American Troops?

Cork

It was great to see the 8 European countries coming out yesterday supporting the US. I think that it really isolates the Germans & French.

Of course, the world commuity has to get hard with Saddam. His people are living under a tyrant. He uses chemical weapons on them.

When are the Iraqi people to get democracy or human rights?

The vandalisim of the US plane in Shannon was a disgrace.

Bertie was not even asked to support the European Statement yesterday - Yet the Shannon "Peace" Group think that Geoge W Bush is worried about their protests?

Of course, the world commuity has to get hard with Saddam. His people are living under a tyrant. He uses chemical weapons on them.

As i've said before the use of chemical weapons is just an excuse. If he had starved them, or shot them there wouldn't be this reason to use against him. Lets face it, there's warlords in Africa who have killed off whole tribes, and theres no international community ramming troops down their throats.

When are the Iraqi people to get democracy or human rights?

When they want human rights for themselves they'll get them. I'm not a socialist, but i understand that nothing can stand in the way of the people. If the Iraqi people wanted Saddam gone, he'd be dead. Its that simple. The Iraqi people live under a harsher culture than we do. All arabs live under that culture. Its kinda like saying, we want them to have democracy, so we're going to give it to them, without their consent. Democracy is born of the people, not by other countries choosing it for them.

It was great to see the 8 European countries coming out yesterday supporting the US. I think that it really isolates the Germans & French.

To be honest i find the opposite. It just shows how fragmented Europe is. Lets face it, America is operating on their own steam, and europe are falling in line simply because theyre afraid to be seen to oppose america. Germany & France are at least standing up for what they believe in (even if they have to consider their recent deal with Iraq for oil).

Originally posted by klaz
As i've said before the use of chemical weapons is just an excuse. If he had starved them, or shot them there wouldn't be this reason to use against him. Lets face it, there's warlords in Africa who have killed off whole tribes, and theres no international community ramming troops down their throats.

Hmmm, it is terrible, that, an incentive like, the presence of oil in the region, is needed before western countries take an active role in modern times in a countries or peoples fate.

Theres no sign of russia or China, bringing resolutions for war against, corrupt African war/lords/regimes either....
But they are signing oil contracts with Sadam:rolleyes:

China is no eejit and realises if the march towards pseudo capitalism is to continue, in their country, then they also have to secure oil for their country...
Oil now is at the root of Every large regimes lack of scruples, I'm afraid
mm

The Saint

As soon as we have wind power and hydrogen powered cars the better. As for the people who say that the Iraqis deserve democracy, who do you think props up every oppressive regime in the Middle East for their own convenience? Which country didnt overthrow Saddam after the first Gulf War saying that they preferred an iron fisted oppressive regime in the name of stability. The only reason the US is going to war is because Germany, France, Russia, ect, have control of the oil in Iraq and America wants it. They said after they invade they are going to take control of the oil fields and "hold them in trust for the Iraqi people". As for gassing his own people and the Iranians? The US, UK, ect, knew completely what was going on and fully supported it and continued to sell arms and munitions to Saddam for years after. He was called the darling of the west.

Cork

As i've said before the use of chemical weapons is just an excuse. If he had starved them, or shot them there wouldn't be this reason to use against him. Lets face it, there's warlords in Africa who have killed off whole tribes, and theres no international community ramming troops down their throats.

There is no scale of brutality. What Saddam is doing his his people is unacceptable.

If the Iraqi people wanted Saddam gone, he'd be dead. Its that simple.

The Iraqi people would be dead as Saddam is defended by his army.

Sure, did he not get 100% of the vote. I am sure they all love Saddam. They are living in fear of their lives.

Germany, France, Russia, ect, have control of the oil in Iraq

So - this this is the Germans motivation?

I think the US & the EU pay the same price for oil.

The whole oil thing is a complete RED herring.

Victor

Originally posted by klaz
The funny thing is that America throws its roots off to quickly. They forget that they as a country aren't around that long. The fact is that they received most of their civilisation from people emmigrating from Europe.

Hmmm, the argument of State -v- the Individual. I'm slow to agree with you do you blame the current generation of say Germans for Hitler's attrocities? People are who they are, not some varient of their ancestors (it is another matter if the current generation directly benfits from past crimes, especially imperialism).

Originally posted by Cork
It was great to see the 8 European countries coming out yesterday supporting the US. I think that it really isolates the Germans & French.

No it doesn't. There are many countries around the world taking a similar stance. And aren't there about 40 countries in Europe, why didn't they all join in the chorus?

Originally posted by Cork
Of course, the world commuity has to get hard with Saddam. His people are living under a tyrant. He uses chemical weapons on them.

Of course the world community has to get hard with Saddam, but that does not mean war is currently justified. And isn't it a matter of him once having used chemical weapons against a rebellious town (not acceptable, but lets be clear what we a talking about).

Originally posted by Cork
When are the Iraqi people to get democracy or human rights?

Klaz has addressed this.

Originally posted by Cork
The vandalisim of the US plane in Shannon was a disgrace.

Is it vandalism? Isn't vandalism damage or destruction without cause? This damage was for a specific political purpose. Were the IRA vandals? Are demolition contractors vandals?

Originally posted by Cork
Bertie was not even asked to support the European Statement yesterday - Yet the Shannon "Peace" Group think that Geoge W Bush is worried about their protests?

How do you know he wasn't asked through diplomatic channels, why would the Americans only seek the support of some specific countries when they are looking for a broad coalition?

The Saint

"There is no scale of brutality. What Saddam is doing his his people is unacceptable."

What Saddam has been doing for 30 years is unacceptable especially when the US and others were supporting him for 20 of those years.

"So - this this is the Germans motivation?
I think the US & the EU pay the same price for oil."

Maybe, but you dont need an excuse not to go to war. The burden of proof is on the aggressor. Oil is priced in US dollars and whoever controls the oil controls the price.

The Iraqi people would be dead as Saddam is defended by his army

Again i disagree. Where does the army come from? but from the people. And i'm also saying that if the Iraqi people wanted to be free of him, he'd be dead. Its hard to operate a country if theres no-one there to work with him.

There is no scale of brutality. What Saddam is doing his his people is unacceptable

True. It is unacceptable. However using this as a reason for america's/britains plans to invade is unreasonable. If they were so set against brutality then there wouldn't be a dictator/warlord left in the world. Nor would america have taken prisoners from afghanistan and tortured them.

The burden of proof is on the aggressor

yes. i see. Well its obvious that America is the aggressor in this case.

do you blame the current generation of say Germans for Hitler's attrocities? People are who they are, not some varient of their ancestors (it is another matter if the current generation directly benfits from past crimes, especially imperialism).

to be honest i was talking about the civilisation that america is so proud of. But in regards to your qustion, i don't. The situation with Hitler & the German people was brought about by external circumstances, caused mainly by the restrictions placed by the allies after WW1.

Victor

Originally posted by Cork
There is no scale of brutality. What Saddam is doing his his people is unacceptable.

Yes, but so is what is happening in many other countries, but nothing is being done about it.

Originally posted by Cork
The Iraqi people would be dead as Saddam is defended by his army.

Armies are often slow to kill their own people wholesale - see Romania c. 1989.

Originally posted by Cork
Sure, did he not get 100% of the vote. I am sure they all love Saddam. They are living in fear of their lives.

Yes they are, but that is from a combination of factors. Do you not think that ordinary Iraqis have any patriotic pride (not that I am big on patriotic pride, most patriots end up dead)? Do you not think it is largely for the Iraqis to decide what direction they go in?

Originally posted by Cork
So - this this is the Germans motivation?

Actually I understand it is mostly French, Russian and Chinese companies have contracts. Indeed I understand a few Irish companies have contracts.

Originally posted by Cork
I think the US & the EU pay the same price for oil.

No they don't, companies from the USA are banned from Iraq, so no profit can be repatriated from Iraq to the USA via oil companies.

Originally posted by Cork
The whole oil thing is a complete RED herring.

So what is it about, exactly? WMD that people can't find? Regime change? War crimes? Bad government?

Originally posted by The Saint
Oil is priced in US dollars and whoever controls the oil controls the price.

Actually quite a few countries (including Iraq) have their oil priced in Euros, as a snub to the American Dollar.

mike65

Originally posted by Victor
Is it vandalism? Isn't vandalism damage or destruction without cause? This damage was for a specific political purpose. Were the IRA vandals? Are demolition contractors vandals?

It was'nt vandalism, it was a politically inspired violence.

Mike.

anthonymcg

Whether this potential war is about oil or not is incidental. We don't know for sure that it is and we don't know for sure that it isn't. Simple as that.

I believe that Bertie should have the balls to stand up to the blatant flouting of our constitution by the US. RTE News reported that the amount of planes REPORTING they have munitions on board has more than doubled over the past month. What about the planes who DONT DECLARE they're carrying weapons. Is anybody checking this?

For the moment Shannon shouldn't be used as there is no UN mandate for it. Does anyone really think that Bush is gonna send the best part of a quarter of a million troops to the region just to bring them all back in a few weeks? Of course not, he'd lose face and Bush aint about to let that happen.

The US is determined to go ahead no matter what happens. The inspectors should be given more time to find what, if anything is there. The US should show us the so-called "evidence" that the CIA and NSA have, otherwise it'll struggle to gain support from the public. A war that is unjustified will only de-stabilise the whole region.

Cork

[

It was'nt vandalism, it was a politically inspired violence.

It was vandalisim & will cost the Irish government.

It will be less money that the Irish government will have to spend on schools & hospitals.

The inspectors should be given more time to find what, if anything is there.

The Iraqi dictator should let us know what weapons he has.

He should come clean and stop trying to out fox the UN.

The UN report was quiet damning on his co-operation and reports have stated that co-operation has not improved.

I am completely anti - war - but if Saddam has nuclear war heads - this would be a danger to the world.

I think heshould begin to co-operate fully with the UN.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
The Iraqi dictator should let us know what weapons he has.

Sure, and lets assume that he did - lets take the farcical situation that he was completely honest in getting the report compiled.

Then lets assume that the west turn around and say "but you have more - stuff you didnt report".

Exactly how do you prove that you dont have something?

The US and UK have insisted that they know Saddam has WMDs, and rarely pass the opportunity up to mention this in any speech.

They talk about the incompleteness of the report, but never mention the fact that hundreds of kilo's of nuclear fuel is unaccountable (on paper) within their own nations, and this has never been seen as a problem. Yet Saddam's report is unacceptable because there are some contradictions in the thousands of pages? Convenient.

If we look at the background for these allegations, what do we see? Any evidence produced to back these claims to date is already-known information which was known to be out of date, or information that has been shown to be incorrect (i.e. they have not led the investigators to a smoking gun despite promising they would).

Now, most people dont even question the fact any more, but when they do we get a new line....acceptence now, proof later. The US and UK wants us to believe their word sight-unseen, and they will provide proof after we have accepted and acted on the allegation.

So maybe if you quit with the pointles rhetoric and instead showed that Saddam does indeed have these weapons....then maybe youd have a point.

As it is....you've still got nothing.

jc

mike65

Cork, when I said it was politically inspired violence, that was'nt approval from me! That woman should have her ass sued off by the government to the tune of $500,000.

Trouble is if they tried she'd end up "The Shannon One" and would have Trevor Seargent starting a hunger strike so she can win freedom from having to face the consequences of her own actions.

Mike.

Cork

So maybe if you quit with the pointles rhetoric and instead showed that Saddam does indeed have these weapons....then maybe youd have a point.

The UN is seaching Iraq for trace of Saddams stock pile of weapons. It would be great, if Saddam could be trusted. But a man who uses chemical weapons on his own people cannot.

President Bush said he would welcome a second U.N. resolution on Iraq if it served to reinforce the message that the international community is determined to disarm Saddam Hussein's regime.

Dr Hans Blix has stated:

Iraq has provided co-operation with regards to the inspection process, but it still needs to co-operate in matters of substance.

However, Iraq appeared "not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it

Iraq has failed to comply with the inspectors' request to deploy a U2 plane to carry out aerial imagery and surveillance.

Are we to ignore Hans Blix?

I think they are a lot of people who are opposed to geoge W Bush who never miss an opportunity to attack him. I am anti war. But I feel Saddam has got to own up to the arms he has.

A lot of stuff being written in our papers is so completely anti american. Why are not the same columnists writing about the sheer horror of Saddam?

I feel many "socialists" would be anti American no metter what. This may be a weakness in any ideology they may have. Hans Blix's comments on Saddam have been damning. Are we to ignore these comments and continue bush bashing?


Chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix's comments on Iraq cannot be brushed under the carpet. Eight European countries have voiced support for the United States and are calling for the U.N. Security Council to "face up to its responsibilities" on Iraq.


What is the best Iraq could come up with: an invitation to U.N. inspectors to return for further talks.

It is about time that Saddam began to talk.

I know Saddam has his support but really Hans Blix has done a good job on exposing Saddam. Yet people continue to make attacks on the US.

IIf is no coincidence that Cork City & County has only 2 "Socialist" TDs - Before this we had none.

Cork

Originally posted by mike65
Cork, when I said it was politically inspired violence, that was'nt approval from me! That woman should have her ass sued off by the government to the tune of $500,000.
Mike.

Well the tribunerals are investigating much smaller amounts. I think due process needs to be taken.

Paying the US is crazy. $500,000 could be spent on our hospitals or schools. Now it is going to be a repair bill on a US aircraft.

If the government said tomorrow morning said they are purchasing a new jet - These very same people would be moaning about waste of public money.

Consistancy in a world gone mad.

rien_du_tout

Originally posted by Cork
President Bush said he would welcome a second U.N. resolution on Iraq if it served to reinforce the message that the international community is determined to disarm Saddam Hussein's regime.

So he welcomes resolutions that support his own position? big surprise. But the big problem is that he will also go ahead without worldwide support. Because aside from the security council, the main council of the UN which represents all the world would never support his action. And the security council not passing a resolution specifically about the use of force against Iraq would be a pseudo-sign of distaste for the said war.

Are we to ignore Hans Blix?

No, yet u have picked the things that suit your arguement. Are we to ignore the fact that he wants more time to search and that the war not go ahead straight away.....not really a question is it.

I think they are a lot of people who are opposed to geoge W Bush who never miss an opportunity to attack him.

Isnt that our right and especially the right of the american people, yet he's brought patriotism into the mix and so its harder for a citizen to condemn him. Pretty handy position for an elected representative, who generally do get an attack whenever there's a chance by people who oppose him- it's called politics!

A lot of stuff being written in our papers is so completely anti american. Why are not the same columnists writing about the sheer horror of Saddam?

There's somebody threatening to kill 1000's of people, both innocent and uniformed. Who are u gonna right about, this aggressor or the past deads which the agressor is trying to use in justifying the present murder.

I feel many "socialists" would be anti American no metter what. This may be a weakness in any ideology they may have.

It is an ideological weakness to oppose a system which due to my ideology, I do oppose. Strange logic. I also oppose dictators and despotism, does that mean its a weakness of mine to oppose any regiems in the world using said method of governence?

I think the word socialist is being used in about as broad a meaning as anti-american. Socialism ranges from coservative to liberal and all in between. Its pretty much the advancement of democracy, IMO. Its power to the people by the poeple and isnt simply an election every 5 yrs and forget about everything for another 5 yrs. There are various models and obviously some are more to my liking. If all any1 can say is that it hasnt worked in any country b4 then I would challange that statement and also say that changes could be made for a different outcome. Please stop implying that all socialists are racists because that really is the true meaning of anti-american in my eyes.

Eight European countries have voiced support for the United States and are calling for the U.N. Security Council to "face up to its responsibilities" on Iraq.

8 Countries in a world of how many?? Hmmm....... and Oasis's song "little by little" is on...how apropriate.

What is the best Iraq could come up with: an invitation to U.N. inspectors to return for further talks.

It is about time that Saddam began to talk.

Hmmm, any1 else notice these contradictory sentences side by side in his post???? I dont think its time for extra talk personally because Saddams obligations are clear and he needs to co-operate with the UN, not the US.

seán

Cork

I dont think its time for extra talk personally because Saddams obligations are clear and he needs to co-operate with the UN, not the US.

I agree but Blix has stated:

Iraq has provided co-operation with regards to the inspection process, but it still needs to co-operate in matters of substance.

It is time for Saddam to stop the symantics & start cooperating with the UN.

Are the "Peace" troop protesting outside the Iraqi embassey?

No?

They are below in Shannon Airport.

This Anti American thing is pretty dreadful.

Turnip

I've no problem with the war, it'll be over quickly, but Ireland shouldn't make itself a target for terrorism in the meantime. If one loony left moron with a hatchet can breach Shannon's joke security, then what damage could a few intelligent organised and dedicated terrorists do?

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
This Anti American thing is pretty dreadful.

Whats more terrible here is your insistence on continuing to use the term "anti-American", despite the fact that your last usage of it prompted large response by me saying that I was fed up of it and wasnt just going to sit by and let it slide any more.

So.....I'll make this simple Cork.

1) Go read this post of mine : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?postid=725034#post725034

2) Once you've read it, come back here and either withdraw your comment, or defend it. And I wont accept any excuses - if you choose to defend it, you'd better argue your case and not just offer me a glib little one-liner like 99% of your posts seem to be made up of.

That clear enough for you?

jc

Cork

Well, bonkey - I am not stating everybody who is in the "Peace" movement is Anti American. I think that debate is a good think & I hate labeling groups or sections within those groups.


If anyboby is offended by the Anti-American comment - I absolutely withdraw the remark.

But I would like to take a quote from the Irish Voice newspaper:

Bush Bashing Is Rampant

American JOHN FAY has lived in Ireland for several years, but he finds the current anti-Americanism in the country hard to take.

“BUSH is mad,” someone told me last week. And, when an Irish person uses the word “mad” about President Bush, they don’t mean he’s angry, they mean he is out of his mind.

This leading Irish American newspaper seems to think anti-Americanism does exist in present day Ireland.

Dr Blix has stated:

quote:

---

Iraq has provided co-operation with regards to the inspection process, but it still needs to co-operate in matters of substance.

---

Why is the Peace movement not protesting outside the Iraqi embassey?


Dr Blix's comments where quiet damning on the Iraqis. But why is the "Peace" movement nof focusing on the Iraqis?

Again, If anyboby is offended by the Anti-American comment - I absolutely withdraw the remark. It is too easy to use labels on people and use labels to stifen debate.

But while Anti Americanisim may exist - I had no Intention of labelling everybody who is involved in the "Peace" movement as Anti American.

If any offence was caused - I 100% apologise. I too am anti war and completely pro life. But I feel Saddam is trying to give the UN the run around.

I think Bush & Blair are right in this regard.

But I hope Saddam proves them wrong. But he has got to actively start working with the UN.

sceptre

Originally posted by Cork
Well, bonkey - I am not stating everybody who is in the "Peace" movement is Anti American. I think that debate is a good think & I hate labeling groups or sections within those groups.


If anyboby is offended by the Anti-American comment - I absolutely withdraw the remark.

Stop dropping it into every second post like a pill then.



As for the article that (at least on the snippet that you posted) seems to equate thinking Bush to be mad with being anti Uncle Sam:

Bush may be mad, he's certainly an idiot puppet controlled by hangover career civil servants from the Nixon era and big energy companies.

Saying things like that doesn't make me anti-American. It shows that I'm quite sorry for the 75% of Americans who didn't vote for this idiot (and the 22.499% that did). My having a problem with Bush domestic and foreign policies doesn't prove me anti-American - in the same way that my having a problem with Israeli foreign policy and questioning the benefits of circumcision doesn't make me anti-semitic.

(I'm assuming that you didn't get to read the remainder of that article?)

The issue from the legal perspective (to repeat what many have pointed out time and time again) so far has not been related to whether going to war with Iraq is a good thing or not. It's whether US troops can legally disembark off the planes and touch a foot on the ground while carrying any weapon. Without permission from the government they can't. Technically they can't disembark while just wearing the uniform of a foreign army without permission. The Department of Foreign affairs warned Brian Cowen in written memos about this months ago. Months ago!

Whether you agree with the transportation of troops or weapons, the possible war in Iraq, or are worried about the jobs in Shannon is immaterial. Whether I agree with any of these things is immaterial. The disembarkation of foreign troops on Irish soil, wearing a foreign uniform and carrying arms is illegal without permission from the government. No such permission has been sought, no such permission has been given. It applies to planes, it applies to ships, it applies to soldiers who get drunk in south Down and are carried across the border on a milk float while in a drunken haze. It's pretty simple for crying out loud. The granting of permission would take ten minutes - rather than actually make a decision on that the current government are putting their fingers in their ears, covering their eyes and swearing blind they can't see anything wrong. It wouldn't require a Dail debate - it would take the same form as the announcement last week to allow transportation of munitions on civilian aircraft.

That's different to the moral perspective. If we have to consider the moral perspective, it's time for a proper Dail debate on whether these guys should be going through the airport. Or for the Taoiseach to make up his mind to either grant permission or deny it. Until that choice is made, the law is being broken.



On the topic of Ireland seeming less of a friend to the US, a real friend would let the other person know when they may be acting like an asshole. If the asshole had any brains he'd realise it didn't make the other person any less of a friend.

mayhem#

Originally posted by Barry Aldwell
The troops are unarmed, and travelling on chartered airline flights. All their weapons, tanks and armoured fighting vehicles are in Saudi Arabia/Kuwait, having been brought there last month on Maritime Pre-Positioning Ships from Diego Garcia and Italy last month.

As much as a have no problem with them using Shannon airport, I must say that this statement is bollox.
I was in Shannon airport last week ens several of the troops were wearing holsters for their sidearm. They would not be wearing them if the sidearm was being shipped by a different means of transport.

E.

mayhem#

Originally posted by Cork
I agree but Blix has stated:


It is time for Saddam to stop the symantics & start cooperating with the UN.

Are the "Peace" troop protesting outside the Iraqi embassey?

No?

They are below in Shannon Airport.

This Anti American thing is pretty dreadful.

Very good point!
It's as stupid as anti-capitalist protestors always going for the nearest McDonalds, Bank or Merc dealership...

E.

This Anti American thing is pretty dreadful.

Perhaps. However i think its just the way things are going at the moment. America is acting like an over powerful idiot at the moment willing to take on anyone. First Afghanistan, then Iraq, where next? If they discover a terrorist cell in the Vatican, will they then, launch the invasion of Italy?

I don't think too many people are "anti-american", its just that America are in the lime-light at the moment, and are due to be discussed alot.

It is time for Saddam to stop the symantics & start cooperating with the UN

I would love to see America, or France under inspection of UN Inspectors. I'm sure we'd all be amazed at the level of cooperation they'd receive when it came to americas test programmes. Lets face it. Iraq is being forced to be put under inspection, due to american pressure. Its just another excuse to give justification of their invasion.

mayhem#

I see the eejit army has been at it again this morning.
Do these ****wits not see that the only real damage they do is to their own interests.
Actions like this will give the authorities plenty of ammo to "remove" the peace-camp....

E.

seamus

Funny that no-one else posted this, but I didn't get a chance till now:

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=908444&issue_id=8671

Weapons requests soar for Shannon

A DRAMATIC increase in applications for permission to carry weapons on board planes landing at Shannon airport has occurred since breaches by the US military were highlighted earlier this month.

Under the 1973 Air Navigation Order, clearance must be got for any aircraft landing in Ireland carrying munitions of war including soldiers' personal weapons in the hold.

However, protesters complained that US carriers arriving into Shannon en route to the Middle East in recent months had personal weapons and possibly heavy artillery in their holds, yet no permission for this was being sought.

The increase in applications to carry weapons on board these flights follows the recent hardline stance adopted by the Department of Transport, when it notified all airlines they must comply with regulations.

News of the increase in applications is seen as embarrassing for the Government, which had denied Irish aviation law was being flouted.

Eugene Hogan

Anyone else still have faith that the American Govt would respect our laws? :rolleyes:

I have a problem with the war, but I don't really have a problem them landing here (if that makes sense to anyone). I have a problem with them lying to us and flouting our laws (and also with the blind faith our leaders put into the promises).

Victor

Originally posted by Cork
Are the "Peace" troop protesting outside the Iraqi embassey?

Because there isn't one.

http://www.gov.ie/iveagh/embassies/dublin.asp