GeforceCote d’Ivore is a country in a civil war which needs international help to solve the crisis. Just as Liberia a year ago peace-keepers are needed, not only to solve the crisis but also to evacuate people. The French have evacuated a couple of hundred Belgians, Germans and probably also Americans. Apart from that, the French have a UN-mandate.
France is not at all doing any “colonial” stuff. Go study colonial history, Sauron, and you’ll see France has had enough bad experiences the past 50 years to never risk such a conflict again.
We don’t use double standards, but it’s quite sad if that’s your only argument. The fact that they are not on the news in North America says more about you guys than us. It’s on TV here daily, but as long as you don’t watch any further than your own borders, how can you expect to understand anything of the world.
GeforceThe AEL is not as important as you might think. First of all they are not politically organised. They don’t represent the muslim community as a whole (I hope) and it’s just a matter of time before this group will end up the same way as the Vlaams Blok. Don’t forget, these two think-tanks (VB and AEL) use the same philosophy. There’s a paradox between “freedom of speech” and reality where they want to cut back on civil liberties. When VB was charged, the AEL condemned this because they found everyone should have the freedom of speech, including their enemy! In Belgium we have a very strange triangle now, between AEL and VB fighting eachother, but having one common enemy: the Belgian gov’t, and more important, the Belgian state (!).
Anyway, Belgium lost its political innocence already a couple of decades ago (since the rise of the VB). Such a party would however, not survive in the Netherlands because you don’t have two nations living in one country. Most voters from the VB are no racists, they just don’t want to ship money to Wallonia. A party which would be based upon a racist and xenophobic program will never become the biggest party, because I still think the majority of the population are no neo-fascists. Therefor I think it’s maybe not such a bad thing there’s a right wing gov’t in the netherlands. They will most certainly change immigration policy etc, but as long as you still have a “democratic and liberal” opposition in the parliament, it’s not really that bad. In Belgium, due our complex system, there’s actually just one political party which is in the opposition and which is an alternative to the mean, francophone leftists: indeed, Vlaams Blok.
Though the situation in the Netherlands is a bit hysterical these days, I hope it will get normal again the next weeks. In Belgium, the problems are more seriously, for the reason you mentioned. Our “wacko’s” are no filmmakers, or even an individual like Pim Fortuyn who would have eventually lost in the next elections if he became a minister, our wacko’s is Flanders largest political fraction.
GeforceFresh sheets 😀
Worst smell: my shoes after 12 km of jogging. Cheezy crust 😀
GeforceBack then, there were a number of Moluccan hostage-takings (two trains and two schools IIRC) here in the Netherlands, because of a (actually quite rightful) grief the Moluccans had after the decolonisation of Indonesia.
Bunch of xenophobe, paranoid pr!cks we are. 😡
Didn’t they solve that hostage crisis in the trains using F-16s?!
GeforceYes, ofcourse, as long as you don’t accuse us of being anti-American because we have doubts on your source. I’m perfectly aware how Iran is dealing with human rights.
This week, I have to write a paper on ethics during war. It’s still a draft but here’s my idea on differences between the old and new europe ;).
————————————————————————————
Having read some of the articles written by Carl Schmitt, the question raises as to “why” it is important, for Europe to have a public enemy. What the article clearly shows is that it is important for a society to have an enemy, preferrably referred to as “inimicus” (distinguished from the private enemy or “hospes”). Or in the abscene of a real threat, it is even more important to keep in mind the possibility of war. The United States, as a global superpower, can maintain their position because of this fact. Europe, having lost most of its political and military influence in the world because of the world wars, is in a state of “pacifism”. A great statesman once said “war is always the last option”. However, in Europe, it is no longer an option. Ofcourse, this does not mean we should create a “new” enemy, but we should always keep the war-scenario as something realist, even if we’re talking about a not so near future. The 19th century nation-states were based upon this, but two global wars have made an end to this. This is what makes us so different from the people living west of the Atlantic. It is true, we share most of our values, our constitutions are very alike, however, we excluded the military solution. The Vietnam war, and more recently, the war in Iraq proved this once again. Post-Modern Europe is no longer capable of going to war, not only because of a weak military (after all the common EU-budget on defence is the second largest in the world), but more importantly, a psychological “burn-out”. War should always be the last option, but it is an option. Ofcourse, it can be avoided, and it should be, but, and here lays the difference, we consider the foreign policy as an object of pure diplomacy between Brussels and the rest of the world, of which the military is excluded. Militarism and war itself are things which, hopefully, will never affect our lives again or in the future. But by being naieve we are not helping ourselves or the rest of the world. The conflict in former Yugoslavia in the ninetees of the past century, clearly showed how Europe reacts. It tries to look at the other direction, instead of launching a military operation to end the ethnic cleansing. Americans are right when they say we were not even capable of keeping peace in our own backyard. This is not the fault of politicians only, but also the public opinion, who is too selfish. There is a gap between the two pilars of Atlantic defence, that is true, but there’s an even bigger gap between the minds of the two people’s living on different sides of the pound.
GeforceYep, the hysteria is spreading from the Netherlands to Belgium. Suddenly, the national security service is getting everything they’ve been asking for the past ten years, including the right to spy on people without a mandate. Personally, I do believe something should be done, and it’s true there are some militant muslim groups in Europe who are spreading hatred. However, there’s no need for a post 9/11 syndrom in Europe. After all, just one man has been killed. He was a civilian, true, but he was by no means innocent. In fact, this Theo Van Gogh could have been in jail for racism as well. The recent measures taken by the Dutch gov’t to take away the nationality from some people is pure nonsence. This is against the constitution! A rightwing gov’t can try to stop immigration, but by no means can they take away the civil and political rights from the Dutch.
Theo Van Gogh, I still believe, is an isolated case. Living in Holland is not dangerous, it’s one of the most safe countries in the world (even more than Belgium). Maybe the Dutch have been a bit too leftist the past decades (gouge away if you got some marihuana :D) compared to Belgium, where we have the stinking breath of the Vlaams Blok/Belang behind the gov’t. Even worse is the day Van Gogh was burried, a court in Belgium has banned the Vlaams Blok from the political scene because of hatred and racism. Now they are calling for a “Dietsch verbond” against islam.
GeforceI agree.
If terrorists blow up Australians somewhere and someone on this forum condems the act, someone will bring up Israel.
Someone’s murdered in Europe by Islamic extremists and someone will point out how bad the people on the West Bank have it.
Something bad happens somewhere the automatic response is to criticize America.
Here’s a news flash…WE GET IT.
We’ve been out of school for a few years ,we know America isn’t perfect, but some things are bad and don’t have to be linked to America or Israel.
And if someone calls them on it, they’re called a right-wing extremist.Get a life. If you want to constantly gripe about America, there must be someplace other then Key Publishing’s message boards to vent your anger.
Now you are being unfair towards the whole forum. All kinds of problems are being discussed here. This is most certainly not an anti-American/Israel website. Sorry for you if some people (including myself) show some criticism to your source. I can’t help it either. But accusing people of anti-Americanism when it’s not appropriate is as sad as anti-Americanism itself. We don’t like what Iran is doing, and it could be that this story as true, which I most certainly hope it’s not. I’m not one of those who think every culture or religion is equal to judge crimes against humanity. As far as I know torturing or executing people because they didn’t strictly follwed Islamic rules is a crime against humanity. But so is keeping prisoners upheld in Guantanamo.
Apart from that, don’t you think it’s strange that so called anti-Americanism on this forum most of the times comes from the British and not the Continental Europeans? I never heard Hand (a bloody frog eating frenchman) spoke out against the US as a whole, or anyone else. Maybe shows again the world isn’t all black and white, it’s grey ;).
GeforceWeather in Belgium is really afwul. For anyone planning a trip: not this time of the year. It’s raining, cold, wind, looks like Scotland but more polluted air.
GeforceHaving studied the cause of WW1 I can tell you the war would have happened anyway. Perhaps at a later date but not too far behind.
The war would still have involved the nations that did participate due to treaties and pacts.
That’s the general idea on WWI. It would have happened anyway. Personally I think even the smallest detail can change history! Maybe if WWI started a few months the outcome would be totally different.
GeforceYes, but a war against Serbia didn’t necessairily have to mean a world war. When AH sended an ultimatum, it was clear for everyone that Serbia could and would never accept this, so a war was most likely to happen. But AH, already weakened because of nationalism in its own multiracial state, didn’t want to go to war, not for Serbia, not for the Balkans, and most certainly not to please the Kaiser. In fact, the Kaiser had to persuade AH to actually attack Serbia, because he needed a reason to go to war. The Austrian emperor, or his two gov’ts (Austrian and Hungarian) could have easily said “no, we won’t support you guys unless you are attacked by Russia or France”. I don’t think war is inevitable, never. The Kaiser didn’t want WWI to happen, but he did want “his war”, to humiliate France and destroy Russia. If AH would have been wise, they would not have gone to war with Serbia, knowing this would cause a Russian, and hence, a German reaction. So, therefor I think AH would have acted differently if it wasn’t that shocked because of the murder on the archduke.
GeforceI agree with most of you, there should be new (regional) superpowers created, especially in the regions of Latin-America, the Muslim World and Africa. I don’t know if a Quartet though would be that good for stability in the world. Trying to bring Europe together is a difficult task, now imagine how you would to the same with Russia, India, China and Brazil.
Realpolitik: The US will never allow Russia to get influence in Latin-America. Washington can’t prevent a political treaty between Moscow and Brazil, but it will most certainly use it’s economic monopoly in the rest of Latin-America to battle against Russian involvement.
GeforceI am, together with 90% of the world population, amongst those who don’t taste the difference between Coke and Pepsi. Same for butter and margarine.
GeforceWell, if smoking bothers you that much, it’s up to the owner of the pub to decide. If he wants to ban smoking from the pub, fine with me, but the state does not have to tell me how I should live. It’s like those silly looking helmets people are now forced to wear on their bycicles. Safety first, OK, but don’t make it rediculous. In Belgium we call these kind of ministers who are overly protective “teletubbies”.
GeforceYou have the freedom to have a walk instead of sitting in the pub. Look, I don’t live in the pub, I go their twice a week. True, my clothes stink, but therefor it is a pub and not a restaurant. I don’t smoke myself, but you don’t hear me complain.
GeforceAnother victory! x( Gov’t should not interfere into private things like this. I’m 100% opposed to these bannings.
Sign In
