July 28, 2003 at 11:09 pm
Italian Troops to Head for Iraq
(Source: Voice of America news issued July 25, 2003)
The Italian parliament agreed to send up to 3,000 soldiers to support American forces in Iraq in a sign of strengthening ties after Prime Minister Berlusconi’s visit to U.S. President Bush’s ranch this week.
When Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi hopped off a U.S. Marine Corps helicopter at George Bush’s Crawford Texas ranch early this week and was greeted warmly by a cowboy-booted U.S. President, nobody expected the visit to be just limited to an exchange of niceties.
As one of the few European leaders who placed himself squarely on the side of the U.S. in the tense run-up to the Iraq war, Berlusconi enjoys special status with Bush. Last week the Italian premier joined a select group of world leaders such as Britain’s Tony Blair and Spain’s Jose Maria Aznar (both of whom supported the U.S.-led war in Iraq) who have stayed at the U.S. president’s Crawford Texas ranch and the Camp David retreat in Maryland.
It was clear that hosting Berlusconi and giving him the red-carpet treatment was a chance for the White House to repay him by giving him a chance to show he has direct access to the world’s only superpower.
By: Phil Foster - 6th April 2004 at 13:46
Originally posted by Sauron
DaveThe IRA is just one of many groups that attempts to raise money in the US. There are rather obvious reasons for this, and in this case it’s clearly because there are many Americans of Irish decent. We should not forget that most are decendants of folks who suffered and starved under British rule. Can a few **** disturbers raise money for the IRA? Yes and I bet they raise alot more in London. Some in the US support Bin Ladin as well. I wonder how much financial he gets from Europe?
Clearly no U.S. administration has ever supported the IRA and the two articals you referred certainly do not support your suggestion that they do. What is a fact, is that the majority of North American Irish (and those elsewhere) have clearly distanced themselves from the problems in the old country and want no part of the violence there.
Regards
Sauron
There are also many British of Irish descent but fund raising never happened here. Any theories as to why?
Obviously I disagree with your claim about IRA fund raising in London.
By: PLA Lover - 5th April 2004 at 05:56
Inform me if I’m wrong, but did the French not aid in the Revolutionary war or your butts would not even be here.
Just because another European nation is sending occupation troops into another sovereign nation against the will of its own public opinion doesn’t mean you have another “allie”.
By: starjet - 5th April 2004 at 04:42
Also, I can see kurmitz28 was too far-fetched. I can rant about both Americans and British., unlike he.
By: starjet - 5th April 2004 at 01:19
Looking back on this nine months later, I personally believe that USAgent made the Italians, Brits, Spaniards, NZers and Aussies sound like a pack of dogs. “Loyal and trustworthy…” Mon Dieu!
By: Phil Foster - 27th August 2003 at 10:34
(no such thing as the BEF I guess)
Hold on chaps. I’m not saying the UK is beyond critisism but the BEF made up less than 10% of the total force defending France and the low countries in 1940. They stopped the Germans dead in their tracks while the French and to a lesser extent the Belgians were retreating around them. They had to pull out before they were completely surrounded, they didn’t just scarper.
They also scared the cr** out of Rommel at Arras by interdicting his supply routes. He had to turn round and backtrack to deal with the situation. It was his worst nightmare and possibly facilitated a couple thousand more troops being pulled from the beaches at Dunkirk. Problem was the French were supposed to join in the attack as well and decided not to show up so in the end the British ‘counter attack’ was broken up but not before they had all but routed an SS Panzer division.
They were however out gunned and out numbered. German records show that the BEF was the only force that gave them any real cause for concern during the Battle of France in 1940 and it is conceited arrogance to impune them without learning what really happened to them. If of course that was your point.
By: Arabella-Cox - 24th August 2003 at 10:06
“1. Who said the US beat Hitler?
2. Who said Vietnam wasn’t a country?
3. The last democrap in the White House turned down an offer to take Bin Laden into custody. What makes you think his protege would have been better for world affairs?”
I don’t think Gore would have been any more understanding about the way the world is than Bush… I just think he would have invaded fewer countries… ie killed fewer non-Americans.
“As for #’s 1 and 2, if that is what your history books are telling you, it would seem that New Zealand’s education system needs some assistance.”
I know full well what happened during WWII and WWI and in Vietnam. Few Americans seems to have the same Knowledge. The Vast majority told France that they were bad allies… America saved them in two world wars… and it was only the French who folded in the face of the Germans (no such thing as the BEF I guess) and it was America that saved them from Nazism and Communism blah blah blah.
I doubt very many Americans know much about Vietnam as a country except that there was a war there once… except of course those who went and fought and died there of course.
By: starjet - 23rd August 2003 at 13:56
USAgent:
Your forum title is totally RUDE. Loyal and trustworthy? I don’t think Italy, UK or Poland are full of dogs,and no people, do you?
By: SOC - 23rd August 2003 at 10:36
Originally posted by GarryB
As our PM said… If Gore was in charge this wouldn’t have happened. But as it has happened and can’t be undone and the Iraqi people need assistance then we will help clean up America’s fkup. As usual you drag an ally into a war zone to wipe your a$$… the history books will show it was the US that saved the Iraqis… just like it said that Vietnam wasn’t a country… nor was it just a war… it was a police action… whatever the hell that means and the US did it alone, just like they beat Hitler and the Kaiser in WWI, and by god when armageddon comes they’ll beat the devil himself… blah blah blah.
1. Who said the US beat Hitler?
2. Who said Vietnam wasn’t a country?
3. The last democrap in the White House turned down an offer to take Bin Laden into custody. What makes you think his protege would have been better for world affairs?
As for #’s 1 and 2, if that is what your history books are telling you, it would seem that New Zealand’s education system needs some assistance.
Whenever Desert Storm is mentioned, the Coalition is mentioned. I am sure that both the UK and France will get mentions for their involvement in the conflict.
By: TJ - 23rd August 2003 at 09:56
kurmitz28 wrote:
” Perhaps I am wrong with quoting stories that I dont know too much about, but even today some people in the UK will not go into Maccie D for what had (suppossidly) happened, and I will admit I am one of them. macdonalds being one of the main benifactors to the IRA”
As serving HM Forces this is simply an Urban Myth. When I joined up in the mid-80’s it regularly cropped up. It never fails to amaze me what individuals and groups will believe. After the Warrington IRA bomb the Urban Myth re-appeared.
Quoted in ‘Fortean Times’ [issue 71] McDonalds PR agency claimed that over 30 letters and some phonecalls had been recieved complaining about McDonalds supposed support for the IRA, an example from one Warrington citizen read “Most of your customers are children. How can you justify giving four percent of profits to the IRA?”. A low-profile letter campaign was instigated to quash the rumour, but it still persists today.”
http://www.mcdonalds.com/corporate/investor/mcdirect/index.html
“IRA” in reference to McDonalds is an Individual Retirement Account. McDonalds admitted that pay slips / statements of some of their employees had contained the initials “IRA” in reference to this retirement account.
TJ
By: kurmitz28 - 23rd August 2003 at 02:24
Originally posted by PhantomII
And I’ll admit I think you are quite insane. You openly admitting your extreme hatred makes it much easier for us to take what you say with much more than just a grain of salt.
And I should worry? Im just glad that Blair and Bush wont stay in power any longer than the next election.
QUOTE]Originally posted by PhantomII
On the topic about Iraq’s oil I have a question for those who are so appalled and set into thinking none of the oil will benefit Iraq.
Would you rather have the United States and its allies in control of the oil or would you rather have Saddam’s regiime.
[/QUOTE]
You said it !!!
Yankie-land has the oil which they are deperate to have control over… and even numb-nuts like you admit to thats what its all about. Allies dont have control of the oil, allies and the UN have the job of sweeping up after you F*****s
Again this is my own personal view…. shouldnt the UN have control of the country and oil and then give it back to the Iraqies?
By: PhantomII - 23rd August 2003 at 02:00
“I will admit I am one of them”
And I’ll admit I think you are quite insane. You openly admitting your extreme hatred makes it much easier for us to take what you say with much more than just a grain of salt.
On the topic about Iraq’s oil I have a question for those who are so appalled and set into thinking none of the oil will benefit Iraq.
Would you rather have the United States and its allies in control of the oil or would you rather have Saddam’s regiime.
I simply will never understand why there’s such opposition to putting that man out of power.
Then again I don’t really care to try to understand, as I know the right thing was done and that’s all that matters.
Sauron you make some great points on Garry’s attitudes. I’ve noticed the same features of his behavior and apparent beliefs.
Why on such a such a moral high horse Garry? Are you really that much better than so many others?
By: kurmitz28 - 23rd August 2003 at 01:45
Sauron
Ever thought bout becoming a UN inspector?
I can only go by my memories from growing up and all the hatred that went on with Macdonalds in the late 80’s. It just so happens that I have been doing some research and and over the years it has also been mentioned about Coke and Marlboro. Perhaps I am wrong with quoting stories that I dont know too much about, but even today some people in the UK will not go into Maccie D for what had (suppossidly) happened, and I will admit I am one of them. I have alot of hatred built up, and it comes to light when I see yanks ‘loving themselves’ and that they are the do all and end all of this world.
By: Sauron - 23rd August 2003 at 00:53
Dave
I suppose even responding to to your claim about big US companies like Mac Donalds supporting the IRA will only encourage more such rubbish. Now, if it was so well documented, were is it? My guess is that it’s a simple-minded claim with nothing to back it up.
Same goes for the Coke/Israel story. Good fodder for the chattering classes and the pub crawlers on a Saturday night. Always something to divert attention away from the real cause of the problems.
I would imagine any claim that Marlboro supported the KKK is just so much smoke.
Skythe
“Spineless” is the word alright. Sad that the only true democracy in the middle east and the only one where Arabs get to vote in an open election, is the one that is subject of such harrasment while those regimes who routinely send their children to blow up other children, gets the moral backing of many western nations and the UN.
US Agent
Perhaps what Garry ment to say, was that it was the commies were really the ones who believed that it was the rest of us didn’t have the right to breathe. Wasn’t it Khrushchev who took his shoe of at the UN and beat on the podium while saying “we will bury you”? Such class! No wonder his son emigrated to the US and became a citizen.
Sauron
By: skythe - 22nd August 2003 at 22:01
Originally posted by kurmitz28
Even big yank companies were donating monies to terrorist organisations, macdonalds being one of the main benifactors to the IRA, and Coke-Cola reported to helping the Israelies
Kurmitz, taking on the entire world, are we?
Coke never helped out Israel , but rather, unlike many other spineless companies, never succumbed to the Arab boycott of Israel and companies who deal with it. I can imagine how someone who would think of Israel as a terrorist organization would also think that this would count as “helping the Israelies”, but taking part in the boycott is quite illegal in several countries.
By: kurmitz28 - 22nd August 2003 at 21:35
Originally posted by Sauron
GarryI notice that you and others here seem to have forgotten that the UK was also a major contributor to the war in Iraq. All your outrage is directed at the US. Keeps it simple I guess.
I am well aware that the Brit Govt sent troops to both gulf wars…. my cousin was one of them sent in ’91, he didnt come back walking, he came back with the union jack draped over his coffin.
Not once have I even suggested that the yank govt supported the IRA, but back in the 80’s it was well documented that the money was being raised in the yankie-land. Even big yank companies were donating monies to terrorist organisations, macdonalds being one of the main benifactors to the IRA, and Coke-Cola reported to helping the Israelies, and am I right in thinking that Marlboro supported the Klu Klux Klan?
It seems Im going off on a different tangent. This thread and arguement can carry on for months, basically I dont like yanks, the brit govt, and the IRA. Hell I think I have spoken about 80% of the UK population.
Enough said?
By: US Agent - 22nd August 2003 at 19:26
Originally posted by GarryB
“This is just my personal views, and this is a forum to put across personal views”Some seem to think that the whole idea and purpose behind freedom of speech is to allow everyone to say how wonderful and perfect the US is… anyone who says otherwise is a commie and doesn’t deserve the right to breathe.
Good idea…lets make that standard operating procedure shall we.
😎
By: Stovepipe - 22nd August 2003 at 15:48
I cant remember there were backdoordeals with weapons from Germany. For example, they got their Bo-105 in the eighties, in a time where the US sold other interesting stuff to SH…
By: Sauron - 22nd August 2003 at 15:44
Garry
Your PM has no idea what Gore would have done about Iraq anymore than you or I do. Seems to me his former boss had no problem conducting a war not sanctioned by the UN in Europe a few years ago. Of course you didn’t like that either because it was just another example of the west finally having to clean up after a “Stalinist’ style **** up.
The people of Iraq do need assistance but obviously due to 30 years of NAZI style rule and wasted resources spent on second rate Russian weapons, attacks on it’s neighbours and empty palaces,etc, etc.
As for the oil, well it’s in better hands now. At least there is some chance that Iraq will actually benefit from it. At the very least the US/UK/OZ has seen that Saddam Insane and Co and the UN have both been kicked out of the trough and the possiblity of France, Germany, Russia,and the like being able to do a back-door oil and weapons deals with SH has been eliminated. Now they will also have to do the deals in the open. The claim that it’s US oil interests that drives everything is obviously lame and I am surprised that someone with your historical knowledge would even mention it at all much less repeat it time and again.
Your view that the KGB was just playing by the rules clearly understood by all (apparently) is pretty funny. I bet they could teach those poor dunb Americans a thing or two about conducting nighttime raids and restoring order in Iraq. 😉
Sauron
By: Phil Foster - 22nd August 2003 at 15:25
For the worlds sake I’m glad Britain went in with the Americans not that I was a big fan of the war. I’m also glad that Britain went with such large numbers too because it give them some political clout and Washington might just listen to what the Brits say even if they don’t listen to anybody else. Why? Suprisingly because I think Britain is a moderator in all of this, if the Americans went alone with Bush Jnr in charge we could all be in an awful lot of trouble with the US military on the rampage with no other nations whos opinions must be taken into account.
Its not that I don’t like Blair or even Bush for that matter but I don’t trust Blair (on Europe) and I don’t think Bush is capable of running the USA which is just as well because I don’t even think he is. Bush Snr doesn’t like him much he’s a family embarracement (scuse spelling) but I wonder why didn’t he install his other son? Not pliable enough I expect.
Keep your friends close and all that cr**. So I have to agree that the UK is cleaning up the mess the USA is leaving lying about the place. They are also a moderate voice in the US camp and the USA actually listens sometimes. And to those who call the Brits American lap dogs (though not in this thread or even forum for all I know, but I have heard the insult) think again. Just an opinion.
By: Stovepipe - 22nd August 2003 at 14:56
Add Turkey to your list,they will send 18’000 Troops to Iraq.