An American Woman's View

[Eric]

Originally Posted by LancYorkYankee

Of course they count Willow! Didn't your cousin acknowledge fact?

I've seen this make the rounds over the years. Not quite sure if it's from a lady from Jersey or not. I guess doesn't much matter. However, it was written by an American aimed at the few Americans who are quite vocal (think main-stream media and the ultra-far left liberals) and would disagree with most of what was written.

I, as a very conservative American, agree most solidly with most of the points. Yup, even bringing God into it.

Rindy does make a good point of the insanity of the millions (probably billions) over the many years of civilization killing others in the name of god. Heck, just in our Civil War over 500,000 died and each side thinking/hoping God was on their side.

Just please understand, I and many Americans really do appreciate all the many young men who have laid down there lives in the name of freedom. I could go on and on into specifics but I shant. My heart breaks even more so for those young lives lost due to the incompetence of their leaders i.e. Gallipoli, geez too many coming to mind but hope you get (IMO) my point!

Brian

I do think the problem is bringing god into it. Not that I have anything against god (I bet that makes him/her feel better) but I do firmly believe in the separtation of church and state. I do think that many feel bitterness at the US, not because the US wishes to act as the world's policeman, but as the world's saviour. And of course that is where the god thing comes in. This messianic zeal, reinforced with a crusading spirit has got, and will continue to get the US into trouble.

I am not an atheist, but I do hold that my spirituality is my private business. Americans may believe that they live in the best country in the world; and it is ok for them to hold that belief. What is not ok is for them to force their way of life (democracy, capitalism etc.) onto others at the point of the bayonet.

By the way, if you do come to Canada to fish, do bring the coffee; I will supply the Cuban cigars. Romeo y Juliettas, or Montecristo?

[LancYorkYankee]

Originally Posted by jambutty

As one famous Scottish judge quote in his summing up of a case regarding the notice about a road toll, “Signs should state what they mean, and mean what they state.”

We can only read what is written and cannot second-guess what was meant to be stated.

Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001?

This is from the very frist sentence!!!!!! Is there really any reason to second guess that this was written by an American for Americans? I believe anyone reading this should understand this. It is then somewhat easily correlated to how various people from other Countries can and should feel (IMO), from their countries point of view.

I believe alot of times many non-Americans are looking for a reason to bring anything from America down. Can't "you" just read Willow's submission as many of the views of Americans. As I've said, there are many other Americans who would state the opposite.

Then, after agreeing or disagreeing, give your individual ideas as these comments relate to the English. For example, from the first sentence: "Yes, it greatly distress me that America was attacked" or "I thought it was grand that those cocky, over reaching . . . Americans got hit!"

See, then it becomes (IMO) more justified/accurate responses. As Willow first requested, what do you (as Englishmen) think about these comments. I believe she was looking for your views from that standpoint. If not, I stand corrected and hence carry on believing that all Americans think the "American G.I." is the only soldier over the past 5,000 years to have shed any blood for another.

I hope that sounds a bit silly but if not. Please again understand, MOST/if not ALL Amercians KNOW that is just unconcientable!

Brian

[West Ender]

Er, actually, it was me who posted this - and for exactly the reasons you said. I wondered what the British "take" would be.

[MargaretR]

We are living through a time when American christian fundamentalism is waging war against islamic fundamentalism - just wish both sides would stop trying to indoctrinate the rest of the world's population with their 'idealism'.
I don't believe in 'god' - so dont use him/her/it as excuse to wage wars

[Wynonie Harris]

I have nothing but admiration for our brave lads and lasses out in Iraq but how exactly are they (and the Americans) "dying for our freedom"?

Saddam was a murderous, evil sod, but he wasn't about to attack us (even though Blair tried to con us into believing in the existence of his WMD). He was not a religious fanatic, he was just an old-fashioned ruthless dictator. Is invading Iraq going to prevent another 9/11? I very much doubt it.

If Iraq had been a threat to us, I would have been the first to advocate going in there, all guns blazing. But they weren't and the tragedy is that brave members of the coalition forces are now dying for nothing.

[Gayle]

The first sentence is the one that worries me and if there is flaw in that one then I'm sorry but I find the whole piece quite alarming.

The problems didn't start with 9/11.
America has had a problem with the oil producing countries for a long time.
They have interfered in the politics in the middle east for years.
A small group of terrorists attacked America.
The American President went looking for the terrorists.
They couldn't find them in Afghanistan so decided to have a pop at Iraq instead under the guise of looking for WMD.

[Ianto.W.]

Gayle, They couldn't find them in Afghanistan so decided to have a pop at Iraq instead under the guise of looking for WMD.

The weapon of mass destruction being Saddam Hussein, in my book was a good enough reason to go into Iraq in my humble opinion, ask yourselves, if that man was still at liberty to dispense his terror where and when would it have ended?

[Gayle]

Originally Posted by Ianto.W.

The weapon of mass destruction being Saddam Hussein, in my book was a good enough reason to go into Iraq in my humble opinion, ask yourselves, if that man was still at liberty to dispense his terror where and when would it have ended?

I don't know Ianto and possibly it was the right thing to do to end his tyranny but what I still don't get is why it is continually linked with the 9/11 bombings.

[Ianto.W.]

Originally Posted by Gayle

I don't know Ianto and possibly it was the right thing to do to end his tyranny but what I still don't get is why it is continually linked with the 9/11 bombings.

I do not know Gayle but with the benefit of hindsight it would appear that the Iraqi people were 'happy' with Saddam, as far as the 9/11 business is concerned with what has come to light since it happened, it is certainly 'food' for thought.

[Wynonie Harris]

Originally Posted by Ianto.W.

if that man was still at liberty to dispense his terror where and when would it have ended?

Ian, doubtless, he would still be dispensing his terror on his own long-suffering subjects. In other words, the situation would be the same as it is in Zimbabwe, or Burma, or any other of the dozens of ruthless dicatatorships that exist around the world. But he would not be dispensing his terror on us, because he was a classic dictator who was concerned with his own self-interest, not with religious fundamentalism.

And, as Gayle says, what exactly did Saddam have to do with 9/11?

[Gayle]

Whooooaaaaaah, hang on there Wynonie - have we found a point of politics on which we agree?

[Wynonie Harris]

Gayle, there are many political points we agree on, as you know from my "manifesto" of a few weeks ago!

[Ianto.W.]

Originally Posted by Gayle

Whooooaaaaaah, hang on there Wynonie - have we found a point of politics on which we agree?

It's a conspiracy Gayle and Winonie Vs Ianto. W.

[WillowTheWhisp]

I could never understand the sudden leap from Osama bin Laden to Saddam Hussein and why invading Iraq was in response to 9/11. I do think it's a pity Sadam wasn't disposed of the first time around but all the insistence on the existence of WMD when nobody could find any - I do remember saying to myself how could he produce them if they weren't there?

Also I'd never heard of Osama bin Laden before 9/11 but everyone in America seemed so sure he was behind it so there was obviously history there.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I could never understand the sudden leap from Osama bin Laden to Saddam Hussein and why invading Iraq was in response to 9/11. I do think it's a pity Sadam wasn't disposed of the first time around but all the insistence on the existence of WMD when nobody could find any - I do remember saying to myself how could he produce them if they weren't there?

Also I'd never heard of Osama bin Laden before 9/11 but everyone in America seemed so sure he was behind it so there was obviously history there.

The leap from Osama to Saddam is a leap of faith. Only if you don't question it does it make any sense. Left to himself, Saddam would have gone on his merry old way, and, in due time, would have become an American ally again. Hell, look what happened to Libya! In some devious way, they and thier demented leader are now OK.