RE: examples?

That is what the member of a regional parliament named Karsai (spelling ?) said and he was criticised of that. It is ok to do that imo.
But it has hit other politicains as well. One defended the right of Mr. Karsai to speak his mind about the on goings in Israel and that from Mr. Karsai´s perspective (he is of arab origin) things must feel different to what jewish or german people feel about such a comparision.

But furthermore a former Minister Mr. Blüm said that he did not like the behavior of Israel in palestina and said they are building ghettos for the palestinians. And guess what he was attacked too.

I know that not the Jews in general are to blame but some Jewish leaders in germany are taking it too far imo. First is the right of free speech and it should be for everyone. And instead of starting a discussion on why the Israeli reaction is neccessary or what they believe it does for the Israeli people they just claim that the critics are against Jews in general and how disgusting that is in a country with germans history.

I know that the individual jew in europe or else where has nothing to do with that, but I do not like the behavior of some leaders at the moment.

RE: examples?

Some thoughts.

1st:
I believe that Jewish graveyards are not more often disicrated the other in europe. The only difference is that if it is a jewish grave it makes it to the headlines, while if it is a christian or muslim grave it is no news.

2nd : What I really do not like about some jewish politicians is that they always refer to the holocaust when they are criticised. (especially here in germany – you cannot say anything against Israel without having to defend yourself from being a Nazi)
You can criticse every country, except Israel. As long as this is the case the Jews are not integrated into the society in the same way as the others are, as they themselves demand a special position. (Kind of the moral heart of germany) If I can criticise Turkey, China or Palestina nothing is said about it (yet more arabs of palestinian origin living in germany then Jews), but if I say something against Israel I´m a Nazi. Why is that ??

3rd : I can think of many ehtnic/religous groups that could demand an own state to have a safe heaven in time of a crisis. How about buddishts and their treatment by China ?

4th : If I understand you correctly you see it as the right of Israel to attack any country if a jewish minority their is mistreated. What gives you or Israel that right ??

RE: Finished

>I could.
>An architect is someone who also designs the builing,
>artisticly and structural. That doesn’t mean that he gives
>the real hard stuff like hard core engeniring away to
>special offices, but in essence he is an engener with an
>artistic view not the other way around,
>
>regards,
>jw

Congrats , but I always thought that an architect was the one with the fancy ideas that make a building expensive, while we civil engineers have to do the work that the ideas really become a building.

j/k

RE: Anybody served in the military before ???????

Same here. I wanted to join the Luftwaffe but my eyes stopped me from that. I then avoided normal army service (the draft) as it would have meant that I would loose one year before I could start university. Simply because the refused to draft me so that I would be out before October the next year.

So I went to do my 1,5 years of service in the civil sector / disaster relief (they took me in 4 months earlier then the Bundeswehr wanted). In the end this prooved quite usefull as I´m working in the same field today as civil engineer.

RE: Arthur’s fine

Very interesting – thx for the link Garry.

Tom´s arguments seem a bit weak to me, although I do have doubts about the article as well, but for other reasons.

Here are my reasons :

1. The UN mission was a multinational mission so the information collected by the weapons inspectors should have been available to more countries then the US. Or at least the knowledge that they are able to intercept the communications should have been available. I can imagine many possible leaks that could (and most probably would) have warned the Iraqis of this operations. (France or islamic countries spring to my mind)

2. If the operations in the hunt for the hidden weapons increased their feects then it would have been logical fot the Iraqis to notice that their communication security is not longer given.Although that must not have been the case given the short duration of the UN operation.

3. Even a change in the leadership of the operation should have been noticed by countries at least a bit pro Iraq.

4. Getting the US intelligence personal into the country could have been very difficult. Not in the idea of hiding them from Iraq, but in hiding them from other UN members. I think there should have been an offical list of all UN inspectors working for the UN team. So if new US personal appears it would raise questions with many services. And as I siad above some of them would surely give the Iraqis a hint about that.

5. The attacking of the two places were SH met his mistresses is most probably related to other ,say human, intelligence sources, as such visits should be very difficult to keep secret. I think you will not need such a sophisitcated operation to fix that positions. You will have people working for the females he likes to visit and such a high ranking visit will also not go unnoticed. Such things are things that are easily to get to know. Obviously if I say have to targets were he might be or one (say a bunker or command complex) and I know the times for both to a certain degree I would attack then when there is only one place were he could be.

And the fact that this becomes known to the public also indictes that it is highly likely that it never happened or was not a very important operation.

RE: bye bye Spain

Poor SPAIN – I really wanted them to go to the final. They are the real winners, SK was cheated into the semi finals. Although I´m german I do not care if they beat us or not, with the game against Spainthe Worldcup has ended for me.

RE: Arthur’s fine

Wow, but I can overall agree to your last post.

RE: Arthur’s fine

>Yes… everyone is anticipating that he will invade all of
>his neighbours any second now with a huge army of what
>exactly?

You have considered that he has no capable army at the moment because of the constant pressure by the US and the UK ??

>”As I doubt that Kuwait could build enough pressure to
>contain SH it is up to the US to contain the pressure. “
>
>So that poor destitute country of Kuwaite will let the US
>defend it from the evil Saddam… and boy what pressure they
>are holding back too.

Well the Iraq before IIPGW was certainly a major regional power. Keeping them low now is nothing but keeping the same thing from happening.

>”First I never said childeren are killed by US bombs. I siad
>that some people in europe are saying that. “
>
>Ahhh so no children are being killed by bombs then… must
>be smart bombs are they?

Well childeren should not be killed by bombs dropped on AA or SAM sites. Except you deliberately put them into rural areas. But then who is to blame ??

>”I mean it is easy, if SH open his country for UN inspectors
>and stopps his claims on Kuwait (17th province etc.) then
>there could be a lifting of sanctions. “
>
>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
>
>Do you know why the UN arms inspectors were asked to leave?
>If you look through the archives you might find it but to go
>over it briefly (do a search on “infowar.com” or visit the
>website).
>Basically to help find out where he was hiding WMD projects
>the NSA was brought in to crack the codes used in Saddams
>Swedish encrypted cellphones. This resulted in a large
>amount of very useful information coming to light but the US
>in its stupidity chose to use it to try to kill Saddam.
>Their clumsy attempt of bombing one of his mistrisses gave
>the game away as he knew it could only have been an
>intercept of his cellphone conversation. Inspectors out and
>information line that could have eventually lead to Saddam
>himself disclosing all of his WMD programs was cut… all
>for a chance to murder him.
>Because of this I very much doubt weapons inspectors will be
>back any time soon… and whether you want him dead or not
>can you blame him?

Well I never heard of that before and I find it hard to believe, perhaps anyone else can confirm this.

>”…thousands of german childeren died by the allied
>bombings in WW2. Should they have stopped the bombing then
>?? Or was it not the fact that the Nazis were to blaim for
>the deaths ??”
>
>I think that was a little different. The objectives of the
>allied intervention in the Gulf was always to liberate
>Kuwaite. There was never any call to kill Saddam except from
>the American side (and perhaps the British and Israeli).

Kuwait is free at the moment, but Saddam never accepted that. The IIPGW is still called a victory in Iraq and Kuwait is the 17th province.

>”Only after the war and after the end of the Nazi regime the
>germans were treated better. “
>
>Yes the removal of Slobodan has resulted in the Serbs being
>showered with kindness and Yugoslavia is now the land of
>milk and honey…

In comparison to the Slobodan regime – yes. They get help from the EU.
Surely the individula suffers from the bad economic situation in the country today, but the reason for that is the policy of the old government and nothing else.

>I thought the Gulf war ended a long time ago. It is
>continued by the US and the UK (specifically Blair) for no
>obvious reason. Yes he is a dictator, yes he has WMD but
>that is hardly a reason to treat him this way.
>BTW for all their rhetoric about him using WMD on his own
>people nobody in the west cared at the time.

I always thought the war ends when SH fullfills the UN resolutions. And he has failed yet.

>Indeed but I think the men safe and sound in Washington and
>London could show a little more intelligence… Saddam did
>what Hitler got away with several times before there was a
>response… Kuwaite was Saddams Austria. (In comparison
>there is hardly ever anything reported about the losses in
>Kuwaite… that is how much we in the West care about
>them… for the Soviet troops there was a little more
>reasoning behind their revenge… if I were able to stop
>them I would just as I would like the West to stop what it
>is doing now… or are you suggesting that what the west is
>doing is OK and therefore what the Soviets did was therefore
>also OK?)

Iraq is like germnay with hitler still in place. Do you think that if the allies would simply have retaken Poland and France etc. and left the Nazis in place the world would be the same today ??

>Red crosses offered very little protection to either side on
>the eastern front… a war is like a dance… you have to
>follow the leader… in this case the leaders were nazis
>with no respect for slavic lives… expecting mercy then was
>a little unreasonable.
>Of course again I would say that it was wrong and should not
>have happened… or are you suggesting this event makes
>anything the west chooses to do now OK?

As you seem to understand this tragedy, plz accept that I do understand the tragedy when Iraqi civilians are killed by US bombs.
Both is wrong but unavoidable.

>I would say that Iraq has been attacked wouldn’t you?
>So by your logic they are free to launch WMD on UK, NATO,
>and US, as well as many of its neighbours.

Yes, after he attacked Kuwait.

>How may I ask did they help the Iranians? Did they provide
>spare parts for the US planes in Iranian service?

You would not believe but yes. You heard about the Iranian Contra affair ? Or Israeli F-4 tires delivered to Iran with US knowledge. Sometimes even US warships warned the Iranians of incoming Iraqi attacks.

>I am not suggesting SH is a saint, nor that the US made him
>invade Iran, but I am sure he was given in very plain terms
>the idea that invading Iran would suit the US… of course

Or he saw a chance to attack a neighbour that was kind of an outsider at that moment and seemd military week because of the islamic revolution.

>This pussy footing around and beating around the bush way of
>offering support was probably the main reason the US was
>misinterpreted over Kuwait.

Perhaps the Iraqis did not tell them they were to incade Kuwait, but asked if the US would back a solution to the current crisis. Who says that only the US can be misinterpreted.

>I see so it was not anything in particular that SH did it
>was just that the opponent he chose this time was too small
>and could become part of a greater Iraq. I guess this would
>lend fuel to those paranoid Arabs that might think this was
>evidence that the US and west like to keep the Arab world
>divided so they can play them off against each other and
>keep the price of oil down.

No the difference was that Israel (with US help) and the arabs (with russian help) were able to defend themselves without the need for outer intervention. Kuwait obviously could not defend itself without outer intervention.

>You try building a nuclear power station in Iraq….

With the declaered plan to build a atomic bomb to use it against Israel.

>”But I´m sure that the imperialstic behavior of Israel made
>them a convinient target. “
>
>Were you asleep during that campaign?
>It was an attempt by Saddam to break up the coalition by
>bringing Israel into the war. The coalition relied on Arab
>support for many of their bases… this was not about
>destroying Israel but breaking up an opponent that was at
>the time attacking them.

So if I say Iraq is supporting the terrorists of 9/11 you would say that the US can attack them then ??
Or Iran with the finacial aid to the Hizbolah. They must help them as much as Israel helped the allies during the IIPGW. So they can be attacked then too ?

>”Sure I can remember when the germans used chemical wepaons
>against theri own population. As did the british. 1000s of
>Scots died by british chemical wepaons.”
>
>Don’t joke too soon. In the US patients were injected with
>Plutonium to see what would happen. Cars were fitted out to
>release biological weapons and driven through the streets of
>major cities to determine how the diseases spread in a real
>city.
>Technically the American Indians were US citizens,
>Technically Northern Irish people are British citizens…
>their treatment hasn’t been perfect.
>A few Islands in Scotland are no longer habitible due to
>experiments.
>During WWI and WWII use of chem and bio weapons against
>fellow Europeans is well documented.

And that gives everyone else the right to do the same ??

>”They can built up an arsenal of weapons to attacks their
>neighbours, they can slaughter minorities, they can built up
>WMDs, they can have a government that is know for aggression
>and yet you say these country/government ist innocent…”
>
>As innocent as that of the US and UK

Yeah sure or as the Nazis or Mussolini or Japan during WW2 or Russia.
If you care to explian to me when US or UK troops invaded another country without that either they or an ally had been attacked or asked for their help.

>Ohh how noble… when are the Russians to be bombed for
>their actions in Chechnia? When are the Arabs and Israelis
>to be bombed? When are the chinese to be bombed for their
>treatment of Tibet?
>Why is it only the little fish are fried… it is not about
>freedom or doing what is right it is about who will let us
>exploit them and let us make money.

Russia and China simply because they could win against them.
But that reasoning is a bit short sighted. That means if you cannot stopp one bad thing from happening you must allow all others to happen ?
I know that the struggle with Iraq was to a large extend based on economic interests. And I do know that the US does not intervene for only good reasons, but that does not make the US the bad guy. But I think there has never been an intervention by any country just for good reasons in the history of mankind.

>You are misquoting me… I said “IF Russians have
>compassion…”.
>Poland early in the war was always going to be gobbled up…
>it was a little fish. Stalin asked the west for a treaty but
>they were not only reluctant to deal with communist Russia
>they were also not in a position to actually do anything so
>he made the only deal going which was with Hitler.
>Indeed you could also mention Poland near the end of the war
>when the Russians fooled the anti communist Polish
>resistance to rise up and be destroyed by the nazis with
>regards to their boundless compassion. Of course both did
>what they did for the same reason so both were as “evil” as
>the other… though points for ruthlessness must go to the
>Soviets.
>(For those who didn’t know as the Soviet approached Warsaw
>the Polish resistance rose up and tried to take the city so
>they could make claims for governing after the war… they
>had a government in exile all ready in Britain. The Soviets
>were not interested in sharing power so they stopped and
>waited at the outskirts of Warsaw and the Nazis hunted down
>and killed or captured the poles.)

So it is not only the US who does such things, so why are they always blamed ???