum for masses or propaganda. Looks like it worked? :roll:

[rokus2595]

No justification going to war ever

Iraq failed to comply with UN resolutions 686,687,688,706,707,1051, 1060, 1115,1134,1137,1154,1194,1205,1284,1441,1454.

Here is UN resolution 687

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/undocs/gopher/s91/4

And 1441.

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/undocs/scres/2002/res1441e.pdf

The Iraqi government, under the leadership of Saddam Hussein failed to comply with the demands of some 19 UN security council resolutions. Iraq failed to comply with measure that were unanimously approved by the International community.

Iraq knew the consequences of failing to comply with the United Nations mandates, and they failed to act upon them.the fact that iraq was failing to comply with UN resolutions didn't grant the US the right to attack Iraq.

[catdat]

I just saw Hamill interviewed on FOX. Thank god he got out Ok and was able to escape. The FOX news correspondent interviewing him asked about the first time he was interviewed after his convoy was assaulted. Remember him pissed off sitting in the back of a SUV with that insurgent?

She asked "why were you so angry?"

"I was angry that that film crew was there so fast after that happened. I thought they must have known it was going to happen and I just wanted to get away from them (the film crew)".


Keep doubting.

catdat

[TALOS]

No justification going to war ever

Iraq failed to comply with UN resolutions 686,687,688,706,707,1051, 1060, 1115,1134,1137,1154,1194,1205,1284,1441,1454.

.

These are excuses to go to war.Legal has nothing to do with war. Again that is pablum for masses or propaganda. Looks like it worked? :roll:
ESL, belief that there is never a need for war is just an excuse to overlook actions of countries that contravene societal rules. We all have an obligation regardless of borders. Saddam ignored the rules.
BTW... I like this article, amazing that so many peeps are willing to ignore it. http://www.navyseals.com/community/articles/article.cfm?id=3482