RE: Downloading : how dangerous is it?

Even when I’m not running Kazaa. So this probably means I’ll have to clean-up my whole harddisk :-(.

RE: Trade War

You can probably imagine on which side I am :7. No, I really think the EU in this case did what was necessairy, not only to protect its own economy (after all the EU can survive), but especially to defend the rights of the developping countries which can’t survive if the US gov’t continues to brak the rules made by the WTO.

Anyway, Brussels is really pissed off and this will not only harm the economical, but also political relations with Washington. The EU is also backed by Japan and South Korea, though for them America is a much more important trading partner than Europe will ever be.

Unless the US gov’t wants to create a marxist state-ruled economy, I really don’t know why they don’t respect the rules of free trading, but on the other hand, its their main policy, one on which they are so proud.

This ‘war’ is not good for economy, for both our economies, but they will survive, don’t worry. I’m glad it was Brussels who had for once the balls, instead of getting on their knees.

RE: laptops

We had one here, I think it was a Toshiba. Man, it sucked. We had to buy a new pc after a couple of weeks, just buy yourself a real computer, one with a screan and a real mouse.

RE: I’ll never forget that horrible day….

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 31-08-02 AT 09:00 AM (GMT)]I have to be honest, that day we all felt like Americans. I mean, I was also shocked, I just stared at the TV for hours and hours. The same day we were discussing “you know, it’s kinda boring these days”. So, if you would have asked me that day, I would say that was the worst thing ever happened. I saw the pictures LIVE on TV, so it was quite shocking, the people in the shop were so confused, many even forgot to buy that TV. In Belgium, normally a peacefull country, it was rather strange to see such a security. All EU and NATO-buildings had to be defended by Military Police, whole streets were evacuated (Leopold II-street, where NATO is based). The same eve, our PM, held a speech for the EU. Belgium held the EU-presidency than, and with Brussels being such an important city, everything had to be secured.

A couple of weeks later I realised that 9/11 was also the responsability of the American gov’t and their selfish foreign policy. But still, I was in favour of a military solution against Afghanistan. Afterwarts, when I became wiser and saw that the military actions didn’t help much, I was becoming US-sceptic.

Vortex, don’t be too hard on Primer. I know exactly what he’s talking about. We all find 9/11 a terrible event, but such a thing had to happen anyway, taking into account the foreign policy of the Bush-administration. Many people here had the same feelings, a mixture of resentment that this has happened, but at the same time we hoped that the US would understand the message behind this. I never cried for it. I was sad because so many people had to die, but I think many Americans cared more about the national pride they lost. Well, I couldn’t care less.

They didn’t … there were enough warnings. Terrorism is not an evil, it’s a form of warfare, the evil behind this (if you want to call it this way, I’d use the term problem) is the hate towards the US, because of its unlilateral policy, it’s troops in Saudi Arabia, it’s support for Israel … This all together made 9/11, remember, OBL is just the organiser, the real problem is the hatred amongst the people. That’s what we understand in Europe, but it will take some time before America sees this.

Vortex, what Primer said is not more sadist than hoping there will be a war against Iraq or even worse, put quotes like “we’ll get ya” on bombs. After all, 3000 deads is just peanuts compared to the hundres of thousands Iraqi children that died because of international sanctions.

RE: Name your five all time favourite songs!

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 30-08-02 AT 05:19 PM (GMT)]Therapy – Die Laughing
Guns and Roses – Paradise City
AC/DC – Highway to hell
Nirvana – My Girl
Lenny Kravitz – Fly Away
Underworld – Born Slippy
Chemical Brothers – Hey boy, he girl
Billy Idol – White wedding
REM – What’s the frequency Kenneth
Michael Jackson – Thriller
Fat boy slim – right here, right now

RE: Iraqi Invitation (Part2)

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 30-08-02 AT 01:05 PM (GMT)]
NOW THIS IS BULLSHIT!

http://www.msnbc.com/news/798785.asp?0cb=-4185737#BODY

To Fire on Iraq, Use a Trigger
However justified, America will not initiate a war with another country without a specific provocation. We are simply not going to do it

NEWSWEEK

Sept. 2 issue — Let me make a prediction. If the administration stays on its current path, there will be no conflict with Iraq. However justified the cause, the United States will not initiate a war against another country without a specific provocation. We are simply not going to do it.

DESPITE SEPTEMBER 11, no president is going to make a speech from the Oval Office saying, “Guess what, folks? Today I’ve decided to send American forces to invade Iraq and replace Saddam Hussein’s regime. God bless and good night.”
Remember that at the height of the Cuban missile crisis—when the Soviet Union was placing offensive nuclear missiles in Cuba aimed directly at the United States—John F. Kennedy rejected the option of attacking Cuba. “I don’t think I want my brother to become another Tojo,” explained Robert Kennedy, referring to the general who planned the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
Advertisement

If the administration wants to take military action against Iraq—and I believe it should—it will have to find a provocation, a casus belli. Some suggest that we push Saddam Hussein and hope he reacts. Kenneth Pollack, the Council on Foreign Relations scholar, proposes that the United States launch a major covert operation against Saddam. When confronted in the past, he has lashed out. In 1996 the CIA helped launch a Kurdish uprising against him. In response he invaded Arbil, a Kurdish city under the protection of the Anglo-American no-flight zones. If once again we make him feel the heat, Saddam might do something stupid, like attacking his neighbors or collaborating with Al Qaeda.

It’s worth trying but probably won’t work. Saddam knows that America is praying he will do something provocative. He has learned his lesson from 1990, when small concessions from him might have derailed the gulf war. “Saddam is not going to do us a favor,” said Charles Duelfer, who was deputy chairman of the U.N. inspections team from 1993 to 2000.

All of which means, inevitably, that Washington will have to try to provoke a crisis over inspections. The United States should propose a new and vigorous system of U.N. inspections—with a clear deadline for compliance. If Saddam refuses or delays, he will give America a rationale that has U.N. sanction and can be used to build international support. Unfortunately the administration is paralyzed on this issue. The superhawks think inspections are a trap. They are right to see a danger that inspections will drag things out, turning into weekly battles about their shape and nature between Washington and the other members of the U.N. Security Council. The French and the Russians will quietly support the Iraqi government and try to defang the inspections.
But that’s where diplomacy comes in. An administration that constantly declares it represents the most powerful nation in the history of the world seems scared witless at the prospect of negotiating with a few French bureaucrats! And even if the inspections do not produce the perfect crisis, Washington will still be better off for having tried because it would be seen to have made every effort to avoid war.

The administration seems to believe that it already has a trigger. Saddam is building weapons of mass destruction, and the Bush doctrine of “pre-emptive action” argues that, in an age of terror, the United States does not have the luxury of waiting to be attacked. Pre-emption is a well-established idea in military history and justifies a decision to strike first, when hostilities are imminent. Israel launched a pre-emptive attack against Arab armies that had massed on its borders in the 1967 war. But Iraq is not gearing up to attack America right now. Invading it would be a preventive war, which must meet a high hurdle. After all, if developing weapons of mass destruction is enough to trigger an American invasion, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, India and China are all legitimate targets. It is the breadth of this doctrine that so worries staunch American allies.

“The United States should not argue that war against Iraq derives from some general law of pre-emption, but rather that it is a unique case,” says Gideon Rose, managing editor of Foreign Affairs. Saddam Hussein is building nuclear weapons. In fact he wants them so badly that he has, over the past decade, forgone $160 billion in oil revenues so that he could keep his labs free of inspections. He has attacked his neighbors three times and used chemical weapons on his own people. Most important, all other methods of handling him have been exhausted. The sanctions against Iraq have crumbled. Three years ago Saddam had access to $200 million to $300 million. Today smuggling and sanctions-busting gets him about $3 billion.
This problem is not going to go away. Unless Saddam is stopped, in a few years the world will almost certainly face a nuclear-armed megalomaniac. That’s why we need to get to work, find a trigger and—then carefully start shooting.

© 2002 Newsweek, Inc.

RE: How old are you?

I’m 18. Belgium

RE: I say forget about Iraq….it’s pointless

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 29-08-02 AT 07:12 AM (GMT)]Wrong, Phantom, O so wrong,

“You are so wrapped up in trying to prove that the EU is just as important as the US (and no, I’m not implying either way) when it comes to this issue or that issue that you feel putting down Bush is a good way to get some sort of satisfaction.”

I indeed think that Europe is equally as important as the US, and so is every country in this world. Maybe the US is number one when it comes to military, but there are other things the United States score really bad. Not going to discuss all of them, did it already a thousand times.

“You don’t vote for the man or have any say to who goes into office so why is it you keep on with your anti-Bush comments?”

This man influences everyone’s life, not just that of the Americans. Agree, I can’t vote for the US president, but for many people outside the US, who the president is is very decissive. Not just for the thousands of Iraqi’s who will die because of the US bombing, but also millions of investors in Europe and Asia who lose their money because of an ongoing trade-war between Japan+EU and the US, who’s protecting its economy by breaking international WTO-agreements.
So yes, I do care.

“I love to watch his speeches on TV as they inspire so much pride in me as an American. “

They also inspire me, afterwarts I always want to eat Pretzals and drink Whisky for some reason :7. No, really, his speeches are worthles flag-waving BS. It’s not like he’s saying, we’ll do this and this to prevent that …, he says “America was under attack bla bla bla” “democracy” bla bla bla “freedom” bla bla bla. I must have seen his ‘axis of evil’-speech a thousands of times. At first I found it hilarious, now I start getting frightened because of what this man is up to.

“As far as the news media goes I don’t pay attention to them. I actually hate the news media (whatever network you are referring to…although I find Fox is usually a bit better than CNN….yuck.)”

I watch BBC World, CNBC and CNN on a regular basis, we haven’t got Fox here in Europe. But sometimes it would be good for you to watch BBC or some other Euroepan news agency. Try to watch France 2 or ZDF for instance, this way you’ll learn some French and German. I do it every day. No news agency is correct, but a mixture of them might gave you a better insight. Ever read the China-Daily for instance?

“At one point you claimed that Sharon was the only one at fault therefore implying that Arafat is innocent. Then later you claim that both sides are at fault.”

I did? No, I said Arafat can’t help it that there are so many terrorists. he can’t do much about it when Israeli jets were attacking his infrastructure. Always paraphrase and memorise, my friend, don’t just think what you like to hear. Anyway, you excused afterwarts for your behaviour on that topic, which is good, but still, it shows that you don’t have much respect for these people.

“I really don’t think we should go in as much anymore. I agree something has to be done, but I think that resistance from inside Iraq should do it.”

Well, than guess who’s gonna be the next enemy of the US. Probably these resistance groups, namely the Kurds. The US will give them financial and military back-up to overthrow saddam’s regime. If they fail, they will be left alone. If they succeed, they might ask for an independent Kurdistan, upsetting Turkey, Russia and Israel, America’s most important allies in this war against terrorism. And guess who will be flying the next planes???

“We’d win for sure, but I’m sure there would be “

You would also have won in Vietnam if you continued the war. But the war was very impopular. Just wait untill the first coffins with the Stars and stripes on them return, and see how popular a war will be. You could be in it, Phantom.

“And I can’t say what or who will replace him. I dare say whoever it is would be an improvement over him (it’s hard to be much worse). “

An islamic fundamentalist, a communists, no wait even worse … my god, not a tree hugger. Not much choises you have, Phantom. Democracy, yeah right !!!

Try to learn som Iraqi history, Phantom. You’ll see that in the 80s, Iraq was the most prosperous, progressive and educated Arab country. Did you even know that Baghdadi’s were hated by other Arabs because their city used to be such a nice place? There was even a good health-care system, at least better when compared to the other Arab countries like SA, Syria and so on.

Than Saddam did some bad things, I agree, like gassing his ‘own’ people. In fact, in a modern definition, they could be considered to be ‘freedom fighters’ or either terrorists. Up to you, but isn’t that what you want, gas the terrorists? Well, exactly what SH did, ofcourse making more casualties among the popoulation. But don’t say the allied forces didn’t do this when they were bombing the Iraqi troops trying to flee. Ever seen pictures of the highway of Death? (http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-death.htm) Some B-52s dropping loads of bombs on Tanks, necessairy?

“The hard part is finding that group.”

Yeah, untill then, there shouldn’t be a war.