It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chirac : Bush made the world more dangerous

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 11:07 AM
link   
rrobert - please define "superior". I have a problem with the concept of "superior" and "inferior" when applied to nations. Who, in this case, are the inferior nations?

There's a difference between a "nation" and a "country". A "nation" is a group of people sharing a sense of common destiny. A "country" is a political entity where one nation or more live.

As a country, the United States are indeed the most powerful on this earth.

But the superior nation? I have a big problem with that. And I doubt you'll find many posters outside the U.S. who'll support that.




posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Seekerof, get over it :

Chirac, and 95% of world opinion, is opposed to neocon foreign policy. That is the only problem standing between the US and the rest of the world : Bush. Nobody, except radical muslims are 'anti-american', but almost everyone on this planet is anti-Bush. There are no WMD, no mushroom cloud, no terrorists in Iraq. There is only a mess, and perhaps soon a civil war, made in USA, made by Bush.



[edit on 18-11-2004 by Mokuhadzushi]



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Seekerof - that's why I said SOME people. I tend to avoid generalizations when I can. However, the generalization abuse is on both sides: as much as some posters will dole out blanket hate towards Americans, as much some posters will dole out blanket hate towards France.

I'm not saying that we should ignore the Oil-for-food scandals. I'm saying that before demonizing France and the UN, some posters should look at what's happening in their own backyard and realize that it doesn't come down to one nation being right and the other being wrong. It all comes down to politics and money.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 11:20 AM
link   
You guys are failing to see the bigger picture and where the nations stand together and where they are divided..

France, Germany, Sweden, Finland, Spain, Portugal, Canada and a half dozen other founding NATO nations are remaining strong in their views towards this unjustified war. Like for instance, Canada simply said "show us the proof" and you'll gain our support, and spare us the falsified version.

At that point George Bush's America pretty much gave the middle-finger and walked away from that foundation to form "the coalition of the willing". Nations like Britian, Poland, Austrailia, Morocco, Hungary, El Salvador and Nicaragu.

WTF is up with that? And to think our tax dollars are paying for this idiotic cowboy gunhoe mistake.. plus the world laughs at us for re-electing the man behind this disaster.

I'm American, but i like the friends on the other team..

[edit on 18-11-2004 by syntaxer]



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 11:26 AM
link   
(reffering to the title of this thread)

This is a first time, as an Brit, that i can say i agree with the french. The world is more dangerous, most zones are "No Go" now due to this "war on terrorism". Well Done America *claps and waves American flag*



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 11:35 AM
link   
For sake of argument, when I say superior, I mean the strongest military nation in the world. And when I say countries come to the USA for aid, I mean that we are approached for assistance in many different matters, from peackeeping efforts to running special ops. We are not the only powerful nation in the world. I guess when it just gets down to it, people, both foreign and domestic, are gonna complain about any decision. Chirac may say what he would like about the US, as citizens of the United States will complain about Chirac and his anti-war stance. It's ashame Kerry didn't make it into office so that we could have had his Global Test policy put into action.
We all want peace. It doesn't make sense to me to say that Bush is stupid or wrong because the US is trying to establish that peace. We are at war with a dictator, who may or may not have turned into the savage that Hitler was in power, that threatened the world's peace. Somalia, Sudan, Iran, North Korea, all these places are being sanctioned by the Security Council, or are building multi-lateral talks to try to end conflicts. North Korea is most likely going to back down because they see what is happening in Iraq. You may not like it, but the US and its allies (Britain, China, even France) are trying to make the world a safer place.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 11:39 AM
link   


Chirac : Bush made the world more dangerous


Hmmm, maybe, maybe not, but Mr. Chirac, are you aware of this?
French insurgents killed in Iraq


Three Frenchmen have died fighting with insurgents against US-led troops in Iraq, reports say.


And your country, despite its stance against the war in Iraq, is doing what exactly to make the world a safer place?

Perhaps Iraq is a good thing? It seems to be 'sucking up' all the world's terrorist into one spot, eh?



seekerof



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Hmmm, maybe, maybe not, but Mr. Chirac, are you aware of this?
French insurgents killed in Iraq

Three Frenchmen have died fighting with insurgents against US-led troops in Iraq, reports say.

And your country, despite its stance against the war in Iraq, is doing what exactly to make the world a safer place?
I don't see how your thoughts above have any merit, unless you expect Chirac to personally screen and follow every French citizen who travels in and out of the country to make sure they are not getting into trouble. Did you post a similar query to Bush on the American terrorists?


Perhaps Iraq is a good thing? It seems to be 'sucking up' all the world's terrorist into one spot, eh?
I would think that rationalization would be sound if it were applied to Afghanistan.

I note the thread author gives passing consideration only to US impropriety, but would much rather spend his energies vilifying another country so as to portray them as the worst of the two. It does have a tinge of "snow white" effrontery to it.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

Did you post a similar query to Bush on the American terrorists?



yeah...bush should really be ashamed of those darn american freedom fighters attacking the coalition troops



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:32 PM
link   
I love it.

Rather than actually ADDRESS the situation (the situation being that YES, the world IS more dangerous because of Bush's policies), you attack the source.

"Yeah whatever, Chirac is Anti-USand we saved them from the Nazis anyway"

Infantile.

IS the world safer than before? Ha! No way! Is it because of Bush's policies? Yes, mostly.

Maybe if we had a little puppetshow, and what Chirac was saying was actually being spoken by a little Abraham Lincoln puppet, you would listen?

j



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Why not discuss what Chirac actually said "There's no doubt that there has been an increase in terrorism and one of the origins of that has been the situation in Iraq," he said.

"I'm not at all sure that one can say that the world is safer."

news.bbc.co.uk...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

....and as for this idea that the 'resistance' is all outsiders? Or that Iraq is 'drawing in terrorists from across the globe?! Sadly, as if.


What a crock....as even your own media is now having to acknowledge.

"Suspected foreign fighters account for less than 2% of the 5,700 captives being held as security threats in Iraq, a strong indication that Iraqis are largely responsible for the stubborn insurgency."

www.usatoday.com...



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof


Chirac : Bush made the world more dangerous


Hmmm, maybe, maybe not, but Mr. Chirac, are you aware of this?
French insurgents killed in Iraq


Three Frenchmen have died fighting with insurgents against US-led troops in Iraq, reports say.


And your country, despite its stance against the war in Iraq, is doing what exactly to make the world a safer place?

Perhaps Iraq is a good thing? It seems to be 'sucking up' all the world's terrorist into one spot, eh?



seekerof


Insurgents would not be fighting against US-led troops if US-led troops hadn't forcibly invaded Iraq in the first place. You do understand this, right? The US-led troops are the original aggressors. Who is making the world less safe - those who commit pre-emptive war or those have no choice but to retaliate in order to protect their lives and the lives of their people? You cannot be that short-sighted, can you?



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Rather than actually ADDRESS the situation (the situation being that YES, the world IS more dangerous because of Bush's policies), you attack the source.

And Bush made the world more dangerous how? By killing terrorists? ah, makes sense. In essence the coalition forces are trying to limit the places that harbor terrorism.


IS the world safer than before? Ha! No way! Is it because of Bush's policies? Yes, mostly.

Has the world EVER been safe? Never, in the entire existence of this planet has there been a period, at least from recorded history, has there been an entirely safe period. If I walk out of my house, I could get gunned down by someone who just felt like shooting someone this afternoon. Bush's policies have not made it more unsafe.

Maybe if we had a little puppetshow, and what Chirac was saying was actually being spoken by a little Abraham Lincoln puppet, you would listen?

Actually, Americans can hear him just fine. And, if Chirac doesn't agree with the USA, that is definitely his perogative. It's just when false accusations and grand lies are being spewn because someone doesn't like what's happening, that's when I get a little deaf.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:57 PM
link   
You mention the Halliburton scandals. I think that everything should be done to expose this companies illegal dealings as well as the US governments unfair practice of giving them contracts. I was glad to see this exposed.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 02:28 PM
link   
rrobert:

It's just when false accusations and grand lies are being spewn because someone doesn't like what's happening, that's when I get a little deaf.


What false accusations? Do you feel the world is safer?



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 02:35 PM
link   

as mentioned by Spade
You cannot be that short-sighted, can you?



I guess I forgot to hit the 'sarcasm' button, eh?




seekerof



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 02:40 PM
link   

as mentioned by Jakomo
IS the world safer than before? Ha! No way! Is it because of Bush's policies? Yes, mostly.


Matter of opinion isn't it Jak?
You and others claim the world isn't safer while some assert it is?
There has been no terrorist acts within the US since 9/11. Hasn't been too many others since the invasion, except for Spain and within Iraq. Evidences to prove that indeed the world is not safer due to Mr. Bush's policies are where? In Iraq? Maybe Canada? Mexico? Where?

As to the puppet's, definitely would enjoy watching that. Can you demonstrate or maybe Parrish can?



seekerof



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 02:58 PM
link   
I'm suprised it took until the third page before someone noticed that the quoted article refered to in this thread is not actually what Pres. Chirac said.


Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi
U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and removing President Saddam Hussein has made the world more dangerous, French President Jacques Chirac said in a BBC interview.

"I'm not at all sure that one can say the world is safer," Chirac said. "There's no doubt that there has been an increase in terrorism, and one of the origins of that has been the situation in Iraq,"



"I'm not at all sure that one can say the world is safer" has been translated and quoted by the anti-bush propagandist to "has made the world more dangerous".

Whether the world is safer or not only time will tell and if that's what you want to talk about let's talk about it, but don't make up quotes from leaders to try & give credibility to your anti-bush anti-american propaganda.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 03:44 PM
link   


Matter of opinion isn't it Jak?
You and others claim the world isn't safer while some assert it is?
There has been no terrorist acts within the US since 9/11. Hasn't been too many others since the invasion, except for Spain and within Iraq. Evidences to prove that indeed the world is not safer due to Mr. Bush's policies are where? In Iraq? Maybe Canada? Mexico? Where


Haha, oh dear... Ok, maybe there hasn't been, its only been 4 years. What was the gap between 9/11 and the last Islamic attack on the USA? And has there been more terrorism. I would think so, yes. I would say that the rate of big terrorist attacks have increased substantially since 9/11.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 04:27 PM
link   
While I understand that terrorism world wide is on an influx standing, I don't believe this is the reason for the US to come under critisms. There are in every war people who retreat as cowards , just to become patriots by attacking as cowards from a safe controlled environment against innocents who dont threaten them. This is a cowardess and desperation cituation, not a US in-effectiveness.




OOOOHHHHH and by the way MR CHIRAC what about this French contribution to the war effort.

FRENCH INSURGENTS IN IRAQ


OR THIS CONTRIBUTION STORY

FRENCH INSURGENTS IN IRAQ

[edit on 18/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join