My blog about talking about the world as it is. No mincing of words.
USA & European perspectives
Published on February 19, 2005 By Mmrnmhrm In War on Terror
The war in Iraq brought the lingering difference between Americans and Europeans into stark relief. Europeans were against the war, for the most part and Americans were for it, for the most part. It is, ironically, a reversal of world views. During the 18th and 19th centuries, the Americans were the ones espousing the importance of international law and the need for subtle diplomacy while the Europeans who made use of raw power on the international stage.

In the late 20th century, with the Soviet Union no longer a threat, the weakness of Europe forced it to take the old American strategy while the unchallenged might of the United States made it take on a different view.

This culminated with Iraq. As Robert Kagan put it, a man armed only with a knife may come to a different decision on what to do about the bear than the man armed with a rifle. From Europe's point of view, Iraq, led by Saddam Hussein, was a threat but not an intolerable one. Removing Saddam was beyond the ability of the European military powers without great sacrifice.

By contrast, the Americans made a different calculation. Saddam could be likely removed with only a couple thousand American casualties. So why should this lingering threat be allowed to continue, especially after 9/11? And events bore this out. The United States was able to march into Baghad and remove Saddam with only a few hundred combat deaths. The 2 years since had brought on several hundred more deaths due to the "insurgency". A number that is pretty unimpressive when one considers that America's drunk drivers are more effective killers than the armed guerilla's that make up Iraq's insurgency.

This essay isn't to argue that the Americans were right to go into Iraq. Only that from the American perspective, if a significant thorn in the side and lingering threat to its security can be removed so easily, then why not do it? The Europeans, by contrast, really didn't have such an option. Realistically, they had to put up with Saddam no matter what. It is far easier to rationalize his existence than to simply admit that there is nothing they could do about it.

Comments (Page 2)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Feb 21, 2005
Nothing more than the inspiration that they are fighting for their nation


That's where I believe you are wrong. That cover story won't wash. They are fighting for noone but themselves and a largely unsupported ideology, and killing more Iraqis than Americans in the process. It is disingenuous in the extreme to characterize it as "trying to expel a foreing invader" - the overwhelming majority of Iraqis oppose the insurgents, and many are dying in the effort to snuff out the insurgency, which seeks not to "free Iraq" but to regain power, give the US a bloody nose and avert the establishment of a free government that might look upon them with some degree of displeasure, even try them for their crimes.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on Feb 22, 2005
He was our monster, our mistake, our problem. Not Germany's, Not China's, Not Russia's..ours. IF any country in the world had the right, nay, the OBLIGATION to remove Sadaam, it was the United States of America. This is such an old arguement and moot at this point, anyways. What is done is done. All there is left to do is get over it and do something positive about the here, the now, and the future. Is that possible or are we going to argue about the past for a decade or more?


Most of the monsters in the world were put in by the US. That was our cold war policy. It didn't matter who we put in there as long as they weren't communist. Pinochet, the Shah of Iran, Manuel Noriega, Osama Bin Laden were all propped up by the US to fight communism. Half of the dictators from South and Central America were input to head off a communist takeover. Additionally we were directly responsible for communism taking over China and Cuba. We still support many cruel regimes in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia for example. If we start messing around with governments like we did during the cold war, we are only going to create more enemies.
on Feb 22, 2005
>That is a "total" figure which includes the actual war against Saddam. Not all those can be attributted to the insurgency.

Utter nonsense. It is believed that that number is CONSIDERABLY higher than the mere 1500 we have been led to believe.
It seems the Pentagon has "several" methods of keeping count ... one of which includes classifying people MIA,
ACCIDENTAL etc etc.

Its all propoganda ... I wager that we wont know the TRUE cost (much like the Vietnam War) until its all over.

We may never know if it manages to usher in:
ARMAGEDDON!!!
on Feb 22, 2005
>He was our monster, our mistake, our problem. Not Germany's, Not China's, Not Russia's..ours.

Ok so you got rid of him ... WHAT ARE YOU STILL DOING THERE TILL NOW?

And if you believe this was such a NOBLE act ... why havent you signed up to the Marine Core?

>Is that possible or are we going to argue about the past for a decade or more?

argue or discuss ... they point is we shouldnt keep silent about it. Those who DONT learn from history are doomed to
repeat it.

As we are about to do in Iran ... where we have begun drumming up the next series of lies to further our ends.
on Feb 22, 2005
>Most of the monsters in the world were put in by the US. That was our cold war policy. It didn't matter who we put in there
>as long as they weren't communist.
>If we start messing around with governments like we did during the cold war, we are only going to create more enemies.

This is the MOST sensible statement on here.
Tis a great reply to the fools who say (while shedding crocodile tears):
"why do they hate us so much"

THERE IS YOUR ANSWER!
A similar thing was done to my country and each new child born is reminded of how we got were we are and the CIA's
role is overthrowing the ONLY democratically elected leader we have ever had since independence. For what?

He belief in the socialist model
and
His believe that our oil resources should be nationalized and used for the benefit of the nation
on Feb 22, 2005
Utter nonsense. It is believed that that number is CONSIDERABLY higher than the mere 1500 we have been led to believe.
It seems the Pentagon has "several" methods of keeping count ... one of which includes classifying people MIA,
ACCIDENTAL etc etc.

Its all propoganda ... I wager that we wont know the TRUE cost (much like the Vietnam War) until its all over.

We may never know if it manages to usher in:
ARMAGEDDON!!!


Are you even able to *prove* this? I thought not. Believed to be is does not make it a fact!
on Feb 22, 2005
>Are you even able to *prove* this? I thought not. Believed to be is does not make it a fact!

Neither does stating 1500! or 1455 or 1421 or whatever the current "administrations" claim is.
Basically this administration has lost all credibility (assuming they ever had any coming in). If they tell me it will snow
tommorow ... I am going out in shorts.
on Feb 22, 2005
>Are you even able to *prove* this? I thought not. Believed to be is does not make it a fact!

Neither does stating 1500 1455 or 1421 ! or or whatever the current "administrations" claim is.
Basically this administration has lost all credibility (assuming they ever had any coming in). If they tell me it will snow
tommorow ... I am going out in shorts.



Until you can prove otherwise "these" numbers ARE considered fatual.
on Feb 22, 2005
Neither does stating 1500 1455 or 1421 ! or or whatever the current "administrations" claim is.
Basically this administration has lost all credibility (assuming they ever had any coming in). If they tell me it will snow
tommorow ... I am going out in shorts.



Until you can prove otherwise "these" numbers ARE considered fatual.


How exactly does the US Government plan on hiding the deaths of Americans in Iraq? Do they have bots sending e-mail to their families? Do they have body doubles to fool their commanding officers and their buddies in the field or in the barracks?

What's going to happen when some units get cycled back home? The body double is going to fool everyone? Maybe they are cloning.
on Feb 22, 2005
>What's going to happen when some units get cycled back home? The body double is going to fool everyone? Maybe
>they are cloning.

Is there an association of military families maintaining the total tally???
How about the TOTAL media blackout that wont even acknowledge troops are dying let alone pictures of caskets?

Wake up
on Feb 22, 2005

>What's going to happen when some units get cycled back home? The body double is going to fool everyone? Maybe
>they are cloning.

Is there an association of military families maintaining the total tally???
How about the TOTAL media blackout that wont even acknowledge troops are dying let alone pictures of caskets?

Wake up


YOU need to wake up!!! You are about as foolish as they come.
on Feb 23, 2005
>They are fighting for noone but themselves and a largely unsupported ideology

Is this what you were doing to free yourself from Great Britain, a few centuries back?

>and killing more Iraqis than Americans in the process.

AND RIGHTLY SO
they are killing "collaborators". In any such environment there are always non patriots and collaborators willing to do the
bidding of the enemy. If the mayor of Badgdad (Iyad Allawi) stepped foot outside the green zone without U.S protection he
would be dead in a matter of seconds.

Hes as worse as they come in terms of "collaborators"

>degree of displeasure, even try them for their crimes.

AND tell me, who will TRY you against your crimes against humanity? The wanton killing of women and children and beating
rape, incarceration of innocents ... who have not done a thing to you.

Remember this expression we were so fond of hearing after 911: "why do they hate us so much"
on Feb 23, 2005
>They are fighting for noone but themselves and a largely unsupported ideology

Is this what you were doing to free yourself from Great Britain, a few centuries back?

>and killing more Iraqis than Americans in the process.

AND RIGHTLY SO
they are killing "collaborators". In any such environment there are always non patriots and collaborators willing to do the
bidding of the enemy. If the mayor of Badgdad (Iyad Allawi) stepped foot outside the green zone without U.S protection he
would be dead in a matter of seconds.

Hes as worse as they come in terms of "collaborators"

>degree of displeasure, even try them for their crimes.

AND tell me, who will TRY you against your crimes against humanity? The wanton killing of women and children and beating
rape, incarceration of innocents ... who have not done a thing to you.

Remember this expression we were so fond of hearing after 911: "why do they hate us so much"


All I can say is it's a *good* thing *you* don't run the US government.
on Feb 23, 2005
Daiwa you know full well that you would want to kill your neighbour if he was helping an occupying army to track and locate you. If China occupied the US you'd be an American 'insurgent', wouldn't you? Or would you let some foreign power decide the future of you and your kids? It's the same in reverse. They are not foreign insurgents like Bush and Co lie about. They're nationalists.
on Feb 23, 2005
this is insane....

so, basically, what the left is saying, is that the ppl that brutalized, ruled by absolute fear, terrorized their population, beat, raped, incarcerated innocents, dominated by torture.....the ppl that ruled that way, are fighting against democracy....and they are the war heroes, the patriots, the nationalists?

God, this is insane....and the left just gets crazier and more off the edge of reality

This kind of garbage makes me sick....outright sick....For ppl to rally around terrorists and proclaim them as the heroes....just makes me sick
4 Pages1 2 3 4