Paris

[jsanders]

We have a long tradition of wearing school uniforms, I know this is alien to you because of course you don't have any traditions do you
'cept for electing Republicans

Thanksgiving, Independence day, Sunday afternoon football, the list goes on.

And oh yeah, a tradition of getting Europe out of its terrible wars.

 

[Rich]

Independence day

aside from the special effects the film was crap

 

[Kraj]

That's not what I said or intended to imply, just pointing out that in a world of division there's a remarkable consensus on common sense here

Ah, my mistake. Sorry 'bout that.

aside from the special effects the film was crap

My brother lives in D.C. and went to see it in the theater. He said everyone cheered when the White House blew up

 

[Rich]

And oh yeah, a tradition of getting Europe out of its terrible wars.

Eventually, that's after growing rich on the proceeds of course
I should also point out that ww11 is short for World War and had we not stood up to Facism you guys would be speaking a mixture of German and Japanese

 

[jsanders]

Eventually, that's after growing rich on the proceeds of course
I should also point out that ww11 is short for World War and had we not stood up to Facism you guys would be speaking a mixture of German and Japanese

Not likely Rich,

Not to down play the role of any Allied citizens or nations, but as you have pointed out so often we have a lot of guns over here.

If a super power like the former Soviet Union, or the current United States can’t occupy a couple of flee bites in the Middle East. How in the world do you suppose the Nazis could have maintained control over Britain or the US for any length of time?

Wouldn’t have happened.

We would have invented a gorilla warfare and terrorism battlefield to make the current stuff look like playground fun.

 

[Rich]

We would have invented a gorilla warfare and terrorism battlefield to make the current stuff look like playground fun.

The Beverly Hillbillies vs. the ruthless efficiency of the Germans and Japs, you're having a laugh

 

[Brianwarnock]

Not likely Rich,

If a super power like the former Soviet Union, or the current United States can’t occupy a couple of flee bites in the Middle East. How in the world do you suppose the Nazis could have maintained control over Britain or the US for any length of time?

You cannot compare the current situation and that in the '40s.
As Germany and Japan would have been the only powers were would their oppnents have got their supplies from, the world was not awashwith weapons in those days.
Also I have read more than one account stateing that there was a strong lobby for Germany in the US.
Also the Japanese and Nazis would have put down resistance much more ruthlessly than GB or the USA.

Brian

 

[Rich]

Also I have read more than one account stateing that there was a strong lobby for Germany in the US.
Brian

Kennedy and that all American hero Lindbergh being just two of them and I still think Hauptmann was innocent

 

[jsanders]

The Beverly Hillbillies vs. the ruthless efficiency of the Germans and Japs, you're having a laugh

Even the French had a resistance.

If Britain couldn’t occupy the US 250 years ago I see no evidence to support a successful Nazi occupation theory.

Could we have lost the war? Absolutely, as you both are very aware we came close many times.

But occupy? We would still be fighting. It’s possible they could have occupied GB not because the British are any less the fighters than Americans but simply due to geography.

The long term cost in blood over here would have been too much for them. And let us not forget the Russians. Thank God we had all of the Allied peoples.

Actually there was only one way that war would end, with Axis power defeat. At some time the machine would have collapsed due to internal strife, lack of will, or the power of God, if you like.

 

[Rich]

Even the French had a resistance.

.

Yes and they were supported and supplied by us in order to maintain that resistance, however due to logistics we couldn't have done the same for you

or the power of God, if you like.

since he did nothing to stop the carnage in the first place it's highly unlikely that he'd acted any different just because another country was being invaded

 

[Friday]

since he did nothing to stop the carnage in the first place it's highly unlikely that he'd acted any different just because another country was being invaded

Amen to that...

 

[ColinEssex]

Do you think Christians could go to Muslim countries and tell them how to run the place?

I note that this question went unanswered

Col

 

[Rich]

I note that this question went unanswered

Col

Well the answer's staring us in the face in Iraq, although oddly enough Christians went about their daily life there unmolested under that evil dictator Saddam

 

[jsanders]

Well the answer's staring us in the face in Iraq, although oddly enough Christians went about their daily life there unmolested under that evil dictator Saddam

Your tone indicates that you think he didn’t deserve to be disposed.

 

[jsanders]

Well the answer's staring us in the face in Iraq, although oddly enough Christians went about their daily life there unmolested under that evil dictator Saddam

Your tone indicates that you think he didn’t deserve to be disposed.

 

[ColinEssex]

Your tone indicates that you think he didn’t deserve to be disposed.

There was a BBC documentary on that, and many Iraqi's interviewed feel they had a better life prior to the US (and UK) illegal interference. Apparently, things are much more dangerous now

Col

 

[Rich]

Your tone indicates that you think he didn’t deserve to be disposed.

Oddly enough neither did the majority at the UN

 

[jsanders]

Oddly enough neither did the majority at the UN

Don’t misunderstand me. I think the GWB administration was criminal in it’s deception of the people, about the threat from Iraq. However the Security Counsel’s reluctance to engage him was also motivated by national self interest.

If anything the biggest “mistake” was cutting the inspection process. Had that continued we may have avoided all this.

As far as life being better for the Iraqis, It’s too early to tell. I, like you, are dubious of any positive outcome for the short term. But I haven’t heard any ideas from you that would indicated you have inkling of a solution. It’s easy to criticize, and much harder to contribute.

 

[ColinEssex]

But I haven’t heard any ideas from you that would indicated you have inkling of a solution. It’s easy to criticize, and much harder to contribute.

There are several dictators who have a dubious regime in their country. We all knew he (Saddam) was not a threat to "the west" - he's not stupid, the reason for blundering in with guns blazing was oil oil oil as the main reason, plus GWB wanted to prove to daddy he could do it, thats why Bush went against the UN 2nd resolution.

You can bet that nothing will be done about Mugabe or North Korea (for example) they lack the one incentive - oil - its nothing to do with the "poor opressed people" or so called "human rights"

Col

 

[Kraj]

All true points. However, assuming that middle eastern countries like Iraq are capable of functioning with governments other than dictatorships, insurgencies are quelled, civil wars are avoided, and the region stabilizes to a reasonable degree (that's quite a "To Do" list ain't it, Bushie?), then it will be hard to claim the majority of Iraqis are not far better off with Saddam gone. I'd imagine the vast majority of people who prefered life under Hussein are either a.) caught in the crossfire of the temporary (if drawn out) conflict between U.S. forces and insurgents or b.) people who benefited from Saddam's corruption.