How the rest of the world sees us.

From today's Daily Telegraph:

How the world reacted (Filed: 20/03/2003)

Turkey: President Ahmet Necdet Sezer questioned the legitimacy of military action against Iraq.

He said: "The United Nations Security Council process on Iraq should have been allowed to finish. I
do not find it right that the US behaved unilaterally before that process ended."

His comments added weight to the parliamentary opposition ahead of a vote later in the day on a
resolution to allow US warplanes to use Turkish airspace for Iraq attacks.

France: President Jacques Chirac said that he hopes military action will not lead to a "humanitarian
catastrophe."

He said: "France regrets this action undertaken without the approval of the UN. It hopes that
operations will be as rapid and as victim-free as possible and does not lead to a humanitarian
catastrophe."

Germany: Joschka Fischer, foreign minister, said Germany was dismayed by the start of the military
campaign and offered humanitarian help to the Iraqi population.

He said: "This is grim news as war is always the worst of all solutions. We hope that the fighting
will be ended as quickly as possible. On no account, should weapons of mass destruction be used."

Russia: President Vladimir Putin called on the US to stop the attacks, calling the campaign a
"serious political mistake".

Portugal: Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso reaffirmed Portugal's strong backing for the US,
but said that no Portuguese troops would take part in the war.

He said: "Portugal reaffirms its support to its allies, with whom it shares the values of freedom
and democracy, and hopes that this action will be over as soon as possible and will carry out all
its objectives."

South Korea: President Roh Moo-Hyun pledged his government's support for the war, pledging to send
non-combat troops and aid for refugees.

He said in a televised statement: "I believe that to support the US efforts benefits our national
interest," His spokesman said the country has also stepped up security measures against North Korea.

Spain: Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar convened a crisis cabinet meeting. He has supported the US
and Britain, despite massive public opposition.

Indonesia: President Megawati Sukarnoputri said the government of the world's most populous Muslim
nation fiercely opposed the attacks and called for an urgent UN meeting.

Iran: Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi called the attack "unjustifiable and illegitimate" but said it
would not take sides. He added: "A new round of efforts in order to reduce the horrible and
extensive consequences of the war must start."

Japan: Yasushi Akashi, special peace envoy to Sri Lanka, said the country wanted to help the
reconstruction of Iraq and assist refugees while not directly supporting the war effort.

Israel: Israelis, who faced Scud missiles in the 1991 Gulf War, have been told to carry
government-issued gas masks. US Secretary of State Colin Powell telephoned Israeli Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon 90 minutes before the strikes began.

Belgium: Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt said he deplored the strikes and denounced the flouting of
international law.

Cambodia: Foreign Minister Hor Namhong expressed "regret" that military action could not have been
avoided and warned that the action would lead to further American political isolation and increased
acts of terrorism.

India: Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee called a meeting of senior ministers shortly after the
strikes began.

Nato: Nato allies are meeting to discuss the war. The alliance does not have a direct military role
in the conflict, but has sent specialist units to help boost the defenses of Turkey, the only Nato
member to border Iraq.

 

<Snipped Interesting Stuff>

The British seem a little irked about not being told in advance. We are looking everywhere for the
keys to the tank, but can't find them anywhere. Arse.

So we'll be heading our attack in an Austin Maestro that Jack Straw borrowed off his gran.

Andy Chequer

 

Stephen Baker wrote:
> From today's Daily Telegraph:
>
> How the world reacted (Filed: 20/03/2003)

Great Britain: President elect, Tony Blair, said; "Please George, can we play? Go on, let us play,
George. We want to bomb something too."

USA: President George W. Bush said; "Yee-haa! Let's whup those rag-head asses, Texas-style. Who's
your daddy now? Huh? Huh? Tony, is that you stroking my leg?"

--
a.m-b FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/ambfaq.htm

b.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm

 

Andy Chequer <[email protected](youdontwantthisbitinit)thisisasparagus.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <Snipped Interesting Stuff>
>
> The British seem a little irked about not being told in advance.

I'm 'irked' that a government that is supposed to govern for the concensus of peoples wishes, is
governing against them.

> We are looking everywhere for the keys to the tank, but can't find them anywhere. Arse.

> So we'll be heading our attack in an Austin Maestro that Jack Straw
borrowed
> off his gran.

You could always lend 'em Binkie.

Shaun aRe - We should just bomb everyone that isn't us and be done with it.

 

"bomba" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Stephen Baker wrote:
> > From today's Daily Telegraph:
> >
> > How the world reacted (Filed: 20/03/2003)
>
> Great Britain: President elect, Tony Blair, said; "Please George, can we play? Go on, let us play,
> George. We want to bomb something too."
>
> USA: President George W. Bush said; "Yee-haa! Let's whup those rag-head asses, Texas-style. Who's
> your daddy now? Huh? Huh? Tony, is that you stroking my leg?"
>

¿Qué es exactamente "bomba" en el español?

 

John Harlow wrote:

> ¿Qué es exactamente "bomba" en el español?
>
>

I believe it means either pump or bomb. I guess you're trying to make some sort of comment about the
irony of my nic compared to my anti-war stance.

Well, my nic actually derives from 'bomber', which I've been called since I was a kid. It comes from
sharing a surname with the head of allied Bomber Command during WWII, Sir Arthur 'Bomber' Harris.
It's kinda legacy, rather than any sort of comment

--
a.m-b FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/ambfaq.htm

b.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm

 

"Shaun Rimmer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Andy Chequer <[email protected](youdontwantthisbitinit)thisisasparagus.com> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > <Snipped Interesting Stuff>
> >
> > The British seem a little irked about not being told in advance.
>
> I'm 'irked' that a government that is supposed to govern for the concensus of peoples wishes, is
> governing against them.

How very naive of you, sir.

> > We are looking everywhere for the keys to the tank, but can't find them
anywhere.
> > Arse.
>
> > So we'll be heading our attack in an Austin Maestro that Jack Straw
> borrowed
> > off his gran.
>
> You could always lend 'em Binkie.

Binkie is part evil. But less evil since the XLite saddle snapped.

> Shaun aRe - We should just bomb everyone that isn't us and be done with
it.

I believe that's the way it is being played, yes. Time for the French next I'd wager (now there's a
war the average Brit could get behind).

Andy Chequer bollocks, eeengleesh peeeeg dug

 

"bomba" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> John Harlow wrote:
>
> > ¿Qué es exactamente "bomba" en el español?
> >
> >
>
> I believe it means either pump or bomb. I guess you're trying to make some sort of comment about
> the irony of my nic compared to my anti-war stance.

yup - just diggin' the irony.

>
> Well, my nic actually derives from 'bomber', which I've been called since I was a kid. It comes
> from sharing a surname with the head of allied Bomber Command during WWII, Sir Arthur 'Bomber'
> Harris. It's kinda legacy, rather than any sort of comment

still enjoying the irony!

 

"Stephen Baker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> From today's Daily Telegraph:
>
> How the world reacted (Filed: 20/03/2003)
>
>
> Turkey: President Ahmet Necdet Sezer questioned the legitimacy of military action against Iraq.
>
> He said: "The United Nations Security Council process on Iraq should have
been
> allowed to finish. I do not find it right that the US behaved unilaterally before that
> process ended."
>
> His comments added weight to the parliamentary opposition ahead of a vote
later
> in the day on a resolution to allow US warplanes to use Turkish airspace
for
> Iraq attacks.
>
> France: President Jacques Chirac said that he hopes military action will
not
> lead to a "humanitarian catastrophe."
>
> He said: "France regrets this action undertaken without the approval of
the UN.
> It hopes that operations will be as rapid and as victim-free as possible
and
> does not lead to a humanitarian catastrophe."
>
> Germany: Joschka Fischer, foreign minister, said Germany was dismayed by
the
> start of the military campaign and offered humanitarian help to the Iraqi population.
>
> He said: "This is grim news as war is always the worst of all solutions.
We
> hope that the fighting will be ended as quickly as possible. On no
account,
> should weapons of mass destruction be used."
>
> Russia: President Vladimir Putin called on the US to stop the attacks,
calling
> the campaign a "serious political mistake".
>
> Portugal: Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso reaffirmed Portugal's
strong
> backing for the US, but said that no Portuguese troops would take part in
the
> war.
>
> He said: "Portugal reaffirms its support to its allies, with whom it
shares the
> values of freedom and democracy, and hopes that this action will be over
as
> soon as possible and will carry out all its objectives."
>
> South Korea: President Roh Moo-Hyun pledged his government's support for
the
> war, pledging to send non-combat troops and aid for refugees.
>
> He said in a televised statement: "I believe that to support the US
efforts
> benefits our national interest," His spokesman said the country has also stepped up security
> measures against North Korea.
>
> Spain: Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar convened a crisis cabinet meeting.
He
> has supported the US and Britain, despite massive public opposition.
>
> Indonesia: President Megawati Sukarnoputri said the government of the
world's
> most populous Muslim nation fiercely opposed the attacks and called for an urgent UN meeting.
>
> Iran: Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi called the attack "unjustifiable and illegitimate" but said
> it would not take sides. He added: "A new round of efforts in order to reduce the horrible and
> extensive consequences of the
war
> must start."
>
> Japan: Yasushi Akashi, special peace envoy to Sri Lanka, said the country wanted to help the
> reconstruction of Iraq and assist refugees while not directly supporting the war effort.
>
> Israel: Israelis, who faced Scud missiles in the 1991 Gulf War, have been
told
> to carry government-issued gas masks. US Secretary of State Colin Powell telephoned Israeli Prime
> Minister Ariel Sharon 90 minutes before the
strikes
> began.
>
> Belgium: Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt said he deplored the strikes and denounced the flouting of
> international law.
>
> Cambodia: Foreign Minister Hor Namhong expressed "regret" that military
action
> could not have been avoided and warned that the action would lead to
further
> American political isolation and increased acts of terrorism.
>
> India: Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee called a meeting of senior
ministers
> shortly after the strikes began.
>
> Nato: Nato allies are meeting to discuss the war. The alliance does not
have a
> direct military role in the conflict, but has sent specialist units to
help
> boost the defenses of Turkey, the only Nato member to border Iraq.
>
>

how about the french go help the iraqis? that way we can smeg them at the same time

2 birds 1 stone

 

Andy Chequer <[email protected](youdontwantthisbitinit)thisisasparagus.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Shaun Rimmer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Andy Chequer <[email protected](youdontwantthisbitinit)thisisasparagus.com> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > <Snipped Interesting Stuff>
> > >
> > > The British seem a little irked about not being told in advance.
> >
> > I'm 'irked' that a government that is supposed to govern for the
concensus
> > of peoples wishes, is governing against them.
>
> How very naive of you, sir.

Hardly - just 'cos it pisses me off that it doesn't work like it should, doesn't mean I expect it to
work as it should. Quite the opposite, in fact.

> > > We are looking everywhere for the keys to the tank, but can't find them
> anywhere.
> > > Arse.
> >
> > > So we'll be heading our attack in an Austin Maestro that Jack Straw
> > borrowed
> > > off his gran.
> >
> > You could always lend 'em Binkie.
>
> Binkie is part evil.

So is JS - they'd surely get along fine...

> But less evil since the XLite saddle snapped.

It was Jesus wot did it.

> > Shaun aRe - We should just bomb everyone that isn't us and be done with
> it.
>
> I believe that's the way it is being played, yes. Time for the French next I'd wager (now there's
> a war the average Brit could get behind).

Yes, the French are stupid, smelly and annoying, but me, I'd rather start the bombing on them there
Merkins, cos, well, if for no better reason, just because they are shit at sarcasm, and don't get
irony. Plus, they tend to tar whole nations with the same brush as that nation's lowest common
denominator.

> Andy Chequer bollocks, eeengleesh peeeeg dug

I get that - that's funny that is!

Shaun aRe

 

[email protected] (Stephen Baker) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> From today's Daily Telegraph:
>
> How the world reacted (Filed: 20/03/2003)

I kindly suggest that the rest of the world would react differently if 3000 of their innocent
civilians lives were snuffed out by terrorists while working on a Monday morning. I just hope we
aren't becoming like Israel and start to smash villages filled with civillians in "retalliation" for
the acts of terrorists.

Personally I don't have much of an opinion on the war because the important facts which I would need
to convince me one way or the other are missing.

1) Does Iraq have vast stores of anthrax, VX, or nukes against their treaty? They certainly have
been evasive and have been actively blocking any investigation into this. Perhaps President Bush
has some information which we do not regarding this. I think this will all be clear at the
conclusion of the war.

2) Does Iraq have ties to Al Queda and other terrorist organizations? Huge cash rewards he pays to
terrorists in Palestine suggest he does but I don't think this will ever be proven.

Hopefully President Bush is right and this will all be made clear when it comes to conclusion. As
far as a ruling by the consensus of the people goes, everything I have heard indicates that 2/3s of
Americans support the action. I don't think that is any real indication of whether this is the
'right thing' to do or not though.

There, I think I've pissed everyone from both sides of the arguement off now.

-- The Ogre http://ogrehut.com

 

Dennis Baker wrote:

> I kindly suggest that the rest of the world would react differently if 3000 of their innocent
> civilians lives were snuffed out by terrorists while working on a Monday morning.

But Iraq doesn't have anything to do with terrorism. If there was a proven link then you'd get a lot
more support. People let you get on with Afghanistan, but now it just looks like war-mongering.

<...>

> 2) Does Iraq have ties to Al Queda and other terrorist organizations?

The CIA and FBI couldn't find a link...

 

"bomba" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
| Dennis Baker wrote:
|
| > I kindly suggest that the rest of the world would react differently if 3000 of their innocent
| > civilians lives were snuffed out by terrorists while working on a Monday morning.
|
| But Iraq doesn't have anything to do with terrorism.

How do you know?

| > 2) Does Iraq have ties to Al Queda and other terrorist organizations?
|
| The CIA and FBI couldn't find a link...

How do you know?

--
Pete Fagerlin

Save Fruita trails! http://www.petefagerlin.com/bookcliffs.htm

 

P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:

> | But Iraq doesn't have anything to do with terrorism.
>
> How do you know?

Ok, let me rephrase; there is currently no evidence of a link between Iraq and terrorism.

> | > 2) Does Iraq have ties to Al Queda and other terrorist organizations?
> |
> | The CIA and FBI couldn't find a link...
>
> How do you know?

Because that's what they reported to congress. Both institutions were under intense pressure to come
up with evidence to support Bush's stance on war with Iraq and they drew a blank. Of course, there's
the possibility that the CIA and FBI are keeping something secret, but it would seem to be to the
detriment of the US' political standing to do so.

 

"bomba" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
| P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
|
| > | But Iraq doesn't have anything to do with terrorism.
| >
| > How do you know?
|
| Ok, let me rephrase; there is currently no evidence of a link between Iraq and terrorism.

How do you know?

| > | > 2) Does Iraq have ties to Al Queda and other terrorist
organizations?
| > |
| > | The CIA and FBI couldn't find a link...
| >
| > How do you know?
|
| Because that's what they reported to congress. Both institutions were under intense pressure to
| come up with evidence to support Bush's stance on war with Iraq and they drew a blank. Of course,
| there's the possibility that the CIA and FBI are keeping something secret, but it would seem to be
| to the detriment of the US' political standing to do so.

So because it hasn't been made public in open sessions of Congress, it doesn't exist?

--
Pete Fagerlin

Save Fruita trails! http://www.petefagerlin.com/bookcliffs.htm

 

P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:

> | Ok, let me rephrase; there is currently no evidence of a link between Iraq and terrorism.
>
> How do you know?

Because otherwise the evidence would have been brought to public attention.

> | Because that's what they reported to congress. Both institutions were under intense pressure to
> | come up with evidence to support Bush's stance on war with Iraq and they drew a blank. Of
> | course, there's the possibility that the CIA and FBI are keeping something secret, but it would
> | seem to be to the detriment of the US' political standing to do so.
>
> So because it hasn't been made public in open sessions of Congress, it doesn't exist?

I very much doubt it. Perhaps you'd care to explain why it would be in the US' best political
interests to keep these links secret.

 

"bomba" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
| P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
|
| > | Ok, let me rephrase; there is currently no evidence of a link between Iraq and terrorism.
| >
| > How do you know?
|
| Because otherwise the evidence would have been brought to public
attention.

Are you really that naive?

| > | Because that's what they reported to congress. Both institutions
were
| > | under intense pressure to come up with evidence to support Bush's
stance
| > | on war with Iraq and they drew a blank. Of course, there's the possibility that the CIA and
| > | FBI are keeping something secret, but it would seem to be to the detriment of the US'
| > | political standing to do
so.
| >
| > So because it hasn't been made public in open sessions of Congress, it doesn't exist?
|
| I very much doubt it. Perhaps you'd care to explain why it would be in the US' best political
| interests to keep these links secret.

If I have to explain why the US doesn't make all of its intelligence methods, sources, and
information public knowledge, then there's no reason to discuss this any further.

--
Pete Fagerlin

Save Fruita trails! http://www.petefagerlin.com/bookcliffs.htm

 

On 20/3/03 7:53 pm, in article [email protected], "P e t e F a g e r l i n"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
> "bomba" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> | P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
> |
> | > | Ok, let me rephrase; there is currently no evidence of a link between Iraq and terrorism.
> | >
> | > How do you know?
> |
> | Because otherwise the evidence would have been brought to public
> attention.
>
> Are you really that naive?
>
> | > | Because that's what they reported to congress. Both institutions
> were
> | > | under intense pressure to come up with evidence to support Bush's
> stance
> | > | on war with Iraq and they drew a blank. Of course, there's the possibility that the CIA and
> | > | FBI are keeping something secret, but it would seem to be to the detriment of the US'
> | > | political standing to do
> so.
> | >
> | > So because it hasn't been made public in open sessions of Congress, it doesn't exist?
> |
> | I very much doubt it. Perhaps you'd care to explain why it would be in the US' best political
> | interests to keep these links secret.
>
> If I have to explain why the US doesn't make all of its intelligence methods, sources, and
> information public knowledge, then there's no reason to discuss this any further.

So - do you have some reason to believe that there is a link between Iraq and terrorism (whatever
that may be), or is this just a word game?

J.

 

"Jeremy Henderson" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:BA9FCDA0.10CE4%[email protected]...
|
| So - do you have some reason to believe that there is a link between Iraq and terrorism (whatever
| that may be), or is this just a word game?

Yes, and it's also a word game.

Main Entry: ter·ror·ism Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m Function: noun Date: 1795
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

http://www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html

--
Pete Fagerlin

Save Fruita trails! http://www.petefagerlin.com/bookcliffs.htm

 

On 20/3/03 8:01 pm, in article [email protected], "P e t e F a g e r l i n"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> "Jeremy Henderson" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:BA9FCDA0.10CE4%[email protected]...
> |
> | So - do you have some reason to believe that there is a link between Iraq and terrorism
> | (whatever that may be), or is this just a word game?
>
> Yes, and it's also a word game.
>
> Main Entry: ter·ror·ism Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m Function: noun Date: 1795
> : the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
>
> http://www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html

So - in a nutshell, "terrorism is what the other guy does" and therefore by definition Saddam must
be supporting terrorism. Or else "terrorism is what everyone does" with the same implication.

Convenient, but unconvincing.

J.