Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

[Florin]

QUOTE

..... France especially did not do anything to help streighthen the European position, on the contrary. It left NATO in a difficult time, it built the nuclear plant, which could have been able to build nuclear arms if not bombed by the Israelis, it sold the Iraqis the air defence system and a lot of weapons etc, etc.................

And during the Iraq - Iran war (1981 - 1989) in every week American intelligence officers met with their counterparts in Baghdad to brief and update them about the Iranian disposition of troops. The American part handled to the Iraqis, in those occasions, photos taken from satellite etc.

At least once an American helicopter was seen above frontline, gathering data/photos above a bridge. Soon an Iraqi chemical aerial attack followed around that bridge, and over 6000 Iranians were killed in that case alone.

Also various weaponry and equipment were sold by American companies to Iraq, in the same years I mentioned above. And yes... The same evil Saddam was ruling the country, blessing the Antante Cordiale, US - Iraq.

[Florin]

QUOTE

................ But, please, don't underestimate ability of U.S.  We will, one way or another, get out of this.  And move on. ...........

Of course, I agree completely. There is always an exit from a situation, one way or another.And move on.

For example, after Austerlitz the solution for the Russians was to move eastward.
After Stalingrad, the solution for the Germans was to move westward. :loool:

[cnflyboy2000]

[quote].You don't cow the Spanish into submission. It's a very proud, robust nation if there ever was one.
_________________________________________

Could u give us an example of this robust nonbovine behavior after say, the period of the Conquistadores? Certainly in that era they were not shy about, e.g. sharing their religion with the natives they didn't toast, but I don't seem to find a large blip for them on the radar screen of world events much after that. e.g., even Der Fuhrer couldn't get them to join the continental festivities in 1940; they took a pass, prefering to keep their robust form of government (Franco fascism) for their own benefit. Maybe u r thinking of the S. Armada?
_________________________________

[quote=Chandernagore"]
As for Europeans being responsible for US hegemonical tendencies... ahem ...we will sooner see pigs in flying formation.[/quote]
_____________________________________________

If the atmosphere consisted of as much a vacuum as the European polity has wrought of late, pigs very well might gain flight., imo. Hegemons thrive in vacuo. I would have thought that the prospect of more indiscriminate mass murder would have brought at least a few of the millions of born again pacifists European cities were so well supplied with a couple of years ago back into action. But so far.....vacuum, at least that's my impression.
[i][/i]

[Florin]

[quote][quote].You don't cow the Spanish into submission. It's a very proud, robust nation if there ever was one.
_________________________________________

Could u give us an example of this robust nonbovine behavior after say, the period of the Conquistadores? Certainly in that era they were not shy about, e.g. sharing their religion with the natives they didn't toast [/quote][/quote]

I am not a fan of Spain, generally speaking, and it was very unfortunate that civilizations as Maya or Inca were destroyed by the Spanish intolerance.
However, I'll give an answer to your question: an example of non-bovine behavior of the Spanish nation after the South American and Central American conquista.

The resistance against the French armies starting with 1809 was the first real setback for Napoleon the First. Napoleon, who previously defeated Austria, Russia and Prussia, couldn't "pacify" Spain. It was the beginning of the end of the Napoleonic star.
Because of the Spanish successful resistance, Austria dared again to charge Napoleon (and it was crushed again in 1810), and Russia dared to disobey the French blockade against the British commerce.

[Victor]

Until Europe will reach a common voice on external politics and will be able to support its interests and will (not only militarily) we will have an American hegemony. But since it seems that Europe is divided on this issue, I wonder, is Bush the only one responsible for the present American stand or are also the Europeans?

Florin, I believe the author was referring to the French aiding Iraq after it became an enemy of the US. Not to mention the fact that selling nuclear technology to such a man is madness.

[Chandernagore]

[quote][quote].You don't cow the Spanish into submission. It's a very proud, robust nation if there ever was one.
_________________________________________

Could u give us an example of this robust nonbovine behavior after say, the period of the Conquistadores? Certainly in that era they were not shy about, e.g. sharing their religion with the natives they didn't toast, but I don't seem to find a large blip for them on the radar screen of world events much after that. e.g., even Der Fuhrer couldn't get them to join the continental festivities in 1940; they took a pass, prefering to keep their robust form of government (Franco fascism) for their own benefit. Maybe u r thinking of the S. Armada?
_________________________________
[/quote]

Geez I'm not going to cut and paste my history books here but to reduce Spain's impact on the continent to Cortez and Franco is one of the most stunning historical shortcuts I've ever witnessed. Examples are plentyfull from the dominance of the Tercios on European battlefields until Rocroi to the more recent Spanish civil war. Anyway I was not judging their varying political choices but their constant national character.

[quote=Chandernagore"]
As for Europeans being responsible for US hegemonical tendencies... ahem ...we will sooner see pigs in flying formation.[/quote]
_____________________________________________

[quote]If the atmosphere consisted of as much a vacuum as the European polity has wrought of late, pigs very well might gain flight., imo. Hegemons thrive in vacuo. I would have thought that the prospect of more indiscriminate mass murder would have brought at least a few of the millions of born again pacifists European cities were so well supplied with a couple of years ago back into action. But so far.....vacuum, at least that's my impression.[/quote]

Those who move in to fill a perceived vacuum anywhere on the globe are not required to do so. And if they run into problems for doing so should they turn on those that had no hegemonic ambitions in the first place ? By the same reasoning you would also hold China Canada or Australia responsible for US problems in Irak. Or maybe I’m confused and you want to tell me that indiscriminate mass murder (9/11) was the valid reason for invading Irak (no link, remember).

Or are you surprised that EU did not prep 100 divisions and rush them under Dr Strangelove’s command to fulfill the neocon wet dreams of US global hegemony ? Do you think terrorism was ever fought efficiently by using conventional warfare ?

What is a born again pacifist ?

[Chandernagore]

[quote]Now, THERE is an odd couple!

U probably already know that P.B., the "old" con flamethrower got his start as a Nixon (u remember him) speechwriter. And Gore (aka Al Bore) is equally famous for being the most wooden speaker in U.S. history and for losing an unlosable election. (Of course he had a "little help from his friends": Ralph (I love Republicans) Nader and Bill (Hand me that cigar, Monica!) Clinton. [/quote]

Huhu. Well ,odd probably but what they were saying had some good sense in it

[Chandernagore]

[quote]Until Europe will reach a common voice on external politics and will be able to support its interests and will (not only militarily) we will have an American hegemony. [/quote]

American hegemony is strictly an American choice. As for Europe, that's it. We're yet a long way from any form of political unity. But if I was an American conservative I wonder if I should be in a hurry to have my dear economic and military hegemony challenged. For without them the high living standard of the average American could melt away.

[Florin]

[quote] ......Florin, I believe the author was referring to the French aiding Iraq after it became an enemy of the US. Not to mention the fact that selling nuclear technology to such a man is madness.[/quote]

Victor,

That reactor was bombed in 1982, 1983 or something like that. You know better, I guess.
In those days everybody sold everything to Iraq: the U.S., Soviet Union, France, Germany, Canada, Romania. Romania, for example, sold various equipment to both sides (Iran and Iraq), and as a personal opinion, there was nothing shameful in it, as long the others did the same.

After the invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, the embargo decided was followed by everybody, including Soviet Union. The visit made to Moskow by Tarik Aziz in Autumn 1990 did not change anything in the matter.
So France and Germany also followed the embargo. The only difference after 1991 was that, while respecting and following the embargo, France, Germany and Russia insisted many times to have it lifted, while the U.S. and the U.K. wanted it continued.

About: selling nuclear technology to such a man is madness. (your words).
What about the nuclear reactor given by the United States to South Africa, in the days when the racial segregation was state law, and the Blacks had special entrances in buildings, and the entrances for the Whites had the label: "Blacks not allowed". That American reactor was the core and the seed of the South African nuclear program, which resulted eventually in 2 successful tests (one over Kalahari, the other over the Indian Ocean), and in 6 operational atomic bombs by 1990.

What about the American nuclear reactor given to Romania in the days of Ceausescu, in late 60's or early 70's? That in Magurele, near Bucharest. I know, Ceausescu's regime was far better than that of Saddam's, but as eyewitness I can tell you it was a tough life under it, especially in its last years. And ha, ha, the Ceausescu's regime also dreamed to have its own nuclear toy, based on the smart Romanian scientists who gained experience around the American nuclear reactor (Magurele) and the Canadian technology around the CANDU project.

[Florin]

The following text was copied by me, using "copy" and "paste":

Saturday 29 May 2004, 2:12 GMT

A US newspaper reports that military equipment and oil rig parts are being smuggled out of Iraq in a scale tantamount to looting.

"This is systematically plundering the country," John Hamre, of the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies, was quoted as saying by the New York Times on Friday.
While occupation authorities have approved the removal of scrap metal from Iraq, including thousands of damaged Iraqi tanks, the newspaper said material seen in scrap yards in neighbouring Jordan include new material from Iraq's civil infrastructure.

Oil rigs and water plants were being stripped of equipment, which then were being carted out of Iraq.
One hundred semitrailers loaded with what is billed as scrap metal arrive in Jordan every day from Iraq bearing legitimate scrap metal, but also inestimable amounts of plundered material, said the paper.

The daily said one of its reporters saw "piles of valuable copper and aluminum ingots and bars, large stacks of steel rods and water piper and giant flanges for oil equipment, all in nearly mint condition, as well as chopped-up railroad boxcars, huge numbers of shattered Iraqi tanks and even beer kegs marked with the words "Iraqi Bravery."

The head of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency's verification office in Iraq, Jacques Baute, told the newspaper that satellite photographs the agency uses to monitor hundreds of military-industrial sites for the removal of sensitive material show "jarring" results.
Entire buildings and complexes of as many as a dozen buildings have vanished from the photographs, he said.
"We see sites that have totally been cleaned out," he said.
"There is a gigantic salvage operation, stripping of anything of perceived value out of the country," said Hamre.

Sam Whitfield, a spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority, however, said the occupation forces had put a stop to widespread looting in Iraq.
But a Jordanian engineer at a scrap-yard in Jordan, pointed to items that did not look like scrap at all.
He indicated five-meter long bars of carbon steel, water pipes and large falanges he identified as oil-well equipment.
"It's still new and worth a lot," Muhammad al-Dajah said.

[Chandernagore]

Question of the day :

Do France and China have the right (given by God) to oust an evil dictator heading an horrible inhuman regime... if this dictator is actively supported by the US Right and (optionaly) controls important oil ressources ? Would that be considered fair game and acceptable vacuum filling ?

PS. We assume they would agree to make a joint pre-invasion declaration stating that "it's for the good of mankind".

[cnflyboy2000]

[quote]Question of the day :

Do France and China have the right (given by God) to oust an evil dictator heading an horrible inhuman regime... if this dictator is actively supported by the US Right and (optionaly) controls important oil ressources ? Would that be considered fair game and acceptable vacuum filling ?

PS. We assume they would agree to make a joint pre-invasion declaration stating that \"it's for the good of mankind\".[/quote]_______________________________
If u mean, by "evil dictator", Pres Bush: get real, please. If u mean the House of Saud; ditto. If u think France will arouse from it's torpor anytime soon to do something helpful to the international common weal; triple ditto.
As for the Chinese: they have their own dictators to deal with.

There's a thin line between provocative discourse and silliness, imho, the above post crosses it.

fyi, I don't like Bush either; he's a vapid, cocky cowboy, imo. But to put him in the same league with that pig Hussein, if that's your implication, also crosses a line; the one between invective and insulting hype. It seems like the kind of conterproductive overkill that so enfeebles the left.

There's a struggle going on here: it's between the 12th century (or earlier, if u include Zionism) and the 21st. Yeah, Iraq was/is a mistake; in execution and probably in concept: a big mistake, paid for in blood of innocents, as usual. But let's figure out what side we r on and move on-hopefully with ABB (Anybody But Bush) leading the charge here. And maybe with the Euros, there, using a little of the hot air they seem to produce in such abundance to puff some pressure into that vacuum.

[cnflyboy2000]

[quote]

What is a born again pacifist ?[/quote]
_________________________________________

"Born again" is the term contemporary evangelical Christians use to describe their "coming to Jesus". I'ts supposed to be an inspired, life changing turnaround, often occuring instantly.

President Bush has been described as a "born again" Christian, I think even self described; in any event, he makes no secret about his religious experience. Many here think he conceives of himself as "on a mission from God". It's actually a little scary.

I was using it as a play on words, is all. I don't think these millions of europeans who were/are so vociferously opposed to the U.S. are really of the same ilk. It just looks that way from here.

[cnflyboy2000]

[quote="Chandernagore"]
Geez I'm not going to cut and paste my history books here but to reduce Spain's impact on the continent to Cortez and Franco is one of the most stunning historical shortcuts I've ever witnessed. Examples are plentyfull from the dominance of the Tercios on European battlefields until Rocroi to the more recent Spanish civil war. Anyway I was not judging their varying political choices but their constant national character.
______________________________________________

Yes, My examples were a bit eliptical. But, I was searching for examples where the Spaniards were players on the international stage. You and Florin give cogent examples of their centrality to european history. Hello........Europe is not the world.

To the point; what's more revealing of "national character" than former colonial powers huffing mightily as if the sun had not set (in some cases never arisen) on their influence and power. Protesting vociferously from the sidelines, and providing no help, unless u consider an example of how to quickly fold up tents to be such.
_________________________________________________



[quote="Chandernagore"]

Or are you surprised that EU did not prep 100 divisions and rush them under Dr Strangelove’s command to fulfill the neocon wet dreams of US global hegemony ? Do you think terrorism was ever fought efficiently by using conventional warfare ?
__________________________________________________

Does Iraq look like conventional warfare to you? You can't bitch about your powerlessness if u have no ambitions in the first place. And the euros don't: one look at their anemic military budgets should tell u that.

But, hey, at least u can retire at age 50 (or so) in France, after working about three weeks in your life.

Point is, they want to have butter, not guns. Fine; just don't whine about it.
Maybe Bush was a little too much, saying, in effect to the euros; "f. u and the horse u rode in on; we're invading ."

That was then, this is now. Time for them to help out or get out of the way.

[Florin]

Without realizing, I was advanced as major... The fruit of more than a half of year of hard work.
Maybe it is time for a honorable discharge. The moment of the well-deserved retirement. However, I simply cannot resist to add some new things...
Today, again about the unfortunate American Nick Berg... (the poor beheaded guy). I think it is worth to add something new, because:

1. Nick Berg gave a 20 minutes interview to the authors of "Fahrenheit 911", the recently acclaimed movie at Cannes, and forbidden in the United States.
The 20 minutes of his interview will not be made public.
(Source: American TV channel ABC)

2. During his detention in an Iraqi prison, Berg was interviewed three times by the FBI, which sent agents to question his family in Pennsylvania. It wasn't his first encounter with the bureau, which had investigated a possible link between him and Zacarias Moussaoui, the al-Quaeda follower awaiting trial for suspected ties to the Sept 11 hijackers. But when the FBI interviewed Berg in 2002, agents determined he had no connection to Moussaoui's associate.
When notified that Berg had been picked up in Mosul, the FBI might have wondered if its original assessment was wrong. After conducting a "thorough review of records", the agents decided once again that he was harmless - and possibly in danger.
Berg wasn't released until April 6, a day after his parents filed a federal lawsuit against Defense Secretary Donald Runsfeld, claiming that their son had been transferred to U.S. military custody and was being detained without probable cause. Berg's father Michael, a staunch antiwar activist, now blames the administration for his son's death while the U.S. military continues to deny it ever had custody of Berg.
(Source: TIME magazine, the issue of May 24, 2004)

And my short comment: If the authors were indeed some crazy Arabs, they made the worst choosing possible. If the authors were not some crazy Arabs, Nick Berg was by far the most convenient American in Iraq to be sacrificed for the cause.