Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

George Not Best Says UK


Talon

Recommended Posts

America helping Saddam Hussein into power.

America helping form, train and fund Al Qaeda.

America helping form a democratic government in Iran then withdrawing support and allowing the Shah to regain power

The US didn't help saddam to power...he only got their support after the fundamentalists took Iran and even then Saddam was promising suger plum fairies and candy for all iraqis.

American helping form a democratic government in iran? hmmm? They backed the Shah....and then pulled backing allowing the current iranian regime to take power? at least thats my understanding of it...the Shah was a nice guy by middle eastern standards:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Homer

    9

  • bathory

    9

  • Talon

    9

  • Velikovsky

    8

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

No offense, but why should the US give a damn about who other countries want as presidents?

Babs: Why Cheney? I wish Powell would run for prez! Damnit he'd probably be one of the best!

Edited by Stellar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is why we elect who we think is best suited to make these decisions for us.

Indeed, and in theory it sounds like a fine way to run the country. However, the US is so powerdul, the decisions of your leaders don't just affect the US, they affect everyone.

I'm pretty sure every government likes to stick their noses in each other's business. It shows all over.

Of course, we live in a interglobaled world, all countries need to deal with others to survive. The difference is, nobody is really affected by what Malta does, everyone is effected by what the US does.

Right, and I do think other countries should have interest in national leaders. Although, I don't believe they should have any say.

No, it would defeat the purpose of citizenship if everyone had a vote on the US leader, and I don't think anyone is proposing that so it really isn't an issue. However, we do have a right to absolutely terrified of who the US people are going to put in power and how it will effect events on the other side of the planet. And that means that we do have a right to make an opinion on the subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Powell. I thought of him too, Stellar, I love Powell. thumbsup.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say we are " world police " more like "baby sitters" for all the friggin babies!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it would defeat the purpose of citizenship if everyone had a vote on the US leader, and I don't think anyone is proposing that so it really isn't an issue. However, we do have a right to absolutely terrified of who the US people are going to put in power and how it will effect events on the other side of the planet. And that means that we do have a right to make an opinion on the subject.

I agree 100%, Talon. And it feels pretty good to say that, too, considering we have been disagreeing so much lately.

Anyway, here's a LINK to an audio clip from today's edition of The World that illustrates just how the majority of non-Americans view the upcoming election. (NOTE: you have to click on the icon next to where it says "World Poll report (3:30)" - near the top of the page.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree 100%, Talon. And it feels pretty good to say that, too, considering we have been disagreeing so much lately.

It is nice isn't it grin2.gif probably because barring the death penatly our views on most issues aren't all that different. thumbsup.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with this statement. However, I feel it is wrong to make this kind of statement without listing some examples. I would prefer examples that doesn't include the war on terror. Not including invading anyone or terrorism, I don't hear anyone complain about The U.S. sticking their noses everywhere.

259495[/snapback]

It looks like you're asking for examples of the US sticking their nose in foreign affairs.

As for America sticking its nose into other people's business here are some examples.

America helping Manuel Noriega into power.

America helping Saddam Hussein into power.

America helping form, train and fund Al Qaeda.

America helping form a democratic government in Iran then withdrawing support and allowing the Shah to regain power.

America dealing heroin throughout Europe during the Vietnam war.

259522[/snapback]

Also, regarding the U.S. sticking their nose in everyone elses business, this topic is about the current election and Bush/Kerry. We can go back in time and find fault with every country on the planet, but that's not staying within the topic. Can you give some examples of the U.S. sticking it's nose in other's business, not including the war on terror?

259530[/snapback]

Not a single one of those concerns the war on terror. But they're all great examples of why the world is more than a little concerned on who we elect President.

So you asked for examples in this topic, I gave you examples and then you act like you have no idea why I'm listing examples. Trying to imply I'm off topic?

You're right we can find examples of every country making bad decisions. However most of my examples are within the last 20 years. They're not old history and as long as the world is still paying the price for those decisions they will remain pertinent.

The US didn't help saddam to power...he only got their support after the fundamentalists took Iran and even then Saddam was promising suger plum fairies and candy for all iraqis.

American helping form a democratic government in iran? hmmm? They backed the Shah....and then pulled backing allowing the current iranian regime to take power? at least thats my understanding of it...the Shah was a nice guy by middle eastern standards:)

259534[/snapback]

Did I switch Iran all around, my bad. grin2.gif But the original idea of that statement is still true. So that part I'll stand behind.

As for Saddam. Perhaps I should have said we helped him maintain power?

Reagan and Saddam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Saddam. Perhaps I should have said we helped him maintain power?

perhaps you should have, then again, the entire west did.

It wasn't the US who sold him those nasty chemical weapons thouygh just in case anyone complains

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no the west didn't the UN wasn't very happy about.

Senate wasn't very happy about it.

The UN is a fraud

the West supported saddam, its as simple as that, unless of course all those french fighter jets were built in Iraq...all that russian and french artilery were built in Iraq.

As for the US regarding chemical/bio weapons supplying

Some biological samples were given to the Iraqi government for medical research purposes.

Various pesticides (which i'm assuming the cyanide is one of) were also given to the Iraqi government, for civilian uses.

a few helicopters were also given, for civilian uses

The french supplied Saddam with the equipment to manufacture his own chemicals, he didn't need US supplies, and as far as i know he was mostly using russian artillery and as such couldn't use american shells.

at any rate, the problem with the counterpunch link is that while it makes all these claims that the US supplied him with chemical/bio weapons, their definition of chemical/bio weapons seems to be materials that could be used as chem/bio weapons. The problem with this is that many of these chemicals have multiple uses, allot of these uses are legitamate. Its like saying "the US sold so and so a heap of fertilser, he said it was for his crops, but he just made a big ass bomb out of it", we aren't given much context to work with other than some chemicals were sold.

What i would like to know is when did these sales occur, the link doesn't specify, all it says is that in 1991 - 1992 so and so reported this was sold during the 80s. When in the 80s?

lol @ the Iran suing the US

Edited by bathory
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not long after the Rumsfield visit.

Now since we knew that Saddam had no problem using chemical weapons, why would the US government allow sales to Iraq of supplies that could be used for making chemical weapons?

i almost forgot. Colin Powell who should have been President. if he'd only run in 96 when he was talking about it.

also why are you so against the UN last time I checked the US was one of the main forces behind forming the UN.

Edited by Velikovsky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now since we knew that Saddam had no problem using chemical weapons, why would the US government allow sales to Iraq of supplies that could be used for making chemical weapons?

because they have industrial/commerical uses as well?

can you demonstrate that

a) the chemicals were in fact used to make chemical weapons

cool.gif they were given/sold to Saddams regime (or businesses in Iraq, people like to play loose with these sort of facts) with the knowledge that they would be used in weapons programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can you prove it to be wrong?

Since I don't have my security clearance anymore I can't look that up.

Can you?

What, you can't never mind then.

They were sold. Iraq had a history already. End of story.

Would you sell the supplies to make chemical weapons to Iran?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say we are " world police "  more like "baby sitters" for all the friggin babies!!!!

If you want to ge all high and mighty about it let em remind you....

The US is only 250 years old and the rest of the World along with the British Empire did fine thankyou very much before your country was ever created. If it wasn't for the rest of the world your country would not exist the way it does. So less of the big boy attitude.

Edited by Lottie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will be warnings issued shortly for insiting inflammatory comments .

We will remember that the moderators are not all American and take offence at being refered to as Babies that require babysitting . So that every one is clear these remarks are aimed particularly at Seventh Son and Babs for the added incouragement .

Edited by Kismit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

can you prove it to be wrong?

Since I don't have my security clearance anymore I can't look that up.

Can you?

What, you can't never mind then.

you are the one making the assertion:)

"the US sold some chemicals which could possibly be used in a chemical weapon" is not "the US sold Iraq WMDS OMG"

They were sold. Iraq had a history already. End of story.

no its not end of story

don't you realise that many of the chemicals used to create chemical weapons are also widely used chemicals in industry, chlorine for example is a major componant of Mustard gas, it is also is widely used within the chemical industry, according to this site

Chlorine Online

Chlorine is essential to Europe's chemical industry, with 55% of all chemical processing depending on this element. It allows the efficient use of raw materials and energy in the production of numerous compounds which would be difficult or impossible to synthesise using other pathways.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UN is a fraud

the West supported saddam, its as simple as that, unless of course all those french fighter jets were built in Iraq...all that russian and french artilery were built in Iraq.

The UN mostly has its hands tied because of Human Rights Laws, this is unfortunate in many cases.

The West is much more than just France or Russia. When it really comes down to it every country has in some way helped Iraq and more so helped Terrorism evolve, whether through trade of arms, financial backing, regular trading, whatever. However, its kind of wrong to pin point the blame on certain countries when we as a world have all had links with this.

The US goverment backed the IRA for goodness sake. Fortunately the goverment have found the error of their ways. However you look at this, the bottom line is, it does not matter whether you are the UN or the President of the US, I only hope that as in life we as humans/ The World/ Goverments are learning a very BIG lesson from all of this, here and now, and will never make the same mistake again.

Edited by Lottie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US goverment backed the IRA for goodness sake.

no it didn't, it just didn't stop the irish community from sending funding to the IRA, well at least thats what i had read?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really like either one of them, however I cannot tolerate a blatent liar, sending over 1000 of our young men and women to their deaths for nothing, such as Bush did. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, and any of you who get excited about war I invite you to strap on a pair of boots and experience it first hand.

Yes.. been there done that..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a single one of those concerns the war on terror. But they're all great examples of why the world is more than a little concerned on who we elect President.

So you asked for examples in this topic, I gave you examples and then you act like you have no idea why I'm listing examples. Trying to imply I'm off topic?

You're right we can find examples of every country making bad decisions. However most of my examples are within the last 20 years. They're not old history and as long as the world is still paying the price for those decisions they will remain pertinent.

Reagan and Saddam

260392[/snapback]

The original post which I replied to asking for specifics is this: "Considering the American government likes sticking their nose into everyone's business, I think that it does matter what other countries think of your president"

The obvious question remains, during the Bush administration, what are some examples of the U.S. sticking their noses in others' business?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the bush administrations objections to the european rapid reaction force eh???

Thats just one of the top of my head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.