i haven't been against the war, i have always been against how it was handled by both the states and the UN.

who put this guy's head in a vice ?

There were a list of 8 or maybe 10 goals for the military campaign given by the Pentagon at the beginning of this campaign. They included such items as "secure the oil fields", "rid Iraq of it's WMDs", and "replace the regime". No one has changed those goals.

That the administration chose one of those goals and marketed it as "Operation Iraqi Freedom" was well, good marketing. What was the most important of the objectives? I think quite clearly it was "Replace the regime. Remove Saddam from power". All else falls from there. "Replace the regime" IS "free the Iraqi people" - same thing, phrased better. Good marketing. Admittedly.

As far as whether the US should step back or not. and let the international community get involved.
That's certainly debatable. Seems to me we should try and get to a point as quickly as possible where Iraqi's decide who is involved or not. I doubt the Iraqi's want Russia being involved RIGHT NOW in a situation where they are saying not to lift the sanctions yet.

but at least let inspectors in. let the UN help in rebuilding iraq. allow the UN to manage the oil and don't piss off OPEC by pumping out cheap oil for americans. right now america looks like they are trying to run the show and make iraq the 51st state. people also think the only reason america bothers with iraq is because of its oil.

bush has come out and said they don't want anyone who hasn't supported the war to help. he is making things far worse than it should be. he's not gonna make people happy in the middle east, but things can get much worse if they keep going down the road that they're on.

I don't think we know yet what the post-war Iraq will be like. We don't know when and if the inspectors will be let back in. We don't know who will manage Iraq's oil and for how long. I'll bet you a fifty-first star representing Iraq is not added to the US flag though.

People think the US is only concerned with Iraq's
oil and yet the only thing in common with the three "Axis of Evil" countries is that they are believed to be developing or have already developed weapons that are in violation of agreements they have signed.

The sword cuts boths ways. One could argue that the US would be better of letting the UN be more involved. One could also argue that France and Russia could have voted in favor of and supported a resolution guaranteeing a more international role.

There has been a hurtful division between some of the Security Council members. What will EACH of them do to repair them? US and UK (and Australia) soldiers are on the ground. The US and UK are spending $100 billion in Iraq. Everyone's asking for something. No one's offering anything. I think it would be fair if the UN countries antied up $100 billion war tab and then asked to be involved in rebuilding of post-war Iraq. What are Russia and France GIVING?

i know that a 51st star won't be added. the perception is that america is trying to take control of iraq's oil. some arabs view americans as evil. its that perception that caused the attack on the wtc towers.

It's not often that wars are started in a way where people feel it was handled well.

Consider the start of World War I. One could draw the conclusion that even a small regional conflict can become a world event under the proper circumstances.

One could also draw the conclusion that Austria could have acted unilaterally and quickly by invading Serbia under the obvious pretext. Acting unilaterally may have avoided the wider conflict. Instead they took a month trying to act multilaterally asking for and receiving assurances from Germany that if Russia became involved Germany would come to their assistance. France would become involved if Russia did by treaty and so on. Everyone got scared and mobilized kicking in all the war plans and treaties. The rest is history.

Sometimes delaying and acting multilaterally can be worse than acting unilaterally.

Are there any circumstances where France could have been brought to the US position and vice versa? I don't think there was in which case diplomacy was doomed from the start.

You think getting the UN more involved in Iraq is going to change that?

fuck it attack Canada

Osama Bin Laden's perceptions of America as evil caused the attack on the the WTC.

Timothy McVeigh's perceptions of America as evil causes the attack on the Federal Building of Oklahoma City.

Nearly any policy of any nation will drive someone to such acts.

It remains to be seen where we are in the Middle East and where we will go. Any policy might look unreasonable if measured by the acts of the people in a region where a good portion of them
of them believe that all infidels should die.

"""In one of the most self-destructive political positions I have ever seen, Canada said it will not hand over any wanted Iraqis, including Saddam, if they wind up in Canadian hands. Canada's top naval commander in the Gulf says he's under orders not to hand over any Iraqis his ships detain to the USA."""

how funny will it be when US Marines board a canadian "naval vessel" and just take the iraqis.
It's going to be awfully embarrassing for canada

Its a shame. I really like Canada and her people. I think this is a very unwise decision by her government. Lets just hope and pray that Canada never needs Americas protection

No, we took care of the tough one, we left the easy ones for you canadian tough guys. Run your aircraft carrier fleet over there and do it.:1orglaugh

Iraq, Chiraq, Afghanistan, Taliban
United Nations Veto but Saddam Hussein had to go

We didn't start the fire
It was always burning
Since the world's been turning
We didn't start the fire
No we didn't light it
But we tried to fight it

as i said it won't, but would you throw gas on a burning fire? try to minimize the damage. pissing off more people could increase the probablity of another terrorist attack. maybe you'll be a victim.

if they keep going the way they are now, it will increase the hatred of americans because of the perception that they're only in iraq for oil. if you allow the international community to step in, then it doesn't appear like america wants to take over iraq.

the states are making things worse than they should be. they're throwing gas on a fire.

No one has yet said what role the UN will or will not have in Iraq. No one has said they won't have a role. Russia, France, China, etc. didn't send their soldiers to Iraq. Russia, France, China, etc. didn't ante up $100 billion for the cost of the war.

This means those countries will have to compromise in some way. They had the chance to align themselves with the winner and chose not to. Public opinion polls in those countries showed the vast majority of people thought the US was losing, would lose, or wanted the US to lose the war. Poor betting.

What do you think the US can really do by themselves? The UN ALREADY governs Iraqi oil right now. The UN sanctions are still in effect. The Oil-For-Food program is still in effect.

"The Arabs will hate you more". Oh, Jesus. You don't seem to be concerned about what people in the world will hate your country for it's actions. Difficult political decisions cost political capital. Goes both ways. How is pissing off the United States any more or less wise than "pissing off Arabs"?

do you understand probablities? would you like a better chance to get killed or a lower chance? bush should be looking out for the american people by trying to lower the chance of another terroist attack. he has that opportunity to do that right now but he's too stubborn and he's putting american civlian lives at a greater risk. the risk of an attack will always be there, but its best to try and lower the chance of it occuring.

america is talking about pumping out billions in oil a year and OPEC is pissed about it because it would drop the price of oil by a ton. do you feal that the world should kiss your ass? its that same arrogance that caused thousands to get killed.

why should countries compromise? the terrorists will strike americans. its in america's interest to compromise to try and change the perception in the middle east. they won't be waving american flags anytime soon, but this situation can get much worse.

Here's what you don't understand sweety.
Any more terrorist attacks and it will increase the hatred Americans have for terrorist orginizations, countries, and religions.
You should sit down and think about what will happen when the level of US hatred equals the level of US ability. Then try to explain it to your terrorist friends.:thumbsup

Yes, thanks for asking. Considering that I have a degree in physics I would consider myself to have at least a working knowledge of "probabilities".

You're really so worried about the US and what harm will come to it as a result of it's policies?

Look at the the topic of this thread. The topic of this thread is about the actions of your country. The actions of YOUR country are increasing the number of Americans that hate Canada.

Canada is a country I personally have NO problems with. In fact, 3/4 of my grandparents come from Canada. However, I can say as a fact that the actions of Canada are having a decidedly negative effect on American public.

Do I think the world should kiss our ass? Hell, no. You apparently think the US should turn a blind eye towards the actions of other countries belligerencies though.

People protesting in your country against our country. Politicians slamming out country and saying negative things about us. People protesting chanting anti-American slogans in your streets. American schoolchildren on a field trip being booed recently while in Canada.

Again - I reiterate. I myself have no problems with Canada or Canadians. I can tell you from the news coverage and comments I see that there is a whole lot of belligerency flowing from North to South right now. Why can you so easily see in others what you cannot see in yourself?

here's what you fail to understand, anymore terrorist attacks means more lives lost in the states. you can't bring those lives back. do you not give a shit about american lives? it doesn't matter if the states can walk into syria or iran after another terrorist attack. those lives would be lost for good. its a fucking shame for that to happen when it could be avoided.

america's foreign policy was an indirect cause of sept 11th. obviously americans haven't figured it out and its a shame. you have a chance now to try and change those perceptions. maybe it will be enough to lower the hatred of americans to a point where another terrorist attack doesn't occur. i think bush should do everything in his power to try and lower the chance of another attack. learn from the past.

seems like i care more about american lives than you do 12clicks.

Tell me. By what calculation did you definitively decide that US actions will cause the loss of more US lives rather than less?

Consider that by the US acting in Iraq it will increase the probability of a terrorist attack in the US.

Consider also that by the US acting in Iraq it will decrease the probabiity of WMD's being used in a terrorist attack in the US.

How do you combine those probabilities in a definitive way when no one knows the individual probabilities themselves?

Everyone is acting in what they believe to be their best interest.

why should it increase the hate towards canada? its this same arrogance that americans have, thinking that everyone should kiss your ass and do what you say. then you wonder why planes fly into your buildings and not others? your foreign policy has put lives at risk in the past and will continue to do so in the future unless this arrogance slips away. it won't vanquish this american hatred overnight, but it will be a start in the right direction.

its your lives that are at risk, not ours.

nobody knows the exact probablity, thats not the issue. the issue is trying to lower the probablity. if you can lower the hatred towards americans in the middle east, you may lower the probablity of a terrorist attack enough so that it doesn't occur.

america needs to do everything they can to lower this probability.

now going into iraq may have lowered the probability if iraq was funding terrorists and if america had the support of the UN. even with the support of the UN it could have increased the probability of an attack, but now that the war is culminating you need to work on damage control.

if you allow other countries to help in iraq and step back while iraq builds its own government while helping to rebuild, that will win a few brownie points. step back from being so stubborn and try to minimize the damage.

would it be worth it if american lives can be saved? i think its worth a shot.

This isnt news. It's an editorial.

I suppose the distinction for many of you is impossible to discern.

Trusting Bill O'Reilly for accuracy is the equivalent of trusting Henry Kissinger not to say something arrogant.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

hello, kettle? meet pot.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

You think that the actions of the US negatively effect opinion of it and yet refuse to believe that the actions of YOUR COUNTRY and it's people negatively effect or should effect opinion of it?

That's called hypocrisy, my friend.

I hardly think it a coincidence that at the same time people are protesting and shouting anti-American slogans, American schoolchildren are getting booed while on vacation and politicians are insulting our president that there would be a commitment to extradite someone that the US has said it wished to charge on war crimes. Canada has been considered a world-leader in identfying and deporting war criminals. They have been actively involved in international agreements regarding such. Now they want to grandstand? For what reason?

Anti-American sentiment is coming loud and clear from North to South right now and beginning to cause the same backwards. Surprise! We're just like you!

But of course, those belligerent people and politicians are only REACTING to what they see elsewhere in the world. Remember Ms. Ducros?

Again - my feelings for Canada are the same as always. One of our greatest allies. I just find it strange that you care so much about the world's opinion of the US but don't care about the negative actions of your countrymen that are now causing a backlash of opinion the other way. Somehow, everything you do is ok. Everything the US does is wrong.

It can't be avoided. If you buy into the bullshit of why the terrorists attack us and give them what they want, they will come up with a new list of reasons they are attacking us.


No it isn't. go read a book on the region. (you really need to read about 50 to bring you up to speed but one will be a start)

what's obvious is how shortsited our detractors are.

he is. he's killing the people who want to kill us. take a history course. this is the best and only way to deal with people who want to kill you.
we have. perhaps you should. (hint: the past consists of more than just your lifetime)

sems like it to you? like that matters.:thumbsup

has there ever been even *ONE* idiot who didn't call his betters arrogant?:1orglaugh

Gee, I don't know.

Protestors shouting anti-American slogans.

Politicians calling our president a "moron".

People booing American schoolchildren that came to visit.

Proclaiming that someone the US wants to try as a war criminal, a refugee from a country where the US sent it's soldiers to fight won't be extradited

Canada sends soldiers to to the US in WW I, WW II, Vietnam, Korea, Kosovo, Afganistan, and the first Gulf War. Canada misses just one lousy war and suddenly it's all about Empire?

you forgot booing the national anthem before a hockey game.
Even with the stream of bad decisions and asshole acts of canadians lately, Americans never booed that silly rippoff of "god save the queen".

Wars cost money to fight and win.

Why shouldnt Iraqi + US + British Companies (countries) get awarded the contracts to help rebuild it since they're the ones who will be paying for the war for the next 50 years!

Ok, only the US is being stubborn.

Russia stakes their claim on their view of post-war Iraq.

France stakes their claim on their view of post-war Iraq.

The UK stakes their claim on their view of post-war Iraq.

US stakes their claim on their view of post-war Iraq.

No one has budged yet. No one has discussed anything. No one has compromised. Not Russia. Not France. Not UK. Not US. France and US are barely talking. Bush spoke to Chirac for the first time since the start of the war a few days ago.

The war is not even "officially over" yet and you are saying the US is being stubborn and not allowing the UN to have a role. That hasn't even been decided yet.

Im still looking for ANY source on this story. except for the FOX sensationalism fest, I havent found anything.

They say the "speech" was made last saturday, so its hardly breaking news


anyone?

bueller?

i don't agree with how canada has treated the states during the war. politicians who bashed americans should be canned without a doubt. there should not be this bad blood between us, its stupid. clinton was 10x better at dealing with other countries. bush does nothing but piss people off.

we're not the ones who will get attacked. america is fighting a war against terrorism. freezing assets and going after terrorists is only the tip of the iceberg. trying to change the perception these people have about americans is the key and will take time.

you have a chance now to do it. saying that canada is wrong in handing saddam over to the international courts is part of why americans have such a bad rep in the world. if you try to bully people around, then hatred will grow.

whether you like it or not, america's actions have contributed to the hatred of americans. these arabs didnt wake up one day and say 'fuck we hate americans'. american actions have fueled the fire. they're still fueling the fire when they have a chance to throw some water on it. its not enough to put out the fire, but its better than nothing.

http://www.nationalpost.com/national...F-658633A7B162

In a speech on Wednesday to the Insurance Bureau of Canada, Mr. Cellucci slammed the Liberal government's "incomprehensible" policy of refusing to hand over Iraqi fugitives from Saddam Hussein's regime to the U.S. forces.

Mr. Cellucci said Washington was stunned at Ottawa's order to the Canadian commander of a multinational task force in the Persian Gulf to refuse to turn over any captured Iraqi war criminals and senior members of the regime.

yes, too much testosterone involved. from what i;ve seen the UK wants the UN to be involved by america says no.

i can see the point of america about not allowing them to have a say. the thing is, its not in america's best interest to do that. it would fuel the fire that the states wants control of iraq and thats the only reason they went in. look out for your own lives.

the last thing i want to see is another terrorist attack. if the markets don't pick up, it hurts my job prospects. so you americans better know what you're doing! :winkwink:

i'm done with this thread. if you dont believe me oh well.

Get your facts straight. The Americans booed the Canadian anthem many times before any Canadian booed the US anthem. Booing the US anthem if anything is a reaction to American disrespect of our anthem. I don't agree with it and don't think Canadians should boo the US anthem regardless of how many times Americans boo our anthem. Why sink to that level of ignorance?

I don't disagree with you. The story can be told with any starting point you wish.

One can say "America's policies in the Middle East caused Arabs to hate Americans"

One can also say "Israel was buying American weapons when the rest of the Arab world was courting the Soviets and buying Soviet weapons".

America's relationship with Israel is the prime motivator in Arab-American relations. How is it any more the fault of America for Middle Eastern countries choosing to do business with the Soviets during the Cold War than the fault of those countries themselves?

Only in 1973 did Egypt decide to stop courting the Soviets and make deals with the US. The US was interested in relations with Egypt all along. What resulted when Egypt decided to get our from under the Soviets and court the US? The Camp David accords and peace between Egypt and Israel.

It was Cold War politics which kept the US on one side and the Middle Eastern countries on the other. It was largely the choices of those countries to decide whether they were in the US or Soviet camp. Notice all those T72s and MIGs in the Middle East still?

Regardless of whatever position you choose in the Palestinian/Israeli debate, one must see that the Arab countries made many poor decisions themselves that causes poor US/Arab relations.

Osama is Saudi Arabian and hates the US. He is upset at the US relationship with Saudi Arabia. He doesn't represent a government. He's a criminal.
Saudi Arabia is buying US weapons now. Saudi Arabia is buying F-15s, Abrams tanks, and Patriot Missile Defense systems.

I think it's politics as usual. Everyone nation is staking out the toughest position they can and then debates and compromises will be reached.

There are all sorts of conflicting statements coming from everyone. Colin Powell has said there would "definitely be a United Nations" role. He also said "The U.N. will be a partner in all of this. Everybody understands that. There's no disagreement about that."

I don't know why you're leaving. This has been one of the better conversations around here in a while. :thumbsup

got studying to do :)

Taking classes? What're you studying?

Just curious :-)

all done university. getting ready for the level 2 cfa exam

Chretien is a fucking cocksucker piece of shit. The US should have done us all a favour and bombed his house on Sussex Dr. in Ottawa.

Talk about a fucking regime change - Canada has needed one since the Liberals came to power. The biggest joke here is he sits in power with about 37% of the popular vote.

Yes ladies and gentlemen Canada is NOT a democracy. You can rule this joke of a nation state with a minority of the popular vote.

Fuck if anyone needs to be fucking freed it Canada.

We a a fucking embarassment! Serves us right if the US is pissed off at our chicken shit setup!


Now - everyone join my affiliate program and be happy! It's in my sig.

Cool. Kick ass!

Hey, this is the U.S. You're preaching to the choir here!:1orglaugh

You expect us to "lower the hatred towards americans" in 2nd and 3rd world countries when edumucated first world folks hate us as much.

Call us "arrogant" etc.

Give me a fucking break.

France isn't a third world country?
:Graucho

Don't be too quick to eat up this type of article guy's, there are parts of it that are very extreme right-wing bias, and highly subjective and full of personal opinion by the writer. It is barely worthy of being printed by any serious news agency really. Sorry, it's the truth. That article reads as very "Liimbaugh-ish" in places with it's innuendo and alarmist commentary.

The "reporter" seems to forget that Canada's 11 warships have done more behind the scenes to aid this war for the USA than 99% of those "46 counties who support us". Simply by performing security and blockade duty in the gulf has helped the coalition forces in untold ways. Fact folks, fact. It is fact.

Also, who was it that sent forces into Afghanistan and is still strongly committed to the US-led war on terrorism? That's righ... Canada. And don't forget the large percentages of Canadians who fully support the removal of Saddam's regime from Iraq, and who fully support any action in the middle east taken by the coalition to weed out further terroristic cells or hidden stockpiles of WMD held by irresponsible governments or organizations.

That's total bullshit. Al Qaeda attacked us on Sept 11th because we had troops in Arabia for the Gulf War. bin Ladens agenda changes for the Arab street every month. He never gave a fuck about the Palastinians, then all of a sudden (because he could get the Arab street) he was a huge supporter of there cause. He never gave a fuck about Iraq and then he released an audio tape saying he supported them. He is an opportunist at best.

As for more terrorist attacks. We here in the US have never burried our heads and we ain't gonna start now. I say that as a New Yorker not an American. Being from NY I and my family are more at risk then somone in the Midwest.

Find them and kill them. It's the only answer to terrorism. You don't bargin with them, you KILL them. PERIOD. For too long Europe has been hiding from them, now the US is not going to.

And I will Vote into office anyone that has that attitude.