My apologies!
here is the link:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/wecontrolamerica/hornet.html
Stan - makes mistakes every now and then
here is the link:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/wecontrolamerica/hornet.html
Stan - makes mistakes every now and then
Maxwell said:
Actually, as soon as I posted that message, I realized it wasn't really true. Most of the participants in this discussion (from Western Europe, primarily) have stated that they are against the war, period. They have decided that the war is wrong, and I don't see a UN resolution changing their minds. In that sense, they pretty much agree with what I'm hearing from my neighbors.
Suppose, as I fear is pretty likely, Chirac decides that the contracts French companies will get in a post-Saddam Iraq are more valuable than those that they'll lose when Saddam falls, Putin gets promised a free hand in Chechnya, and a second UN resolution goes through. Then what? Will Western European opinion swing around to Bush's position? Will German troops fight alongside their Indonesian brothers in fullfiling the call of the world's people for a free Iraq? Will radical imams in Pakistan stop saying this is a war of American aggression against Islam, because the UN security council represents all of mankind speaking as one? If the war triggers a wave of attacks against civilian targets in Europe and Australia, will people say that it's a small price to pay supporting the UN, man's best hope for peace? Or will they curse their governments for getting involved in a foolish US adventure?
Maybe I'm being too cynical -- maybe everyone who says they would support a war with UN approval really would. But my guess many of those who are pushing a UN solution will dismiss the security council as a bunch of US stooges the second war is authorized. And if you won't believe the UN when they say yes, why should we believe them when they say no?
Well, yeah. That's what makes this loss of faith in the UN so worrying. But that doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
A couple of things to keep in mind: first, all media is biased. Because you haven't grown up with it, it's much easier to see the bias in foreign media than in your own. But trust me, the UK press is biased too. And second, the US media that you have access to overseas tends to be the big corporate stuff, like CNN or Time magazine, which isn't really representative of full range of the public debate going on here. That, plus the fact the the European press consistently portrays Americans as a bunch of fat, ignorant rubes, may be creating the impression the US public opinion is more monolithic and less nuanced than it actually is.
I guess that would make the best of a terrible situation. But the questions remain: what happens if there isn't a broad coalition? Does that mean the right thing to do is nothing? And if even if there is, does that means it's now not all about oil? Those are the questions that keep me awake at night.
I wrote: "I really haven't a clue whether Saddam has WMD and the intention of using them against the West"
Phil, I see what you are saying. I am not sure there is any historic evidence of SH threatening the West. This has been the basis of Bush and Blair's justification: that the West is threatened. However, with no clear link to terrorists and no clear motivation on SH's part I find this justification hard to buy in to.
Phil, I see what you are saying. I am not sure there is any historic evidence of SH threatening the West. This has been the basis of Bush and Blair's justification: that the West is threatened. However, with no clear link to terrorists and no clear motivation on SH's part I find this justification hard to buy in to.
THE BIG ONES GET AWAY
To connect to my first post in this thread,
I'd like to quote Buffy Sainte-Marie once more:
/halo - thinks THE BIG ONES GET AWAY
- and the little ones take the suffering AS USUAL
To connect to my first post in this thread,
I'd like to quote Buffy Sainte-Marie once more:
BUFFY SAINTE-MARIE - a legend in her own time
/halo - thinks THE BIG ONES GET AWAY
- and the little ones take the suffering AS USUAL
There are so many posts/day now that it is hard to keep up!
I notice Rumsfeld is getting quite shirty today with several countries and trying to scare everyone with the "terrorist threat".
One thing that doesn't seem to have had much discussion in this thread yet is why this terrorist threat, which 9/11 does prove, exists at all.
I do not believe, as some of the US officials suggest, that there is some sort of "evil" out there that cannot be reasoned with and that is totally unreasonable. Perhaps Bush thinks the US electorate are this gullible but I'm sure they aren't. Terrorism is not an acceptable way to behave but this doesn't mean the reasons fueling it are not true or just.
It seesm to me there are some actions needed to address some of the reasons behind recent terrorism. It also seems to me that these actions do not include invading Iraq and, on the contrary, invading Iraq may add much more fuel to terrorist motivation.
Leaving all the rhetoric aside, which I think is now failing very badly indeed to pursuade all our electorates, I am afraid that this intended invasion is missing the priorities and missing a big opportunity to relief some of the Middle East issues and for the US to show it is truely interested in international needs and not just national needs.
I notice Rumsfeld is getting quite shirty today with several countries and trying to scare everyone with the "terrorist threat".
One thing that doesn't seem to have had much discussion in this thread yet is why this terrorist threat, which 9/11 does prove, exists at all.
I do not believe, as some of the US officials suggest, that there is some sort of "evil" out there that cannot be reasoned with and that is totally unreasonable. Perhaps Bush thinks the US electorate are this gullible but I'm sure they aren't. Terrorism is not an acceptable way to behave but this doesn't mean the reasons fueling it are not true or just.
It seesm to me there are some actions needed to address some of the reasons behind recent terrorism. It also seems to me that these actions do not include invading Iraq and, on the contrary, invading Iraq may add much more fuel to terrorist motivation.
Leaving all the rhetoric aside, which I think is now failing very badly indeed to pursuade all our electorates, I am afraid that this intended invasion is missing the priorities and missing a big opportunity to relief some of the Middle East issues and for the US to show it is truely interested in international needs and not just national needs.
traderbam said:
In your opinion, what might be some of the just reasons fueling terrorism, and how might the USA and/or the world community relieve these issues?
I should start by stating I am no expert on the history of the Middle East. One thing that I am aware of and several of my educated friends is that the Israeli/Palastine disaster is a festering wound. I understand there are outstanding UN resolutions requiring action by these two; one of which is for Israel to stop/reduce its invasion of Palastine. What about sorting these things out as a priority and demonstrating to the world that self-interest is subordinate to world interest.
I know the standard answer is to say: "true, but there is no way the US will ever abide by those resolutions because of pro-Israeli lobbyists and voters, so let's be realistic and accept this inconsistency".
Perhaps we shouldn't jsut accept this. Perhaps the battle needs to be fought at home before being taken to the Middle East.
Like I say, I'm no expert. But I know this reasoning is very widespread and deserves to be debated.
I know the standard answer is to say: "true, but there is no way the US will ever abide by those resolutions because of pro-Israeli lobbyists and voters, so let's be realistic and accept this inconsistency".
Perhaps we shouldn't jsut accept this. Perhaps the battle needs to be fought at home before being taken to the Middle East.
Like I say, I'm no expert. But I know this reasoning is very widespread and deserves to be debated.
A lot of interesting things have been said in recent postings. For
instance, this is the first time I have seen any figures of the
opinon of the american people. There has been figures presented
for a lot of countries, but for the US, my impression from the
media here is simply that there is a majority for a war, which
obviously is a somewhat coarse conclusion.
So this leads to what Rob pointed out above: what picture
does the media give us about it all. Just as Rob said, this is
likely to change from country to country, and our beliefs about
the media picture in other countries is also likely to be biased.
Hence, I think it is interesting to hear what the media actually
does report elsewhere, not the least in the US. My own
experience from a number of visits to the US is that it is very
difficult to find newspapers or news on TV that bothers much
about what happens outside the US. I am sure I could find
newspapers that does, and that there are TV channels
providing a different news coverage, if I had tried hard enough
to find these. However, if it is so difficult for a foreign visitor to
get such news, will the average american bother to buy those
newspapers and watch those news channels? Some of you will,
I am sure, but what media picture does the average american
get?
For instance, there are many pieces of news in swedish media
reagarding this topic which I have not found anything about
when checking the CNN and BBC World websites. Maybe I simply
didin't find it, maybe some of it is wrong, or maybe some of isn't
reported by these media for some reason.
Some minor examples, but nonetheless interesting, from
the media over here:
- The copy of Picassos Guernica in the UN building was covered
by a sheet of cloth when Powell went there last wednesday. This
can be considered censorship of art, perhaps. In any case,
somebody was obviously very worried that seeing Powell and
Guernica on the TV simultaneously might give give the "wrong"
signals.
- For the first time ever, the majority of norwegians are for
joining the EU. A norwegian professor said that he believed one
of the factors was that many norwegians do not trust Bush and
the motives for the war, and want to distance themselves from
the US. (This is obviously just a speculation, though, not a fact).
- It has been suggested that the main motive for a war might
be that the US wants a permanent base in the middle east and
since Iraq is a secularized country, it will be much easier (after
a war, that is) to have that base in Iraq than in any other country
in the region.
- There has been a meeting in Europe between US and Iran,
discussing what will happen in the case of a war. It is believed
that the US wanted to make sure that Iran does not try to
invade any part of Iraq. Similar discussion are being held with
Syria, but that is not quite as remarkable. There are also
discussion with Turkey that are causing problems. Turkey seems
to demand that they be allowed to send in their own troop in
norhtern Iraq, which could cause serious problems with other
countries in the regions.
instance, this is the first time I have seen any figures of the
opinon of the american people. There has been figures presented
for a lot of countries, but for the US, my impression from the
media here is simply that there is a majority for a war, which
obviously is a somewhat coarse conclusion.
So this leads to what Rob pointed out above: what picture
does the media give us about it all. Just as Rob said, this is
likely to change from country to country, and our beliefs about
the media picture in other countries is also likely to be biased.
Hence, I think it is interesting to hear what the media actually
does report elsewhere, not the least in the US. My own
experience from a number of visits to the US is that it is very
difficult to find newspapers or news on TV that bothers much
about what happens outside the US. I am sure I could find
newspapers that does, and that there are TV channels
providing a different news coverage, if I had tried hard enough
to find these. However, if it is so difficult for a foreign visitor to
get such news, will the average american bother to buy those
newspapers and watch those news channels? Some of you will,
I am sure, but what media picture does the average american
get?
For instance, there are many pieces of news in swedish media
reagarding this topic which I have not found anything about
when checking the CNN and BBC World websites. Maybe I simply
didin't find it, maybe some of it is wrong, or maybe some of isn't
reported by these media for some reason.
Some minor examples, but nonetheless interesting, from
the media over here:
- The copy of Picassos Guernica in the UN building was covered
by a sheet of cloth when Powell went there last wednesday. This
can be considered censorship of art, perhaps. In any case,
somebody was obviously very worried that seeing Powell and
Guernica on the TV simultaneously might give give the "wrong"
signals.
- For the first time ever, the majority of norwegians are for
joining the EU. A norwegian professor said that he believed one
of the factors was that many norwegians do not trust Bush and
the motives for the war, and want to distance themselves from
the US. (This is obviously just a speculation, though, not a fact).
- It has been suggested that the main motive for a war might
be that the US wants a permanent base in the middle east and
since Iraq is a secularized country, it will be much easier (after
a war, that is) to have that base in Iraq than in any other country
in the region.
- There has been a meeting in Europe between US and Iran,
discussing what will happen in the case of a war. It is believed
that the US wanted to make sure that Iran does not try to
invade any part of Iraq. Similar discussion are being held with
Syria, but that is not quite as remarkable. There are also
discussion with Turkey that are causing problems. Turkey seems
to demand that they be allowed to send in their own troop in
norhtern Iraq, which could cause serious problems with other
countries in the regions.
Christer said:
Alas, we are insular. There probably are not 2% of the population who could name the leader of 4 countries outside the US.
There is one country whose opinion matters at all to the average American-England. And most of us will refuse to publicly acknowledge even that.
Christer said:
New York Times, Feb 5 (and just about everywhere else).
This I didn't know, but to be fair I also read the main Dutch papers and I didn't see it reported there either. Besides, it's sort of a local political issue, no? Have you been following the latest moves in the water battles between California and Arizona?
The US already has permanent bases in the middle east. But I get your meaning, and the possibility of establishing a moderate, secular, democratic, generally pro-Western government in Iraq is widely reported here as a possible positive outcome of a war.
Front page, today's Washington Post.
Thanks Rob, I didn't expect to get such detailed reports, but
thats excellent. Then we know that at least these things are
reported on both sides, in some major media. Although I didn't
mean it as that, it served as a test of the media coverage
coherence.
thats excellent. Then we know that at least these things are
reported on both sides, in some major media. Although I didn't
mean it as that, it served as a test of the media coverage
coherence.
Christer said:
Sorry if I seem testy -- this is a pet peeve of mine.
There's this widely held presumption that Americans are ignorant, and in fact that this ignorance is at the root of a lot of the world's problems. I've lived and taught in both the US and Europe, and I've seen nothing that makes me think that Americans are substantially more ignorant that Europeans, or anyone else for that matter. Maybe it's true, though I don't know how you could even measure such thing anyway. But just because "everyone knows" Americans are insular and ill-informed doesn't make it so. And I know I'm not going to convince anyone, given the number of ignorant Americans running around "proving" the rule, but stop to think sometime: how many ignorant non-Americans have you met in your life?
Rob:
I am an American citizen, and have lived here all my life. I can't say how insular or non-insular your average European is. I would only ask if you would disagree with my previous statement: "There probably are not 2% of the [American] population who could name the leader of 4 countries outside the US."?
In 1980, when he was running for President, Ronald Reagan was asked by a reporter about a statement by then French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing. Ronald Reagan asked the reporter who d'Estaing was.
This was reported in the press, but no big issue was made of it. I mentioned it to a few of my friends, and they all said they didn't care about France.
I do not know how well the average non-French European would do when asked the question, but there you have it. Americans don't spend a lot of time becoming aware of other nations unless some big issue pops up in the news.
Whether the Europeans are any better, I will leave to others to answer.
Thank you for defending my countrymen on this issue, Rob-I believe you mentioned that you were originally from Holland-but facts are facts.
I am an American citizen, and have lived here all my life. I can't say how insular or non-insular your average European is. I would only ask if you would disagree with my previous statement: "There probably are not 2% of the [American] population who could name the leader of 4 countries outside the US."?
In 1980, when he was running for President, Ronald Reagan was asked by a reporter about a statement by then French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing. Ronald Reagan asked the reporter who d'Estaing was.
This was reported in the press, but no big issue was made of it. I mentioned it to a few of my friends, and they all said they didn't care about France.
I do not know how well the average non-French European would do when asked the question, but there you have it. Americans don't spend a lot of time becoming aware of other nations unless some big issue pops up in the news.
Whether the Europeans are any better, I will leave to others to answer.
Thank you for defending my countrymen on this issue, Rob-I believe you mentioned that you were originally from Holland-but facts are facts.
INSULAR.
Hi,
From business experience and travelling I can only confirm your view that the larger, bigger countries such as France,Britain and Germany tend to be more insular than the smaller countries.
This is essentially rather normal in that the major countries are geographically large,economically self-sufficient and most of them are more or less linguistically isolated.
With the advent of the internet things are rapidly changing...witness the number of German and French members who are very fluent in English (the web language par excellence).
Ten years ago, in the eyes of a Frenchmen the world ended at his country's frontiers,same goes for the Germans and... the British are slowly realising they're not the "Empire" they once used to be.
Generalizing. there is a trend towards globalisation and we can only hope this brings people and cultures across the globe closer together.
/Pace.
Hi,
From business experience and travelling I can only confirm your view that the larger, bigger countries such as France,Britain and Germany tend to be more insular than the smaller countries.
This is essentially rather normal in that the major countries are geographically large,economically self-sufficient and most of them are more or less linguistically isolated.
With the advent of the internet things are rapidly changing...witness the number of German and French members who are very fluent in English (the web language par excellence).
Ten years ago, in the eyes of a Frenchmen the world ended at his country's frontiers,same goes for the Germans and... the British are slowly realising they're not the "Empire" they once used to be.
Generalizing. there is a trend towards globalisation and we can only hope this brings people and cultures across the globe closer together.
/Pace.
Thanks to all for some great posts, arguments, comments etc... while I have been sleeping!
In the news this morning:
More comment on our American friends having their Terror Alert level raised to "Orange" status - the second highest level of alert.
In Australia, Every household and mailing address has been sent out a terrorism pack, basically a handbook with a list of important phone numbers and a fridge magnet (?) telling us what to do in the event of a terrorist attack. (I have decided to start spying on my neighbors. They play funny music. 😉 ) Many Australians have opted to "return to sender" the package, including prominent public figures.
While I certainly do not underestimate the possibility of an attack, I cannot help feeling that this $15 - 20 million dollar mailout is designed more to swing popular opinion in favour of a war with Iraq.
Colin Powell's recent "light and sound show" for the security council tried to establish a clear link with Al-Qaeda terrorists and Iraq, when top intelligence officials in the US and in Europe have been desperately looking for evidence of a link, but finding nothing to date.
In the absence of facts, It would seem that the Governments of both the US and Australia would prefer to scare their people into agreeing with a war on Iraq.
My Prediction? Some "terrorist" incident in Australia in the next few weeks, just to pull the doubters into line...😉
In the news this morning:
More comment on our American friends having their Terror Alert level raised to "Orange" status - the second highest level of alert.
In Australia, Every household and mailing address has been sent out a terrorism pack, basically a handbook with a list of important phone numbers and a fridge magnet (?) telling us what to do in the event of a terrorist attack. (I have decided to start spying on my neighbors. They play funny music. 😉 ) Many Australians have opted to "return to sender" the package, including prominent public figures.
While I certainly do not underestimate the possibility of an attack, I cannot help feeling that this $15 - 20 million dollar mailout is designed more to swing popular opinion in favour of a war with Iraq.
Colin Powell's recent "light and sound show" for the security council tried to establish a clear link with Al-Qaeda terrorists and Iraq, when top intelligence officials in the US and in Europe have been desperately looking for evidence of a link, but finding nothing to date.
In the absence of facts, It would seem that the Governments of both the US and Australia would prefer to scare their people into agreeing with a war on Iraq.
My Prediction? Some "terrorist" incident in Australia in the next few weeks, just to pull the doubters into line...😉
EEEEEKKKK....
Hi,
That's the scariest idea....mass manipulation.
Better not to start posts on that one.🙄
Cheers,😉
Hi,
That's the scariest idea....mass manipulation.
Better not to start posts on that one.🙄
Cheers,😉
Rob,
I don't think I said that americans are more ignorant,
but merely asked about the media coverage. I also left open
the possibility that it might be the swedish coverage that is
wrong, biased or otherwise bad. Except for clear things, such as
Rumsfeld insulting me and most of the population of this planet
directly on TV today, it is hard to check the facts and claims
presented in media. That is why I think it can be interesting
to discuss this with people from different countries and see
if we get a better joint view of the state of affairs. I would be
most curios, for instance, to learn if it is actually true that Bush
said a few days ago that he would "threat" Russia that it is
important for them to have good connections with the US.
I still hope that the swedish quite was a misunderstanding or
mistranslation.
On the other hand, there is, as you say, a widespread cliché
that americans in general are more ignorant about other
countries, other cultures and geography than the average
western european. My personal impression is that this is
the case, but I have not tried to keep any statistics on it.
It is a common joke that americans mix up Sweden and
Switzerland, which I considered just a joke until my first
visit to the US over 15 years ago, when I actually experienced
this on several occassions. However, as Frank pointed out, I
don't think this is all that surprising. The US is a very big country
both geographically and populationwise, and to some extent
it is fair to compare the american states to the countries of
europe, although cultural differences are very small in comparison.
Furthermore, the US is quite far away from Europe, so it is quite
reasonable that most americans have never been to Europe,
while most european have visited several other european
countires. I was quite surprised when an american collegue of
mine at work who is from NYC said that he had never been to
California, while i had been there. In retrospect, I realized that
quite stupid of me, considering the size of the US. I must confess
that I have not been further north in Sweden than Umeå, for
instance, while I have on the other hand been to places like
the US, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, south-east asia
etc. BTW, regarding geography, there has been test on school
children in many countries that showed american school childern
to have an almost unbelievably ignorant knowledge of geography.
They didn't score that bad in other subjects, though.
I should add that while I could answer your question with,
yes I have met quite a lot of americans that are very ignorant
in this respect, I have also met a lot of americans who are
quite well informed about european culture and geography.
In some cases they are so well informed that many of us laugh
at them because we are to ignorant to realize that they are
in fact right.
I don't think I said that americans are more ignorant,
but merely asked about the media coverage. I also left open
the possibility that it might be the swedish coverage that is
wrong, biased or otherwise bad. Except for clear things, such as
Rumsfeld insulting me and most of the population of this planet
directly on TV today, it is hard to check the facts and claims
presented in media. That is why I think it can be interesting
to discuss this with people from different countries and see
if we get a better joint view of the state of affairs. I would be
most curios, for instance, to learn if it is actually true that Bush
said a few days ago that he would "threat" Russia that it is
important for them to have good connections with the US.
I still hope that the swedish quite was a misunderstanding or
mistranslation.
On the other hand, there is, as you say, a widespread cliché
that americans in general are more ignorant about other
countries, other cultures and geography than the average
western european. My personal impression is that this is
the case, but I have not tried to keep any statistics on it.
It is a common joke that americans mix up Sweden and
Switzerland, which I considered just a joke until my first
visit to the US over 15 years ago, when I actually experienced
this on several occassions. However, as Frank pointed out, I
don't think this is all that surprising. The US is a very big country
both geographically and populationwise, and to some extent
it is fair to compare the american states to the countries of
europe, although cultural differences are very small in comparison.
Furthermore, the US is quite far away from Europe, so it is quite
reasonable that most americans have never been to Europe,
while most european have visited several other european
countires. I was quite surprised when an american collegue of
mine at work who is from NYC said that he had never been to
California, while i had been there. In retrospect, I realized that
quite stupid of me, considering the size of the US. I must confess
that I have not been further north in Sweden than Umeå, for
instance, while I have on the other hand been to places like
the US, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, south-east asia
etc. BTW, regarding geography, there has been test on school
children in many countries that showed american school childern
to have an almost unbelievably ignorant knowledge of geography.
They didn't score that bad in other subjects, though.
I should add that while I could answer your question with,
yes I have met quite a lot of americans that are very ignorant
in this respect, I have also met a lot of americans who are
quite well informed about european culture and geography.
In some cases they are so well informed that many of us laugh
at them because we are to ignorant to realize that they are
in fact right.
Re: EEEEEKKKK....
Ooooops!
Sorry Frank, you are right!
I think I have being reading between the lines for too long! 😕
I think I need to get my gear off and join these guys:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2740007.stm
Thanks Paulb!
Make Love not War!
🙂
fdegrove said:
Ooooops!
Sorry Frank, you are right!
I think I have being reading between the lines for too long! 😕
I think I need to get my gear off and join these guys:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2740007.stm
Thanks Paulb!
Make Love not War!
🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.