*moved* What's up with the weak U.N.?

Seems to me a resolution to disarm Iraq was already unanimously passed some 12 years ago. SO why is it that France, Germany, and Belgium (who?) don't think it necessary to back their words?

When I have to resort to threatening my kids with a grounding, or worse, a spanking, I try to get them to understand that as much as I don't like it I will have to FOLLOW THROUGH WITH WHAT I'VE SAID. A simple philosophy, it shows my kids that when I say something I mean it. Such a simple lesson should be taken to the U.N. and shoved down the throats of those pu55y security council members.


Anybody have any thoughts? Wait, let me rephrase that..... Does anybody have any intelligent thoughts? :thumbsup:

France and Belgium have never really been pushy, pushovers perhaps, but never pushy. So maybe that's why they are not as adamant about the whole situation.

Well, they are closer to it than us. I hope they have some chemical/biological/radiation proof underwear. ...

Cause just sittin' on you thumbs at this point is a stupid move. I'm sure they all are enjoying themselves incredibly, though.

hell, when ordinance starts flying, they may just switch sides depending who is recieving less of a pounding. They may not have much faith in our abilities or our convictions and think that we are going to get stomped. They'd be wrong, but they might think that.

I think when Irak was the nabour of one of these country s they also would have asked some counter-measures incase the shits gone hit the fan!

Here's how brave their supporters are.. Instead of writing something intelligent here to debate they resort to giving negs (and NO I don't care about antipoints, go ask around) and completely stupid remarks like...

Quote:

---

For the simple fact that their countries are not being run by closet fascists.

---

What a brave soul you are.... maybe you should look up that word..... cause he may be an idiot, but he ain't a fascist.

I agree with you completely. Not only did we have authorization years ago, but we also just recently got it again! :rolleyes:

In the opposing countries drain bamaged minds, they probably feel that such a campain may "destabilize" the middle east, which has obvious implication for them...

OH NO!!! We wouldn't want to destabilize a region of the world that has never been stable. That'd be like doing a brain transplant on Jack Chirac....

And anybody who is thinking of taking the whole "preemptive strikes are no-no" line. Just remember, if it takes 12 freakin' years, it ain't preemptive.

I hate war just as much as the next person, but I think the main reason a lot of European countries don't want to get involved is because they have seen war up close via WW1 & 2, and they know first hand just what really happens when the battle is going on right in their front yard. Given the events of history, Germany in particular will never take part in any war because they have suffered every time they get involved. There never has been, and never will be a ground level invasion of the US, so as Americans we never worry about war, its only something that we see on the TV, not something we can look out our windows and see a bomber strafing the front lines.

Kom@ - that entire paragraph is ignorant. We Americans have fought ourselves to bloodier ends than most of the rest of the world has, or do you not know about our "civil war".

And as far as Germany getting involved, let's just say that they got their asses handed to them by the U.S. et al because they wanted to dominate the world. That is not the current case. The U.S. pumps loads of money and a food assistance into the world, and this is how the "grateful" nations of the world treats us.

You fail to address any of what I wrote. Sharpen your pencil, read some books, come back and we'll talk.