u.mess.a. u.mess.a.

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Sep, 23 2004 @ 03:55 AM
link   
ok every one it's about time we heard a bit about the coalition.
everyone remembers the coalition of the willing right, well what ever happened to this i keep seeing how it is g.w.bush's fault for the big stuff up in iraq but what about howard & blair?
i will admit i have done my fair share of finger pointing myself but to put the blame all on america is a bit rough. especially since one of the main reasons howard sent australian troops to iraq was because it would be good for trade relations with america, that makes me sick lives for $$$$




posted on Sep, 24 2004 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by unhingedmullet
ok every one it's about time we heard a bit about the coalition.
everyone remembers the coalition of the willing right, well what ever happened to this i keep seeing how it is g.w.bush's fault for the big stuff up in iraq but what about howard & blair?
i will admit i have done my fair share of finger pointing myself but to put the blame all on america is a bit rough. especially since one of the main reasons howard sent australian troops to iraq was because it would be good for trade relations with america, that makes me sick lives for $$$$


Nice post. Rarely do people post the other side of this thing. Pretty much everybody blames solely the U.S.A for this. They don't tend to mention all the other countries that are with us in this as well.



posted on Sep, 27 2004 @ 03:47 PM
link   
And why doesn't this thread get more attention? Because people love to hate America!!! Yeah, let's just all forget about the other countries who are in this war with us, it's 100% the fault of America! (I'm a supporter of Bush, but that's beside the point). People from Australia and Britain saying that they're happy they don't live here, but their countries are in it too!



posted on Sep, 27 2004 @ 07:50 PM
link   
I do recognise Howard and Blairs involvment in this, But the USA is the leader fo the coalition. They have the most troops there, they call all the shots there and they set up the coalition in the first place.

I for one am voting Howard out of office this coming election. The reason i usually rant away at the US is many people on this forum probably wouldnt even know who John Howard is, and basically it is a heavily American forum so Aussie politics rarely get a mention... look at this thread for example... I think the reason it hasnt had any attention is no-one here really cares for our politics unhingedmullet, and i bet no-one really knew who Howard is so they didnt bother responding.

Conslusion- Howard and Blair and Bush = bad

Bush= Leader of bad...

Take out the leader, and the coalition crumbles.

P.S HERMAN.... your right... you know one of my favourite hobbies is hating the USA and George Bush....


[Edited on 27-9-2004 by specialasianX]



posted on Sep, 27 2004 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Here's a homework assignment. All information can be found at ATS.

1. List the countries named in the original so-called "Coaltion Of The Willing". What do you notice about them? Who is overwhelmingly absent? (ie the vast majority of industrialized western nations).

2. Determine which of those countries have provided troops and which have only lent support on paper to the whole debacle (generally as they are tiny nations with no troops).

3. Determine which countries remain in support and which have withdrawn support from the US effort.

4. Aside from any complicity in the fraudulent intelligence used to justify the illegal invasion (in the case of the UK), identify how it could be possible that entity other than the corrupt Bush administration should be held accountable for the whole mismanaged tragedy. (Include Israel and Saudi Arabia in this discussion).

The U.N. serves specific purposes in international relations and the U.S. has continually breached provisions it has signed onto. Bush has signed more corrupt Executive Orders than any previous "president" to try and save his skin. And many ATS readers applaud that the U.S. as a self-appointed "superpower" and "global policeman" has invaded Iraq on fake evidence. The same people invite the U.N. to take a running leap. None of this points to a rosey future in foreign relations for the U.S.




[Edited on 27-9-2004 by MaskedAvatar]



posted on Sep, 27 2004 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Well see, alot of people tend to "lump" everything into one big categorie. First off, everytime anything goes wrong in the government, it's Bush that everyone blames. There are other branches of the government that get a voice in many aspects of our country (The U.S). I mean, a lot of people completely forget about our legislative and judicial branch. Congress and the president are seperate. The president is just another part in this.

Back to the topic: The other countries were just as willing to go into Iraq as the U.S. was. The war on terrorism, and the war in Iraq are different things. The intelligence that Bush used, not only coming from his administration but also from people like Kerry and Clinton, told him to go in. He did not lie, he acted on the information that he had from many people other than just his administration. When said information turned out to be (possibly) wrong, everyone else bailed on him and left him in this alone. Although Saddam (possibly) didn't have WMD's, it was still a good thing to get rid of him. You can't really listen to poles. I have heard polls that say 90% of Iraqi's like Bush, and I've heard polls that say only 5% like him. Nobody places any of the blame on the other countries that are in this with us, that's what the thread is about. Just because Bush is the the most influential does not mean that he should be the only one focused on. Specialasian mentioned that he doesn't like to bring up Howard and Blair because alot of people haven't heard of them. If people don't know of them, inform them of these people. That's what this site is about, denying ignorance.

I hear many people talking about how we've made the rest of the world hate us. I'd like to say this, when did the ever like us!?



posted on Sep, 27 2004 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Herman... the Us has 138000 troops in Iraq... The UK has a few thousand (i dont know the exact figure), Australia has a few hundred... and some other countries have a couple of support personel or a small amount of troops... who is doing all the damage.... who is in control... all the other members of the coalition are really there purely for support so the USA could say 'well these people agreed with me'...

I have tried to bring up Australias involvement but many people here choose to ignore the fact or just arent interested in knowing (you know the typical american view of no-one else in the world counts its just us)... so i gave up trying...

As for when did the world like the USA... well there was the period of the two world wars where america pretty much saved Europe from the Evil Krauts... then there were some periods in the cold war (depending who was president at the time...) and there was that magical era that spanned the majority of the 90's where the well respected Bill Clinton was the president... The only people who hated the US then were the people who hated them for being powerful, not for what they did... the US was respected and looked to for advice and guidance.... Nowadays the world scoffs at the mere mention of the USA and you'd probably pretty much bet that more than 3/4 of the worlds population who you'd ask, would say that they dont like the USA... all in the span of 4 years... funny how one administration can change things so much..

I actually planned on moving to the USA once i graduated university, but if things stay the way they're going, i wouldnt even consider visiting.





top topics
 
0

log in

join