New Allies Back U.S. Iraq Policy

[Texan]

International Herald Tribune
February 6, 2003

New Allies Back U.S. Iraq Policy

BRUSSELS, Feb. 5 - Ten Eastern European countries - all aspirants to NATO membership - have united behind a strongly worded statement of support for the United States in a further sign of the increasingly polarized positions in Europe toward a possible war in Iraq.

The gesture highlighted the division between newer allies of the former Soviet bloc who are staunchly pro-American and the more traditional allies of the United States, notably Germany and France, who are skeptical of the American position on Iraq.

"Our countries understand the dangers posed by tyranny and the special responsibility of democracies to defend our shared values," the statement said. "The trans-Atlantic community, of which we are a part, must stand together to face the threat posed by the nexus of terrorism and dictators with weapons of mass destruction."

The statement was much firmer toward Iraq than a letter last week from nine European countries - including Britain, Spain and Italy, but not France or Germany - urging support for the United States.

The signers of today's statement included five countries set to join the European Union next year - Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia and Slovenia - and two countries scheduled to join in 2007 - Bulgaria and Romania. The other signers were Albania, Croatia and Macedonia.

Hmm... I've lost count. Does that make 19 European states that back the U.S. Iraq policy?

[deerbarn]

BRUSSELS, Feb. 5 - Ten Eastern European countries - all aspirants to NATO membership

[pablissimo]

Originally posted by Texan
...Estonia...[/i]

GIVE ME ZE BALL

Though you won't appreciate the joke. And to be fair, who cares about EU countries-to-be?

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by pablissimo
GIVE ME ZE BALL

Though you won't appreciate the joke. And to be fair, who cares about EU countries-to-be?

who cares about france and germany ??
its a matter of principle, probvably these countries are too much used to do whatever a superpower asks them to :/
i count 14 countries so far + netherlands and those scandinavian countries (which didnt sign that letter but still support the war)

poor perfomance for europe if you ask me.

[Texan]

Originally posted by deerbarn
BRUSSELS, Feb. 5 - Ten Eastern European countries - all aspirants to NATO membership

"The trans-Atlantic community, of which we are a part, must stand together to face the threat posed by the nexus of terrorism and dictators with weapons of mass destruction."

[Sub]

Those are all loser countries.

[Texan]

Originally posted by Sub
Those are all loser countries.

Define loser countries?

[Sub]

The countries whose sum of GDP is less than Denmark(?).

[at0mic.c0w]

Originally posted by Texan
Define loser countries?

the ones signing such a statement

"all aspirants to NATO membership" paints a clear picture of what they are up to.

Originally posted by Texan
"The trans-Atlantic community, of which we are a part, must stand together to face the threat posed by the nexus of terrorism and dictators with weapons of mass destruction."

"Yes. Let's kill them all. We got them first, and we are responsible enought to have them, altho we tend to use them as a deterent from attacking us, and also as a threat towards our enemies"

Weapons Inspectors - Making Saddam look clever since 1991.

[LHC]

These countries don't count.

I got a foreign virus from eastern european illegal immigrants the other day. There was no way that was a northern virus.

Originally posted by LHC
These countries don't count.

I got a foreign virus from eastern european illegal immigrants the other day. There was no way that was a northern virus.

There lies a solution in this text. I'll give you a hint:
Illegal Immigrants
Middle-East
Virus

This could possibly solve 2 problems with a little effort and 'goodwill'

[Marilyn Manson]

Wow, I'll bet Estonia was really high on Bush's 'Important countries to convince' list!

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Wow, I'll bet Estonia was really high on Bush's 'Important countries to convince' list!

important or not, this shows that there will be no common european foreign affairs policy, which is a sad thing

"Divide et impera"

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by wu_trax
important or not, this shows that there will be no common european foreign affairs policy, which is a sad thing

Like that was ever going to realistically happen in the next twenty to thirty years or so anyway.

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Like that was ever going to realistically happen in the next twenty to thirty years or so anyway.

we were moving in that direction though. now we are further away from it than ever before

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by wu_trax
we were moving in that direction though.

Despite the fact that European governments often agree on forieng policy objectives, I honestly can't think of a single one who would want their hands tied to the extent of having a Europe-wide foreign policy.

[Texan]

Originally posted by wu_trax
who cares about france and germany ??
its a matter of principle, probvably these countries are too much used to do whatever a superpower asks them to :/
i count 14 countries so far + netherlands and those scandinavian countries (which didnt sign that letter but still support the war)

poor perfomance for europe if you ask me.

Germans and French are not all of Europe. The French have for a long time sided with anyone who would make the United States appear to be wrong.

The Germans have always been on the side of the United States -- until now.

I suspect that Germany is now so afraid of the Muslims living there, that they would rather have 100 million Iraqi children die, instead of one German child.

People are going to die. You must decide which children that will be. Should it be Iraqi children or European children?

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Texan
Germans and French are not all of Europe.

thats what i said.

The French have for a long time sided with anyone who would make the United States appear to be wrong.

and still they will switch sides in the near future.

The Germans have always been on the side of the United States -- until now.

which wasnt always such a good idea

I suspect that Germany is now so afraid of the Muslims living there, that they would rather have 100 million Iraqi children die, instead of one German child.

maybe we dont belive that war does solve any problems. i know a lot of muslim people and im not scared of any of them.

People are going to die. You must decide which children that will be. Should it be Iraqi children or European children?

so you really belive this is a humanitarian mission to safe the poor children of iraq ??? sorry, but thats more naiv than i thought

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Despite the fact that European governments often agree on forieng policy objectives, I honestly can't think of a single one who would want their hands tied to the extent of having a Europe-wide foreign policy.

there were plans to have a european foreign affairs ministry and of better coordination of foreign affairs etc. ofc there would still have been the national ministries and national points of view but it would have went in the right direction. now it wont.

[Marilyn Manson]

There were plans for tons of things. That didn't mean they were that likely.

[Nixjim]

Originally posted by wu_trax
there were plans to have a european foreign affairs ministry and of better coordination of foreign affairs etc. ofc there would still have been the national ministries and national points of view but it would have went in the right direction. now it wont.

See, all these european countries are fairly close together, same basic needs and what-not, but still you have widely differing opinions on what should be done. Yet you think the US, isolated from Europe by a few thousand miles of water, and larger I would bet than all the European countries combined, should always be able to see your side of things and do things your way, when you can't even agree yourselves what that way is. It's no wonder we disagree on so many issues, the amazing thing is that we ever agree on anything.

PS, this is not directed at you, this was just a convienent place to post it.

[Phang]

Originally posted by Nixjim
See, all these european countries are fairly close together, same basic needs and what-not, but still you have widely differing opinions on what should be done. Yet you think the US, isolated from Europe by a few thousand miles of water, and larger I would bet than all the European countries combined, should always be able to see your side of things and do things your way, when you can't even agree yourselves what that way is. It's no wonder we disagree on so many issues, the amazing thing is that we ever agree on anything.

PS, this is not directed at you, this was just a convienent place to post it.

jolly good.


now, would you like to back the implications in that statement up?

[Nixjim]

Originally posted by Phang
jolly good.


now, would you like to back the implications in that statement up?

It's very simple, what part of "you don't agree with each other so why do you think we should always agree with you" did you not understand?

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by wu_trax
important or not, this shows that there will be no common european foreign affairs policy, which is a sad thing

This shows it's a stupid idea in the first place. It's bad enough we have to have national states who claim to speak for their inhabitants without extending it to Europe and making it more ludicrous. "The European View". What next? The White Man's View? The global view?

Oh, and perhaps the German's don't want war not because they are afraid of Muslims but because they don't want to see an assault on a (relatively small) third world nation? Then again, who knows with these krauts, hey?

[Caesar2]

Originally posted by Texan
Hmm... I've lost count. Does that make 19 European states that back the U.S. Iraq policy?

Hmm... I've lost count. Does that make 25 European states that do not back the U.S. Iraq policy?

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by Caesar2
Hmm... I've lost count. Does that make 25 European states that do not back the U.S. Iraq policy?

I know this wasn't your point particularly, but why does it matter what Europeans (especially) think? Why don't we have a tally of how many African (or Latin American, whatever) states support/oppose US action? Or is this a non-darky only decision?

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Nixjim
See, all these european countries are fairly close together, same basic needs and what-not, but still you have widely differing opinions on what should be done. Yet you think the US, isolated from Europe by a few thousand miles of water, and larger I would bet than all the European countries combined, should always be able to see your side of things and do things your way, when you can't even agree yourselves what that way is. It's no wonder we disagree on so many issues, the amazing thing is that we ever agree on anything.

PS, this is not directed at you, this was just a convienent place to post it.

the people in europe pretty much agree on what policy should be made on iraq. unfortunatly most goverments dont care about them and rather have some pretty oil-deals or whatever.
oh, and id rather be a partner and ally to the us than someone they tell what to think or say.

[Caesar2]

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
I know this wasn't your point particularly, but why does it matter what Europeans (especially) think? Why don't we have a tally of how many African (or Latin American, whatever) states support/oppose US action? Or is this a non-darky only decision?

ask Texan why he constantly posts how many countries in europe support america

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by wu_trax
its a matter of principle, probvably these countries are too much used to do whatever a superpower asks them to :/

the people in europe pretty much agree on what policy should be made on iraq. unfortunatly most goverments dont care about them and rather have some pretty oil-deals or whatever.

So the governments that oppose military action against Iraq do so because of principle and because they care about what their citizens think; and the governments that support military action against Iraq do so because they're dupes and don't care what their citizens think and only want oil-deals or whatever?

How simple your world must be.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by Tactitus
How simple your world must be.

It's not his fault though. He's a liberal.

[Bunga]

Originally posted by wu_trax
who cares about france and germany ??
its a matter of principle, probvably these countries are too much used to do whatever a superpower asks them to :/
i count 14 countries so far + netherlands and those scandinavian countries (which didnt sign that letter but still support the war)

poor perfomance for europe if you ask me.

Only Norway and Denmark. Sweden doesn't support it at all, and god knows what Finland and Iceland think.

[G_frog]

Originally posted by Tactitus
So the governments that oppose military action against Iraq do so because of principle and because they care about what their citizens think; and the governments that support military action against Iraq do so because they're dupes and don't care what their citizens think and only want oil-deals or whatever?

How simple your world must be.

I would suppose he meant that it's a matter of principle as to whether the war is right or not, which makes this numbers business irrelevant.

So then the only explanation for european state's support or opposition is that they don't share their citizen's principles, but are making a cynical calculation. This includes germany, which is opposed for electoral reasons (altho this might be considered reasonable in a democracy).

[Cuddley_Battleship]

It would be funny to see them mass an army and help us out. Imagine the headlines.

"Iraqi division routed by Slovakian horse cavalry."

[at0mic.c0w]

Originally posted by G_frog
This includes germany, which is opposed for electoral reasons

that's totally not the way i see it. schroeder made such a big fuss about it for electoral reasons and he has answered questions which were never asked (like sending troops to iraq or not) but i'm sure he'd still be against the war.
if it was only a propaganda stunt to be reelected he'd probably have moved away from his pre-electoral position just as he did on so many other subjects...

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Tactitus
So the governments that oppose military action against Iraq do so because of principle and because they care about what their citizens think; and the governments that support military action against Iraq do so because they're dupes and don't care what their citizens think and only want oil-deals or whatever?

How simple your world must be.

i guess you missunderstood what i tryed to say. for me economical strength or population number dont count, it doesnt even really matter anymore how many countries are pro or against war.
the problem is that europe did not have one opinion and displayed such an opinion, whatever it might have been, to the rest of the world. now europe is more or less divided and therefore does not matter, which is a bad thing.

[Nixjim]

Originally posted by Caesar2
ask Texan why he constantly posts how many countries in europe support america

I agree, it's starting to get old, and rehashing the same subject every post reminds me of m.ar.ds many posts, which I eventually stopped reading at. Find a new subject Tex, it's time to mosey.

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Cuddley_Battleship
It would be funny to see them mass an army and help us out. Imagine the headlines.

"Iraqi division routed by Slovakian horse cavalry."

I think someone's ignorance is showing.

The Slovakian army has considerable expertise in anti-Chemical, -Biological and -Radiation capabilities (as does the Czech army--part of their NATO specialization). Their assistance will likely be very valuable--if not in the war itself then in the post-war neutralization of Iraq's stockpiles.

[Nixjim]

Originally posted by wu_trax
now europe is more or less divided and therefore does not matter, which is a bad thing.

I wouldn't say Europe doesn't matter, if that were true the US would not be trying so hard still to convince you. I think one thing these posts do is show why our governments can't agree, we can't even get a consensus here, everyone just keeps restating their opinion in every way they can think of while discounting everything the other side says as wrong.
If we were truly unbiased we would see that both sides are right in their positions, based on what they know, and a compromise could be reached.

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Tactitus
I think someone's ignorance is showing.

The Slovakian army has considerable expertise in anti-Chemical, -Biological and -Radiation capabilities (as does the Czech army--part of their NATO specialization). Their assistance will likely be very valuable--if not in the war itself then in the post-war neutralization of Iraq's stockpiles.

czech repulic != slovakia

[Cuddley_Battleship]

Originally posted by Tactitus
I think someone's ignorance is showing.

The Slovakian army has considerable expertise in anti-Chemical, -Biological and -Radiation capabilities (as does the Czech army--part of their NATO specialization). Their assistance will likely be very valuable--if not in the war itself then in the post-war neutralization of Iraq's stockpiles.

Just a joke...

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Nixjim
I wouldn't say Europe doesn't matter, if that were true the US would not be trying so hard still to convince you. I think one thing these posts do is show why our governments can't agree, we can't even get a consensus here, everyone just keeps restating their opinion in every way they can think of while discounting everything the other side says as wrong.
If we were truly unbiased we would see that both sides are right in their positions, based on what they know, and a compromise could be reached.

but would the us goverment want to find a compromise on this issue? its far more usefull to have europe divided
"Divide et impera!"

[Nixjim]

Originally posted by wu_trax
but would the us goverment want to find a compromise on this issue? its far more usefull to have europe divided
"Divide et impera!"

If you could actually show them a way to disarm Iraq quickly without a war, then I think they would go for it. What we don't want is to keep dragging this out without making progress while Saddam snubs his nose at the world.

[Event_Horizon]

Originally posted by Texan
International Herald Tribune
February 6, 2003

New Allies Back U.S. Iraq Policy

BRUSSELS, Feb. 5 - Ten Eastern European countries - all aspirants to NATO membership - have united behind a strongly worded statement of support for the United States in a further sign of the increasingly polarized positions in Europe toward a possible war in Iraq.

The gesture highlighted the division between newer allies of the former Soviet bloc who are staunchly pro-American and the more traditional allies of the United States, notably Germany and France, who are skeptical of the American position on Iraq.

"Our countries understand the dangers posed by tyranny and the special responsibility of democracies to defend our shared values," the statement said. "The trans-Atlantic community, of which we are a part, must stand together to face the threat posed by the nexus of terrorism and dictators with weapons of mass destruction."

The statement was much firmer toward Iraq than a letter last week from nine European countries - including Britain, Spain and Italy, but not France or Germany - urging support for the United States.

The signers of today's statement included five countries set to join the European Union next year - Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia and Slovenia - and two countries scheduled to join in 2007 - Bulgaria and Romania. The other signers were Albania, Croatia and Macedonia.

Hmm... I've lost count. Does that make 19 European states that back the U.S. Iraq policy?

I find this amusing. What allies do you possibly think we have? Just because some countries GOVERNMENTS support us does not mean that their people do. A government is suppose to be a reflection of the people, and there is a vast majority of Europeans that don't agree with their governments on the US invading Iraq. And rightfully so.

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Nixjim
If you could actually show them a way to disarm Iraq quickly without a war, then I think they would go for it. What we don't want is to keep dragging this out without making progress while Saddam snubs his nose at the world.

if the wmds would really be the reason, but i seriously doubt it. north korea seems to be a far larger thread on that topic at the moment. and dont forget that this war will be absolutly Counter-productive on the war on terror, its almost like begging saddam to give whatever weapons he has to al quaida and at the same time increasing the support of terrorism.

[Sub]

I think the Bush administration are just trying to split Europe apart.

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Sub
I think the Bush administration are just trying to split Europe apart.

and succeded ...

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Sub
I think the Bush administration are just trying to split Europe apart.

I think Europe can still quite easily do that by itself, luv.

Originally posted by Caesar2
ask Texan why he constantly posts how many countries in europe support america

its pretty simple.
hed like to see the US army finally kick some butt.
He cant wait for the show to start.