Genocide Treaty

[garinda]

The USA would have loved to have created a puppet, western friendly government, in the Middle East, even as far east as Afghanistan, sadly for them this doesn't look likely, especially in Iraq. The 'freedom' given to the Iraqis may result in a more draconian, Muslim controlled state than they had under Saddam.

The USA aren't worried about Zimabwe, and the terrible human rights abuses there, because it's a former British colony? Didn't stop them invading Greneda, a member of the Commonwealth.

[JohnW]

Like Bazf, I too am very tired of the USA being blamed for every damn thing that is wrong in the world. If everyone in the UK is so worried about Zimbabwe then go in and sort the bloody job out. Or, let the French go in and sort it out, they're not doing anything for the rest of the world at the moment are they? Well, have they ever? There has never been a more generous country than the USA in the history of the world, yet people can't wait to complain about almost everything this country does. Anytime they do anything they are 'interfering' and any time they don't do anything they are 'insular and couldn't care less about anyone else.' Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Of course countries look after their own interests. Don't we all? Why should America be any different? Time to wake up and smell the bloody coffee.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by JohnW

Like Bazf, I too am very tired of the USA being blamed for every damn thing that is wrong in the world. If everyone in the UK is so worried about Zimbabwe then go in and sort the bloody job out. Or, let the French go in and sort it out, they're not doing anything for the rest of the world at the moment are they? Well, have they ever? There has never been a more generous country than the USA in the history of the world, yet people can't wait to complain about almost everything this country does. Anytime they do anything they are 'interfering' and any time they don't do anything they are 'insular and couldn't care less about anyone else.' Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Of course countries look after their own interests. Don't we all? Why should America be any different? Time to wake up and smell the bloody coffee.

Is that Nicaraguan coffee?

Seriously, I'm not getting on your backs, just stating a fact. Except for the demployment of small special forces in places such as Lebanon, Greneda, Panama, Hati and Bosnia, American involvement in more costly wide scale wars, has been determined by stategic position, or the oil wealth of the country.

[JohnW]

Originally Posted by garinda

Is that Nicaraguan coffee?

Seriously, I'm not getting on your backs, just stating a fact. Except for the demployment of small special forces in places such as Lebanon, Greneda, Panama, Hati and Bosnia, American involvement in more costly wide scale wars, has been determined by stategic position, or the oil wealth of the country.

I believe I just said that, yes, countries do look out for their own interests. Why shouldn't they? We need the oil to keep the wheels of industry turning. If we go bust, so does most of the rest of the world because we're the ones that buy much of what they manufacture. Also, if we go bust, we won't be able to buy any oil, so what will happen to the nations that are presently screwing the crap out of us with inflated oil prices? Well, do I really care? So it's not only important for America. However, America's presence in the middle and far east is costing an absolute fortune, partially responsible for our massive national debt. We were not doing too badly prior to all this crap. Can someone please explain to me, I know I'm old and a little slow on the uptake, where is the profit for us in this mission? More funds leave these shores in the name of 'charity and aid' than any other nation in the world. Maybe it would be a good idea to start looking at that and giving some credit rather than seeking out causes for complaint. Does anyone know what these oil rich Muslim countries hand out, if anything, in the way of aid to the less fortunate in the world? In fact, what has any Muslim country ever done for any other part of the world? Anybody......................?

[garinda]

In answer to one of your questions, the Red Crescent, the equivalent of the red cross, does a lot of humanitarian work throughout the world and not just in Muslim countries.

In answer to your other question regarding the war in Iraq and it's merits in relationship to your national debt, perhaps you should ask your own government. I'm not being flippant in that answer John, perhaps you can tell us what the man in the street thinks about American loss of lives and the financal cost, versus the benefits gained by your country?

[Tealeaf]

Thank you, John W, for posting some simple home truths on here. The fact is that too many of 'us brits' are becoming like our european neighbours; always whinging and too spineless to do the often costly, but right things that need doing in the world.

I notice in all of the eulogies to that hypocritical scottish garden gnome who popped his clogs the other week there was no mention of the fact that he,as then foreign secretary, sent UK troops into Kosovo, without a UN mandate, but only doing so once the US had been prepared to use it's muscle.The Balkans mess in the 1990's was a European disaster, mainly the reponsibility of the Frogs and the Germans. It was the US (with UK assistance) that finally managed to get it sorted out.

There are two major cess pits in this world; one is called the UN, the other is called the EU. The US, quite rightly, recognises that any UN treaty is not worth a piece of used toilet paper.The entire institution is corrupt from the top down; we have always known that, but even so, the blatant attempts of UN personnel to undermine the US/UK Iraq policy, simply in order that they could continue to line their own pockets from the oil-for-food scheme, beggars belief.

As for a genocide treaty...please, this is just a joke.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

The fact is that too many of 'us brits' are becoming like our european neighbours; always whinging and too spineless to do the often costly, but right things that need doing in the world.

Human rights in Saudia Arabia are appalling, in this sumpreme monarchist state, but the West turns a blind eye because they are our 'friends', no military intervention, no diplomatic protest, funny that.

[Tealeaf]

Originally Posted by garinda

Human rights in Saudia Arabia are appalling, in this sumpreme monarchist state, but the West turns a blind eye because they are our 'friends', no military intervention, no diplomatic protest, funny that.

Thats called national sovereignty. Every country is entitled to make it own laws and set its own system of government..if the people don't lie it, then they can always change it. The one rule is they don't threaten anyone else...if they do, then actions may have to be taken.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

Thats called national sovereignty. Every country is entitled to make it own laws and set its own system of government..if the people don't lie it, then they can always change it. The one rule is they don't threaten anyone else...if they do, then actions may have to be taken.

Iraq, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba,Nazi Germany which also had a democratically elected government, Cuba....................all countries with their own laws where foreign intervention was deemed necessary?

[Tealeaf]

Originally Posted by garinda

Iraq, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba,Nazi Germany which also had a democratically elected government, Cuba....................all countries with their own laws where foreign intervention was deemed necessary?

Have you been drinking? Just what are you on about now?

[JohnW]

Originally Posted by garinda

In answer to one of your questions, the Red Crescent, the equivalent of the red cross, does a lot of humanitarian work throughout the world and not just in Muslim countries.

In answer to your other question regarding the war in Iraq and it's merits in relationship to your national debt, perhaps you should ask your own government. I'm not being flippant in that answer John, perhaps you can tell us what the man in the street thinks about American loss of lives and the financal cost, versus the benefits gained by your country?

That is the point I am trying to make. There is no financial benefit gained by this country from the Iraqi war. Just the opposite, it's costing us a bloody fortune. Same with the UK. I'm quite sure the long term mission is to try to provide stable supplies of oil to the west as well as trying to ensure a democracy and better life for the Iraqi people. We are struggling with that at the moment, no secret there. That is why the UK are there also, looking after their own interests and quite rightly so. You know that Europe will benefit just as much as America from any such stable oil supplies but it takes someone to ensure the stability. Anybody can sit on the fence like Switzerland does and proclaim nutrality during all wars. But where the hell would Switzerland be now if Nazi Germany had not been challenged by the Brits and the Yanks. Do you think it would still be the banking capital of the world? France must be laughing its socks off. Let the Brits and the Yanks spend all their cash, we'll just sit back and reap all the benefits for no damned input. I'm quite sure the man in the street in both our countries bitterly regrets the loss of life and also counts the financial cost. Fact is, somebody's got to do it. Fact is, it's always the Brits and the Yanks. Fact is, we make mistakes like everyone else. Fact is, if it wasn't for our two great countries, our world would have gone to hell in a handbasket over the last 80 years. Two great German war machines and/or the threat of Russian supremacy would have ensured that.

[garinda]

Agreed, Middle East stability and oil supply are paramount in this conflict, weapons of mass destuction and bringing human rights to a down trodden people are secondary.

As originally stated, there is selected Western [note, I include 'us', so as not to offend our American cousins,] involvment when it comes to toppling Govermnents and despots like Mugabe.

[JohnW]

Originally Posted by garinda

Agreed, Middle East stability and oil supply are paramount in this conflict, weapons of mass destuction and bringing human rights to a down trodden people are secondary.

We agree. If we can achieve both then we must also agree it will have all been worthwhile.

[/QUOTE=As originally stated, there is selected Western [note, I include 'us', so as not to offend our American cousins,] involvment when it comes to toppling Govermnents and despots like Mugabe.[/QUOTE]

We agree again. I'm quite sure if we were not so stretched with all the other stuff going on at the moment, we may well get around to toppling that b@st@ard as well. If we don't ensure the oil first though, what the hell are we going to fight him with? Bows and arrows perhaps.

[Bazf]

Originally Posted by garinda

Iraq, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba,Nazi Germany which also had a democratically elected government, Cuba....................all countries with their own laws where foreign intervention was deemed necessary?

Who elected Fedel Castro, Saddam, and Hitler? and who intervened in Cuba? last time I looked it was still a communist state.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Bazf

Who elected Fedel Castro, Saddam, and Hitler? and who intervened in Cuba? last time I looked it was still a communist state.

Those countries were quoted in answer to countries that had unappetising governments, not necessarily democratic elected.

In answer to one of your questions, Hitler and the Nazi party were democratically elected by the German people in 1932. 37% of the vote made gave the Nazis the most seats, and Hitler ultimate power.