Ought we start petitions...

[Paranoid Dot Calm]

What if it all is a charade?

What if France and Germany bad-mouthed the US just for their domestic audience because of having such large Muslim populations?

What if "World" banking authorities were behind this invasion of Iraq and any "political" opposition within Europe is just for T.V. Land?

No European country has publicly asked for a boycott of American products.
All those countries which bad-mouthed the US still have not suggested any sort of sanction against America. Not one!

The complete "Western" economy rides upon this Iraq invasion.
The West needs a "secure" source of oil and to have that oil sold for U.S. greenbacks or Euro's ..... definitely not Dinars!

I still buy American products myself.

Calm

 

[Machjo]

Good point, Calm.

Maybe we're all beiYemeni goals are long-term political aims whereas the American agenda focuses on short-term prosecution of military or law enforcement objectives," wrote Charles Schmitz, a specialist in Yemeni affairs, in 2004 report for the Jamestown Foundation, an influential US think tank.
crites here ad we don't even know it. That would mean that while the US, Canada and the Europeans are just as low on the ethics scale, the only real difference was that Bush was stupid enough to do al the dirty work and reap the future repercussions for the US while the rest sit back and will reap the benefits later.

Wow, scary thought there.

 

[Machjo]

Good point, Calm.

Maybe we're all beiYemeni goals are long-term political aims whereas the American agenda focuses on short-term prosecution of military or law enforcement objectives," wrote Charles Schmitz, a specialist in Yemeni affairs, in 2004 report for the Jamestown Foundation, an influential US think tank.
crites here ad we don't even know it. That would mean that while the US, Canada and the Europeans are just as low on the ethics scale, the only real difference was that Bush was stupid enough to do al the dirty work and reap the future repercussions for the US while the rest sit back and will reap the benefits later.

Wow, scary thought there.

 

[Machjo]

Good point, Calm.

Maybe we're all beiYemeni goals are long-term political aims whereas the American agenda focuses on short-term prosecution of military or law enforcement objectives," wrote Charles Schmitz, a specialist in Yemeni affairs, in 2004 report for the Jamestown Foundation, an influential US think tank.
crites here ad we don't even know it. That would mean that while the US, Canada and the Europeans are just as low on the ethics scale, the only real difference was that Bush was stupid enough to do al the dirty work and reap the future repercussions for the US while the rest sit back and will reap the benefits later.

Wow, scary thought there.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I have a question, and maybe you can answer it Rev...

Why hasn't the international community worked towards revoking their UN Charter?

There are a few reasons, Vanni:

Money and power. The US has more military might and a larger economy than anybody else. That gives them a fair bit of immunity. Consider the pressure they put on countries that did not enter the war on Iraq. Consider the pressure they put on countries to sign bilateral agreements not to extradite Americans to international courts.

Complicity. England and France are guilty of most of the same things the US is, just on a smaller scale.

One hand washing the other. Russia and China have a long record of abuses of power. They stay fairly quiet about the US and the US stays fairly quiet about them.

The general feeling in the international community is that it is better to have the US within the scope of the UN in hope of guiding them to some extent. At least they end up having to publicly veto things and must answer criticisms to some extent.

It works a little too. After Annan received his standing ovation in the General Assembly and everybody who was anybody endorsed Annan and the UN, the US had to send their guy to do the same. Bush has had to come crawling back to the UN for help several times since his illegal invasion of Iraq etc.

I'm not sure I agree anymore though. I think the US should have been removed from the Security Council when they invaded Iraq illegally. There is no mechanism to do that though, and none of the permanent members of the Security Council will back something like that because the same rules would then apply to them.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I have a question, and maybe you can answer it Rev...

Why hasn't the international community worked towards revoking their UN Charter?

There are a few reasons, Vanni:

Money and power. The US has more military might and a larger economy than anybody else. That gives them a fair bit of immunity. Consider the pressure they put on countries that did not enter the war on Iraq. Consider the pressure they put on countries to sign bilateral agreements not to extradite Americans to international courts.

Complicity. England and France are guilty of most of the same things the US is, just on a smaller scale.

One hand washing the other. Russia and China have a long record of abuses of power. They stay fairly quiet about the US and the US stays fairly quiet about them.

The general feeling in the international community is that it is better to have the US within the scope of the UN in hope of guiding them to some extent. At least they end up having to publicly veto things and must answer criticisms to some extent.

It works a little too. After Annan received his standing ovation in the General Assembly and everybody who was anybody endorsed Annan and the UN, the US had to send their guy to do the same. Bush has had to come crawling back to the UN for help several times since his illegal invasion of Iraq etc.

I'm not sure I agree anymore though. I think the US should have been removed from the Security Council when they invaded Iraq illegally. There is no mechanism to do that though, and none of the permanent members of the Security Council will back something like that because the same rules would then apply to them.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I have a question, and maybe you can answer it Rev...

Why hasn't the international community worked towards revoking their UN Charter?

There are a few reasons, Vanni:

Money and power. The US has more military might and a larger economy than anybody else. That gives them a fair bit of immunity. Consider the pressure they put on countries that did not enter the war on Iraq. Consider the pressure they put on countries to sign bilateral agreements not to extradite Americans to international courts.

Complicity. England and France are guilty of most of the same things the US is, just on a smaller scale.

One hand washing the other. Russia and China have a long record of abuses of power. They stay fairly quiet about the US and the US stays fairly quiet about them.

The general feeling in the international community is that it is better to have the US within the scope of the UN in hope of guiding them to some extent. At least they end up having to publicly veto things and must answer criticisms to some extent.

It works a little too. After Annan received his standing ovation in the General Assembly and everybody who was anybody endorsed Annan and the UN, the US had to send their guy to do the same. Bush has had to come crawling back to the UN for help several times since his illegal invasion of Iraq etc.

I'm not sure I agree anymore though. I think the US should have been removed from the Security Council when they invaded Iraq illegally. There is no mechanism to do that though, and none of the permanent members of the Security Council will back something like that because the same rules would then apply to them.