Great timing! Going to Paris on Friday...
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
From: eurostar
DJ Qube, how long are you staying for?
I'm not sure I'll be in Paris this week-end, but if I am I'll definitely take you for a spin in the S2000, and we can try to find those 'no americans' signs...
More seriously, if you need advice on where to stay, what to do, etc... let me know, I can help - and you should post something in the European forum too.
I'm not sure I'll be in Paris this week-end, but if I am I'll definitely take you for a spin in the S2000, and we can try to find those 'no americans' signs...
More seriously, if you need advice on where to stay, what to do, etc... let me know, I can help - and you should post something in the European forum too.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,101
Likes: 0
From: Dana Point, CA
Originally posted by PeaceLove&S2K
I see... I still don't fully understand though. Are you suggesting that Chirac is taking Saddam's side because he doesn't think war is the solution to our current problems? At least not yet? That logic is flawed. What you said could very well be the case, but not necessarily.
If the Bush administration manages to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Saddam Hussein does indeed have WMDs, and that he refuses to get rid of them, I agree war is virtually inevitable.
The way I see it though, the Bush administration is saying that Saddam is guilty (of having WMDs) until proven innocent, which I believe is very much against the spirit of this great nation. I don't think that's how things should be done, and to the best of my understanding, that's all Chirac et al's is saying. I've read (on CNN I think) that France has mentioned that they'll use force against Iraq if that's necessary.
France isn't the only country that is opposing the war. In fact they didn't even threaten to veto the U.S. new resolution, unlike the Russians. The only reason they are getting so much attention lately is because they are a "traditional" ally, and they are not agreeing with you now. Instead of hating them for it, you should perhaps take a step back and ask yourselves "why?"
As far as I'm concerned, the Bush administration is just telling the world (those countries that disagree with the U.S. anyway) "Well
you then," very much disregarding how the world perceives this nation. I, for one, feel it is very important how the world perceives you. I understand that you can't please everyone in the world, but I do feel Bush could try harder.
I see... I still don't fully understand though. Are you suggesting that Chirac is taking Saddam's side because he doesn't think war is the solution to our current problems? At least not yet? That logic is flawed. What you said could very well be the case, but not necessarily.
If the Bush administration manages to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Saddam Hussein does indeed have WMDs, and that he refuses to get rid of them, I agree war is virtually inevitable.
The way I see it though, the Bush administration is saying that Saddam is guilty (of having WMDs) until proven innocent, which I believe is very much against the spirit of this great nation. I don't think that's how things should be done, and to the best of my understanding, that's all Chirac et al's is saying. I've read (on CNN I think) that France has mentioned that they'll use force against Iraq if that's necessary.
France isn't the only country that is opposing the war. In fact they didn't even threaten to veto the U.S. new resolution, unlike the Russians. The only reason they are getting so much attention lately is because they are a "traditional" ally, and they are not agreeing with you now. Instead of hating them for it, you should perhaps take a step back and ask yourselves "why?"
As far as I'm concerned, the Bush administration is just telling the world (those countries that disagree with the U.S. anyway) "Well
you then," very much disregarding how the world perceives this nation. I, for one, feel it is very important how the world perceives you. I understand that you can't please everyone in the world, but I do feel Bush could try harder.
1) I am saying that Chirac is refusing to make Saddam abide by the promises he already made some 12 years earlier because his arms for oil contracts are too important to him. France, Germany, Russian and China all agree that Saddam is bad for the world, he's a threat to the world and that he has WMD's. Where they disagree with the US is what actions should be taken to disarm him.
2) Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. The UN all agree on that. Their resolutions have asked Saddam to prove that he has destroyed these weapons and/or show where they are. Iraq has done a partial accounting, at best of this. Iraq's partial disclosure is apparently good enough for some countries.
3) Your accounting of what you saw on CNN is only partially correct. France has said that if Iraq uses biological or chemical weapons against the US, UK and Australia, France would commit troops. Big whoop. But that's not the point. Why even make that statement if you don't honestly believe that Iraq has said weapons.
4) You are correct that France isn't the only country against this move. You are wrong in your assertion that France didn't threaten to veto it. They stated numerous times that they would do exactly that. In fact, didn't anyone else find it amusing that France said no to England's latest proposal before even Iraq did? Why is that do you assume?
5) I have asked myself why. I know why and it sickens me.
6) I agree with you that President Bush should have and could have done a better job of diplomacy. Diplomatically speaking, this hasn't been the USA's finest hour.
7) Having said that, I feel that this issue has drawn on far too long and should have been handled a long time ago. Appeasement with mad men doesn't work. History has taught us that. I honestly believe that my great grandchildren will read about these upcoming events some day and history will judge our actions favorably. Its too bad that all of the world isn't with us but this issue is too important to let go on indefinitely (as the UN's 12 year history of debacles and missed ultimatums has).
You are right that my statements against France as a whole and French people are out of line. I fear that's part of the insulating effect of the internet. I know that the avg. French chap is a good and decent human being that doesn't deserve my ire and ranting (as useless as it is in this forum). Our discussions here have forced me to take a step back and realize that. I sincerely thank you for that.
But it doesn't change my disappointment in the French govt. and Chirac in particular.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,101
Likes: 0
From: Dana Point, CA
[QUOTE]Originally posted by le car
[B]
Do you remember that time when we went to that pizza place with Rob and Hugh, and that how the waitress insisted on adding more and more black pepper on Rob's lasagne?... And when I left my helmet on my scooter to go to that Absolut Vodka party for 30minutes and came back to see that a pigeon had sh!t in it!
[B]
Do you remember that time when we went to that pizza place with Rob and Hugh, and that how the waitress insisted on adding more and more black pepper on Rob's lasagne?... And when I left my helmet on my scooter to go to that Absolut Vodka party for 30minutes and came back to see that a pigeon had sh!t in it!
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
From: eurostar
Thanks Da Hapa for being a bit more cold-blooded in you latest replies.
However I'd like to set things straight as much as I can:
on the 11th of september 2001, along with the rest of the world, I discovered, horrified, that a city that I love, where I have lots of friends, got attacked.
What I posted was the reflection of the general opinion in London on that day. It was something like "this is very scary, and even scarier is the fact that an idiot has the access to the red button".
Meaning that we were very afraid that with his usual lack of subtlety, GWB would unleash his BIG WMD and start a 3rd world war.
After posting this single remark, I took my S2000, drove to Paris, and then took the plane for my yearly break in my home country - Greece. There I read as many newspapers as I could from as many countries as possible, and saw with relief that the Big Red Button had not been pushed.
When I came back to the web 2 weeks later, I saw that the post had been deleted, and that feelings were quite strong towards me to say the least, but I could neither find that post, nor defend myself of course (too late).
I apologized for the bad timing of my reply, but I guess many people had already used that wonderful function : the 'ignore list'
I understand that people got really offended, but I also think that this is symptomatic of the general tendency in the US to refuse any opinion that is not the one proposed by the Bush administration, and I think that it's a sad thing in a democracy that has as one of its founding values the freedom of speech. I know I haven't been stopped from voicing my opinion (although certain members have insisted that I be evicted from the board), but debate and exchange of conflicting ideas is certainly not something I'd expect to find here anymore, sadly..
However I'd like to set things straight as much as I can:
on the 11th of september 2001, along with the rest of the world, I discovered, horrified, that a city that I love, where I have lots of friends, got attacked.
What I posted was the reflection of the general opinion in London on that day. It was something like "this is very scary, and even scarier is the fact that an idiot has the access to the red button".
Meaning that we were very afraid that with his usual lack of subtlety, GWB would unleash his BIG WMD and start a 3rd world war.
After posting this single remark, I took my S2000, drove to Paris, and then took the plane for my yearly break in my home country - Greece. There I read as many newspapers as I could from as many countries as possible, and saw with relief that the Big Red Button had not been pushed.
When I came back to the web 2 weeks later, I saw that the post had been deleted, and that feelings were quite strong towards me to say the least, but I could neither find that post, nor defend myself of course (too late).
I apologized for the bad timing of my reply, but I guess many people had already used that wonderful function : the 'ignore list'
I understand that people got really offended, but I also think that this is symptomatic of the general tendency in the US to refuse any opinion that is not the one proposed by the Bush administration, and I think that it's a sad thing in a democracy that has as one of its founding values the freedom of speech. I know I haven't been stopped from voicing my opinion (although certain members have insisted that I be evicted from the board), but debate and exchange of conflicting ideas is certainly not something I'd expect to find here anymore, sadly..
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 962
Likes: 2
From: Vancouver
i find no reasons we have a war here in the forum... what we need here is smile and peace...
do you see why we have a war now? no love, lack of communication, and too much bullshit
stop it today and begin to consider for each other....
do you see why we have a war now? no love, lack of communication, and too much bullshit
stop it today and begin to consider for each other....
You are disrespectful, rude and inconsiderate.