OT: Eating Crow

[Guest guest]

Hey Kathleen,

 

I wanted to stop on this subject but this post got me excited and on my

soap box. ;-p This is a long one so those who don't like my posts or

don't want to deal with the realities we're living now oughta delete.

 

> > PS: I keep CNN on .. and just heard the French say that IF Saddam

> > uses what they said he doesn't have in the first place against

> > American or British forces in the war they'd reconsider their

> > participation. ;-p

>

> Now that's a little in line with what you were saying, we will see who

> is/was right and who is/was wrong. France is risking that they are

> right, BUT are willing to admit they were wrong if proven to be.

 

I don't think France gave any consideration to whether or not their

position was right or wrong reference the war against Iraq .. I think it

was purely a jostling with Germany for a leadership position in the EU.

Schroeder ran on an anti-American platform so we can understand that its

natural he follow through .. but Chirac wants that leadership position.

 

And I believe Chirac has LOTS of vested interests in ensuring that Iraq

stays under the control of Saddam .. perhaps even personal interests!

Finally, I think that the offer made my France is symbolic and intended

to reduce present criticism and build an alibi for future events. You

see .. use of chemical or biological weapons is a CRIME under all the

international laws .. so agreeing to come on board after ANOTHER crime

has been committed by Saddam gives France little credibility. Saddam is

certainly going to face trial for War Crimes IF he is captured alive and

that trial will be for acts already committed against his own people.

 

> Just as Bush and Co. are risking that they are right. I wonder if they

> would be as willing to conceed that they were in error.

 

Doesn't matter .. its not Bush and company nor Chirac and company who

will decide if they were right and wrong .. the international media will

control the thoughts of folks in that regard .. they will lay out the

agenda and then the pros and cons will line up behind their words .. as

is the case for anti and pro war folks who march blindly like sheep.

 

> If the french were/are wrong, the little hate fest that is going on

> now in the US. will seem like a Love-in compared to what will come AND

> if they are/were right, people will close a blind eye and ignore it.

 

In order for the French to be right .. the following would apply.

 

1. Iraqi people will NOT be better off after removal of Saddam.

2. America will find NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

3. America will find NO more evidence of crimes against humanity.

4. America will find NO indisputable evidence that Iraq has been in

direct support of international terrorism.

 

It has NOTHING to do with whether or not Saddam or his Republican Guard

uses chemical or biological weapons against the American/British troops.

If he does, it will just be one more crime added to all the others.

 

And IF Saddam's folks blow a few oil wells, the French and Germans and

Eco-Terrorists will all blame the USA even if the provision of all the

paragraphs above are met. If they don't blow many of them, it will be

because George Bush looked them in the eye and told them that there will

be a reckoning .. and the wealth of Iraq will be what they are blowing

up while in support of a monster who has but a short time left.

 

Finally, France and Germany and all the others who 100% backed the UN

Security Council Resolutions demanding Saddam disarm .. and providing

for penalties if he didn't .. then later refused to put the teeth into

that resolution .. will never be right!! They will always be wrong!!

And the UN has suffered as a result of such wimpish thinking. Even Ian

Smith .. the opposition to Tony Blair .. has come on board and repeated

these very words .. as have those American Democrats who opposed Bush.

The difference between those people and those of us on this list are

that those people shoulder responsibility for the interests of their

nations .. and they understand that NOW is the time to back the men and

women in uniform. They deserve it regardless of where one stands!!!!!

 

Finally, in the beginning of the problems months ago, France wanted a

second Resolution .. when the US wanted a second Resolution France said

there was no need for one. None of this will be forgotten and you can

bet your bootie that there will be MUCH discussion in the international

media on Who Shot John after the dust has cleared. France has much to

do to win back the credibility they have lost. None of the others ever

threatened a veto .. they were far smarter than Chirac.

 

> Interesting how they have to bear the burden of EVERYONE who is

> against this little shindig in the desert.

 

A shindig its not .. it the exercise of foreign policy through the use

of military force. Like it or not, that's the legal defination. And to

the troops there .. its certainly more serious than a shindig. ;-p

 

> Seems to me that there were more countries than France saying " NO " .

 

The USA only needed nine YES votes in the Security Council but we will

never know who would have said " YES " or " NO " because it didn't come to

vote. It would have been embarrassing for those countries who were on

the edge to make a decision then have it cast aside by a veto. But just

today the Bush Adminstration has released a list of 30 countries that

say they support his actions. Some of them would have said YES and there

are a number of others who are even now giving us basing and overflight

rights who have asked to not be named on the list simply because they

are Arabic and don't want to have any turmoil amongst their masses.

 

ALL political action is driven my motive we can only hope is honorable.

The French and Russian has sold MUCH nuclear technology to Iraq .. and

Chirac personally dealt some of the nuclear reactor sales. Russia has a

multi-billion dollar oil exploration contract with Iraq that comes in to

effect AFTER sanctions are lifted .. plus they have a few billions of US

dollars owed them by Iraq. Russia asked the US to guarantee payment of

those debts and Bush said that the US would not be in a position to be

dictating to the new Iraqi government .. it would be a UN responsibility

to direct that payment. So we know Russia's vested interests too.

 

China doesn't want the US in the Middle East period .. look at the map.

We are touching China in Afghanistan now .. they don't want us there or

in any of the Middle East countries. China is NOT the enemy of the USA

now .. they need us and they will maintain good relations with the USA

because they know that they need economic development or they will face

a revolution. China might someday become an enemy but its not going to

happen within the lifetime of anyone reading this post. And for the one

who said the other day that North Korea is a more immediate threat, this

is just not true. Without China the North Koreans are a basket case.

They probably make no moves without China's approval and if they decide

to rebel against China, they'll be on their own and not with the support

of China .. which means .. they would gain exactly nothing.

 

North Korea has too many internal problems to be concerned with playing

international terrorist. They are not even driven by idealism any more.

They aren't driven by religion either .. those two reasons can justify

becoming a terrorist but a desire for power and anger at others is not

sufficient .. so North Korea is not a problem. They can't deliver any

weapons of mass destruction onto the USA .. they might do so on South

Korea but then it would be another UN mission .. same as before.

 

> The only diff is the power of Veto.

 

That is a very BIG difference .. a pompous difference that will NOT be

forgotten by the country that saved France's butt twice and left tens of

thousands of dead in their soil. The five PERMANENT members of the

Security Council do not veto each other .. its not a friendly gesture

nor something you can do and expect to be easily forgiven .. protocol is

protocol .. and violations of protocol are frowned upon.

 

You can abstain .. or you can vote against .. but a veto means that the

entire body can want something but one pompous ass member with Permanent

Status can assume a King of the Hill position and destroy all the votes.

 

> Well, it won't be long now before we DO find out who is in the right

> and who's got the wrong end of the stick.

 

We will be able to develope opinions on it soon. Those opinions will be

different depending on whether one looks at the results as a leftist or

a rightest or a moralist or an idealist .. those who can look without

being swayed by such handicaps will develop the correct conclusions and

those are the conclusions our grandchildren will read in history books.

 

As for who has the wrong end of the stick .. its always those who are

downtroden by the dictators and maniacs. As Ian Smith said today, he

had talked with a Kuwaiti whose uncle had been dragged away by Iraqis

for a minor traffic violation and never heard from again.

 

There are many who still think the US was wrong to go into Kosova .. the

fact that a monster was murdering an entire nation notwithstanding.

 

And there are those who think going into Afghanistan was wrong .. funny

it is because one such outspoken Socialist sent one of those silly butt

email partitions around months before that demanding Afghani women be

treated humanly by the Taliban .. and she sent another one around on the

Nigerian woman that was going to be stoned though the courts had turned

the decision over 6 months prior to that. I think one could conclude

that in addition to being an left-wing anti-American Socialist she was

also a niave chavenist or maybe a Feminazi. Save the wimmens.

 

Its not like y'all wimmens are a minority .. you outnumber mens already.

Mens die younger .. especially married ones. They see it as a plausable

alternative to continuing living. ;-p

 

It will be a while before folks know all the facts but I believe we will

see a lot of rejoicing in Iraq sooner than some think. All of my Iraqi

friends here say this will happen. It will take some time to find all

of the evidence needed to convince the doubters because it is all being

hidden now .. Saddam thinks he is going to come out of this again as the

winner of the Mother of All Battles. That maniac has convinced himself

that he won the last one. His mentality is much like that of a pissant

crawling up an elephant's leg with rape on his mind.

 

And Ann .. as for your comment that you sometimes felt like " a lone

voice crying in the wilderness. " I think you have no reason to think

like that. First, we are probably wrong to be discussing these matters

on this list .. though they are preceeded by OT (Off Topic) and these

posts are NOT preempting other posts. But on lists such as this or any

alternative healing list we're closer to New Age than we are to the VFW.

Most folks think as you do. Most folks have no training or experience

or interest in international affairs .. many folks think what they think

because their heart tells them to go that way. If there is anyone in

Lonesome Wolf position you described, its me and those few who think as

I do. You are in the majority on this list.

 

I am not trying to sell you folks anything. And I'll never ever be able

to plug my mental hard drive into yours but if I could, you would know

WHY there is no room for emotion in international affairs. There are

many truisms that I couldn't even mention here because I'd be cursed and

it would likely shock some folks to a point of ruining their week. I'll

just say that those playing the political games know the rules and the

penalities and they are all aware that games are played .. and why!

 

I will say this .. the West is at WAR .. if we want to BS ourself into

thinking we are not because it makes us feel better .. or don't want to

read any bad news because it spoils our day, then we will most likely

have a more difficult time adjusting to the events that are sure to go

down in the future .. events close to home and events that can not be

blamed on any US president or administration. Those who don't know the

meaning of Wahabiism can't begin to understand the mind of the typical

Islamic Terrorist. Saddam has openly supported them and has even given

payments to the families of those who would sacrifice themselves.

 

I believe that in the first days after America and the UK enter Iraq we

will see ATTEMPTS to create incidents of terrorism in the USA .. and I

believe the people who are often criticized for inconveniencing spoiled

Americans .. for taking away their freedom and the freedom of those who

would kill us, will stop those terrorists before they accomplish their

missions. I'm sure we'll see attempts to murder and kidnap in my area

of the world. I believe the forces here will not be so successful in

preventing this so its up to each individual to be alert and to avoid

being a soft target .. make them work harder or go for the other guy.

 

But you know what? Some folks would criticize those who stop terrorists

if they knew how they stopped them. Like .. you gotta use rules even if

the dude trying to do in your country has no rules.

 

Some will blame the Bush administration regardless of what happens ..

but they will be totally out of line and totally without knowledge of

the realities of a world where something called EVIL exists.

 

We can deal with most governments through diplomacy .. some, like those

of Hitler and Saddam, are immune to diplomatic efforts .. they can only

understand force. Whether we like it or not or wish it were otherwise,

there are rogue nations in the world .. and now we are dealing with even

more difficult enemies because they are not representives of a nation.

 

When diplomacy fails, and/or when dealing with rogues who are driven by

irrational ideals or religious zeal, peace and security can only come

through superior intelligence collection and superior firepower .. and

some sacrifice. All benefit from those few who sacrifice.

 

The world will be better for our children and our children's children.

Regardless of what happens today, conditions will ensure this is true.

Mankind does make progress .. those who like to read history know this.

 

> Kathleen Petrides

> The Woobey Queen

> http://www.woobeyworld.com

 

Y'all keep smiling, Butch :-)