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 3)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Feb 23, 2005

Anyone suggesting that "almost" half of Americans opposed going into Iraq at the time are either lying or grossly misinformed.  A solid majority of Americans favored going into Iraq.  And right now it's essentially evenly split on whether Americans are glad we went in or not (well within the margin of error either way).

None of which has to do with the original article.

on Feb 23, 2005
Another example .. product of a corrupted and backward educational system. You self righteous right wingers have totally
corrupted the English Language. Its so bad we cant even define terrorist or patriot.

As it stands:
One mans "terrorist" is another mans "freedom fighter"!!!


They're freedom fighters alright. Fighting freedom like a fireman fights fires.

Freedom doesn't include beheadings, carbombing mosques and police stations, or implementing Sharia law.

Do everyone a favor read up on some American history between 1777 and 1781.


4) depleted uranium shells


Depleted Uranium: Another Phony Left-Wing Pet Cause?
Daily News's Depleted (Uranium) Integrity
Nuclear Genocide? Piercing through the depleted uranium myths
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.


It's intellectually dishonest to pose decontextualized hypotheticals like that. You completely ignore the "what" and "why" of the situation. "What" is Daiwa doing, and "why" is he doing it?
If Daiwa's "what" includes kidnappings, beheadings, and car bombs because he seeks a Catholic theocracy, he has no moral justification for his actions nor for being angry that "his neighbor sold him out."

Now if the United States had become a communist dictatorship or an Islamic theocracy, I'd welcome foreign assistance to help restore which government defends our natural rights. I don't expect anyone to offer assistance out of pure benevolence. The occupying French military in the Revolutionary War didn't give military and economic assistance to the Americans because they were humanitarians. It simply served their interests to weaken the British.
on Feb 23, 2005
"Now if the United States had become a communist dictatorship or an Islamic theocracy, I'd welcome foreign assistance to help restore which government defends our natural rights"
Holy crap sir. That's insane! You as an American would help an occupying army instead of fight for your own land like the Americans of old had done. You'd collaborate with an enemy foreign occupying force! You'd be deserving of a bullet in the back by your own countrymen. Nice self determination you embrace there sir. I've never really seen someone say, as a patriotic American, that they would embrace an occupying force whatever the color of the flag. Truly a traitor in the worst degree. You'd inform on your neighbours and friends then right? You'd work as a translator for the occupying Chinese army so they can get the message to the people. The message telling them when they can have air conditioning and power, when they can have water running into their own homes, you'd translate the Chinese rules on the chinese-run elections going on in Washington and the USA entire? Sorry soul you are. To say you'd go against your own nation and your own people for a foreign power. Sickening.
on Feb 23, 2005
Holy crap sir. That's insane! You as an American would help an occupying army instead of fight for your own land like the Americans of old had done.


Did you not read what I said? I said I would welcome foreign assistance. For someone else to assist, that requires that we ourselves are doing most of the work. And who are the "Americans of old" you speak of? There's not too much that bothers me more than foreigners cutting and pasting select details of American history to suit their agenda. Were the French forces of the Revolutionary War somehow Americans too?

Nice self determination you embrace there sir. I've never really seen someone say, as a patriotic American, that they would embrace an occupying force whatever the color of the flag. Truly a traitor in the worst degree.


Excuse me, mental midget, my loyalty isn't to the US government simply because it is the government or because it is made by people born within our national borders. Once the government becomes abusive of our guaranteed rights, neither I nor any other American owes to it any allegiance whatsoever. It has no legitimacy. Where's the self-determination for the American people if the government imposes its will on the people? You don't even know what you're talking about.

You'd inform on your neighbours and friends then right?


Anyone one of my "friends" who supports a communist American dictatorship or an Islamic theocracy in America is a traitor. Apparently you're still not getting it. You still don't understand the "what" and "why" questions. "What" are they doing and "why" are they doing it.

So the choice in my hypothetical is:
A. Support the totalitarian governments that abuse my rights and those of my fellow countrymen simply because it is run by people from the same country as me, or
B. Fight against the totalitarian government that abuses my rights and those of my fellow countrymen and welcome the help of anyone who wishes to see my people take back our country.

And you think I would be a traitor for doing so? Do you also believe a wife who's getting beat by her husband and decides to call the police, have him arrested, and press charges against him is a traitor to her family? Did your parents shake you when you were a baby?

You'd work as a translator for the occupying Chinese army so they can get the message to the people. The message telling them when they can have air conditioning and power, when they can have water running into their own homes, you'd translate the Chinese rules on the chinese-run elections going on in Washington and the USA entire? Sorry soul you are. To say you'd go against your own nation and your own people for a foreign power. Sickening.


Seeing as though the Chinese have no concept of freedom and liberty, they have nothing of value to offer us besides rifles and other weapons. I'll take their money and machinery. But their physical presence is not wanted. Any foreign power's assistance which will ultimately threaten our own interests of our rights and liberty is unwelcome.

Your lack of critical thinking is appalling.
on Feb 24, 2005
>Did you not read what I said? I said I would welcome foreign assistance.

EasterDiamondBack you are a traitor of the worst kind. If this country were ever invaded I fully expect you would become a collaborator in seconds,
your ILK would probably offer up their wives and daughters to the soldiers of the occupying force. Coward!

You are truly the lowest of the low and trust me ... your type would be the first targeted, much like the Iraqi Translators of Propaganda and the Iraqi's idiots queing in
front of a police station FOR A GOVERNMENT HANDPICKED BY AN OCCUPYING FORCE , or the senseless morons ferrying equiptment by truck to an
occupying force.

Dude, I WOULD NOT hesitate to put you out of your misery if such a situation happened.

You are truly a traitor of the worst kind.
I dont care how bad ones government is, change can only come from within. Our homegrown evil is certainly better than an external evil.

YOU ARE TRULY THE LOWEST FORM OF TRAITOR THEIR IS. THE COWARD THAT YIELDS BEFORE THE FIRST SHOT IS FIRED.
Change your nick to "YellowBack" it suits you Coward!
on Feb 24, 2005
Let me get this strait Rombios.

If the US lost its Constitutional Freedoms to a Hitler style take over (like in the 1930s), then any person who would accept any aid from a foreign source in order to restore Democracy would be a collaborator of the worst kind?

So you think it was a good idea to let the people of Hungary and Austria in the 1956, the Shies/Kurd in 1991, thoses in Tiananmen Square get massacred? So all those involved with the Bay of Pigs invasion deserved every thing they got, just because they received help from another country to install a Democracy in Cuba. How about all those who died fighting in the French underground during WWII against Vichy French totalitarian government, they accepted foreign aid and organized a new government during our occupation of France. Yes we did occupy France until a new French Government was elected and had military units there for near six years.

We had turned our head multiple times in the past when local populations asked for our assistance to get rid of a totalitarian Government. Now it is about time that we did help those who scream for the Freedom to have a voice in their government.

Your idea of who are a traitor and a collaborator may be technically true, if held up against any type of Government. But is that model to be held true for those who fight for freedom and democracy against a totalitarian Government, then need a little help from outside. You need to lay off a little on your rhetoric.

My oath is to the Constitution of the United States and to the Freedoms there in. When those freedoms are stripped from you and another country wants to return them to you, I would not consider using some of that help as collaboration.

That's My Two Cents
on Feb 24, 2005
Lee1776, don't bother with rombios. He's a delusional, internet trolling, turd worlder . My opinion is that he's a communist from Guatemala due to his comment about the CIA overthrowing his country's government (Arbenz) or that he's an Iranian (Mossadeq). His response to me was totally disconnected from anything I said. I also wouldn't be surprised if he was 15 or 16 years old as evidence by his lack of intellectual maturity. My suggestion? Don't waste your time.
on Feb 25, 2005
>My opinion is that he's a communist from Guatemala due to his comment about the CIA overthrowing his country's government (Arbenz) or that he's an Iranian
> (Mossadeq).

wrong AGAIN, on both counts. But then again thats not surprising .... I HAVE read your posts in the past.

>I also wouldn't be surprised if he was 15 or 16 years old as evidence by his lack of intellectual maturity.

I said wrong on just two coounts ... make that three!
TRAITOR!!!
on Feb 25, 2005
I don't know why I keep answering this nut, but.....

When one places Nationalism above Republic/Democratic ideals, one is asking for what they get. (Hint, Hint, Japan Oct 1936, Germany in 1930s)

I'm very patriotic to my county, but I know when the Freedoms of Choice and Democracy should override Nationalism.

That is why IMO that Europeans finds our presents in the Middle East more palatable as of late, now that they see Democratic reforms advancing in that region. While they may not like our Nationalism from time to time (much like we don't like the French Nationalism), they themselves still feel the bond between Democracies.

That's My Two Cents

P.S. Rombios, if you find those thoughts Traitorous, then fine. But that also shows that you’re more then willing to let a totalitarian Government do as they please with your life without a fight, just in the name of Nationalism. Now I call that being a traitor to man kind and free will.


on Feb 25, 2005
>That is why IMO that Europeans finds our presents in the Middle East more palatable as of late

are you MAD?
How many European Leaders did you poll?
Are we still making the distinction between Old and New Europe?
Have you taken into account that the Majority of Europeans are OPPOSED to your presence in the Middle East regardless of how foolish their Leaders are to side with
you (Poland, Denmark, Britain). The few foolish enough to anyway.

>now that they see Democratic reforms advancing in that region.

Jesus Christ you must live in Bizarro World ... where logic JUST DOESNT apply.

Stop pointing to the current votes in Iraq as an example. There is but ONE reason it took place. The Shiite leading Ayatollah called men to the streets to PROTEST
your ORIGINAL idea of hand picked leaders and a caucus ... NONE OF WHICH IS DEMOCRATIC.

The fear of having to contend with two insurgencies last year forced Bremer to call for elections.

Listen CAREFULLY.
An Ayatollah had to intervene to make you grant the "one-man-one-vote" tenet of Democracy. This should bring shame to you to begin with.
Where if NOT for that pressure your puppets would still be in power ... but of course thats how it works with you. Thats "American Democracy".

Now in Saudi Arabia ... you manage to help STIFLE the opposition to the Rule of the House of Saud. Thats very Democratic isnt it? Nothing surprising because most
SANE people know your policies have NOTHING what so ever to do with Democracy. Its simply about protecting your interests

>While they may not like our Nationalism from time to time (much like we don't like the French Nationalism), they themselves still feel the bond between Democracies.

Keep repeating to yourself ... I am sure if you say enough time it becomes the truth.
"why do they hate us so much?"
sob , sob wipe tear ... sob sob
on Feb 25, 2005

>That is why IMO that Europeans finds our presents in the Middle East more palatable as of late

are you MAD?
How many European Leaders did you poll?
Are we still making the distinction between Old and New Europe?
Have you taken into account that the Majority of Europeans are OPPOSED to your presence in the Middle East regardless of how foolish their Leaders are to side with
you (Poland, Denmark, Britain). The few foolish enough to anyway.

>now that they see Democratic reforms advancing in that region.

Jesus Christ you must live in Bizarro World ... where logic JUST DOESNT apply.

Stop pointing to the current votes in Iraq as an example. There is but ONE reason it took place. The Shiite leading Ayatollah called men to the streets to PROTEST
your ORIGINAL idea of hand picked leaders and a caucus ... NONE OF WHICH IS DEMOCRATIC.

The fear of having to contend with two insurgencies last year forced Bremer to call for elections.

Listen CAREFULLY.
An Ayatollah had to intervene to make you grant the "one-man-one-vote" tenet of Democracy. This should bring shame to you to begin with.
Where if NOT for that pressure your puppets would still be in power ... but of course thats how it works with you. Thats "American Democracy".

Now in Saudi Arabia ... you manage to help STIFLE the opposition to the Rule of the House of Saud. Thats very Democratic isnt it? Nothing surprising because most
SANE people know your policies have NOTHING what so ever to do with Democracy. Its simply about protecting your interests

>While they may not like our Nationalism from time to time (much like we don't like the French Nationalism), they themselves still feel the bond between Democracies.

Keep repeating to yourself ... I am sure if you say enough time it becomes the truth.
"why do they hate us so much?"
sob , sob wipe tear ... sob sob


Take your particular brand of lunacy down the road idiot! Who *really* cares if they do hate us?
on Feb 25, 2005
>Who *really* cares if they do hate us?

drmiller set aside any dis-agreements we have had on this forum.

But we should ALL care. If all they did was hate "us" it wouldnt matter. The problem here is that history has shown that such "hate" translates into actions,
that affect peoples lives.

Surely even you can see this!

Arent the LEAST bit curious why someone would hate "us" or do you still want to keep listening the daily "talking points"?
on Feb 25, 2005
Have you taken into account that the Majority of Europeans are OPPOSED to your presence in the Middle East regardless of how foolish their Leaders are to side with
you


What part of "more palatable", do you not understand? I'll let that slide because English my not be your first language.

Are we still making the distinction between Old and New Europe?


No, do you have a problem with the New Europe? Sometimes those who recently earned their freedoms are more willing to share that feeling with those who are still oppressed. Just because a country has recently has joined the European community, does not mean they should site at the back of the bus (as France is directing them to do).

An Ayatollah had to intervene to make you grant the "one-man-one-vote" tenet of Democracy. This should bring shame to you to begin with.


Please provide a reference to where we were not going to allow "one-man-one-vote" in the first place. Also let’s just add that if it was not for us, it would have only been "man" and no "woman".

your ORIGINAL idea of hand picked leaders and a caucus ... NONE OF WHICH IS DEMOCRATIC.


Again provide me info where it was the ORIGINAL idea to not allow the hand picked leaders to be replaced in a vote. Now let’s see, a caucus is part of electing a Republic, which is Democratic. I guess you don't know what a caucus is.

Let’s see the number of free elections in the Middle East during 2001?

One: Israel

Number of elections from July 04 through a projected July 05:

One: Israel
Two: Iraq Constitutional elections
Three: Afghanistan
Four: Saudi municipal election (it's a start in a county that had none)
Five: Lebanon in the next few months. (Will be a lot freer then the last 15 years)

No elections are perfect. Except maybe Saddom's 100% election or Iran's 100% Hardliner Clerics. (Oops, their the only ones on the ballot, that's why I don't consider them elections).

rombios why are you so afraid of Democracy? Did it drop you on your head as a baby or are you one of those who will lose power if ordinary people can vote?

I’m at the point of realization that you have political blinders on and will not even consider offering hope to others. I know the world is not perfect, but bashing the head of any chance of Democratic reform, because you just don’t have faith in humans or don’t like the politics of those who are providing the opportunity, is just plain sad. You’re just the type of person that would let his freedom (if you are in a country that allows it) be crushed by Nationalistic zeal and hatred for others.

Sorry, Toughlove for taking this thread so far off track. I’ll only comment on the original topic for now on.

That's My Two Cents



on Feb 25, 2005
Arent the LEAST bit curious why someone would hate "us" or do you still want to keep listening the daily "talking points"?


I personally could care *less* why they hate us.
4 Pages1 2 3 4