Of course, its aggression. With Afghanistan, the public bought it because a coalitionof nations was going after the Taliban and Al Qaeda who we were confident were linked to 9/11.
That's completely absurd. Are you saying that the US public would not be for it if there was no coalition?
It certainly didn't hurt.
I think your perceptive skills - well they are not there.
It could be your perceptions are inaccurate.
Coalition was irrelevant, and it was pretty much not there, other than the British, and various "slimy" characters that rule countries around Afghanistan (that you with your high standards would not be dealing with),
Joe, did you want to post with me on this issue......if os, then stop with the innuendo and half mocking comments.
It was my understanding that the coalition consisted of Americans, British, Canadians, Pakistanis, with support from Germany, France and one of "the stans" north of Afghanistan. I figured the US was the majority partner but I didn't think the others were irrelevant........at least, Rumsfield seemed to think they weren't.
And by the way, when you say the public bought it, are you saying you didn't?
Huh?
Excuse me.......is this some kind of game to you? We are talking about American people who are going get killed in this war.
Americans got killed in Somalia, and we had far less business there than we have in Iraq.
And that didn't bother you?
Back then, we were in for a mild recession.......things have worsened significantly since then.
What do you base this statement on? I think GDP figures are a good indicator, and Q3 figures are not available yet. After negative 3 quarters in Q1 - Q3 2001, the GDP figures were:
Q4 2001 2.7
Q1 2002 5.0
Q2 2002 1.1
What are you doing........the worst has yet to happen.
Do you see worsening in Q3, if so, how, and what do you think it will be. My very limited info (just from our company's business), July and August were morbid, but we have had a significant pick up in activity in September. So I would not be surprised to see a negative Q3, but going forward, barring something unexpected, things are starting to look up.
Let's see.......in August, the leading indicators were done for the 3rd straight month.....three months in a row is considered an indicator of a change in direction for the the economy; unemployment is up for the 4 straight week and is well over 400 k; retail sales have been flat with the exception of autos, and the fear is that auto companies are cannibalizing 2003 sales into this year; consumer confidence is dropping and is well below 100; the Production managers' ISM index is slipping down to 50....above 50 is expansion, below is contraction......the index had moved about 50 this past Spring but is sliding back down again, the markets have yet to bottom, the B2B is slowing......I mean what other evidence do you need......the collapse of JPM?
I don't want a consensus for Saddam's sake.......I could give a flying fukk about Saddam. Its about our place in the world, and the perceptions that other countries have re the way we deal.
I kind of agree, since the Iraq issue is not as pressing as Afganistan, so there should be time to bring the allies around. French and Italians seem more and more content, so are the Russians, Germany with Schroeder is a lost cause, Canada that looked like a lost cause as well, may have some hope.
Screw the French......you can't trust them at all.
BTW, where have you been when China and Russia were categorically against invasion of Yugoslavia, could block any UN resulution supporting the US action there, therefore UN was completely bypassed. Nato, a defensive formation was completely put on its head and was used for unprovoked aggression against a sovereign country. Where were you been back then? And where was Schroeder?
Excuse me.......I have no idea what you are talking about..... its my understaning that NATO peacekeeping units were there in full force.
I deleted your comments re the Germans but than I realized that this is more than a minor issue. The US has few equals in the world.......the English, the Germans and maybe the Canadians. The French are undependable and ready to go with the best deal. The Russians are always looking for a handout or an even trade.
Since the end of Cold war, Germany is as useless as an ally as France is, if not worse. But it needs to be noted that during the Cold war, Germany was probably the most important ally of the US (and the US was the most important ally of Germany). If this punk Schroeder wants to put it all on line for his pitiful re-election, that's his business. BTW, I think Steve had a great idea about closing down the military bases in Germany. They are useless now, and costly. We have bases in UK and an air base in Italy, which should be enough for that part of the world. There is no threat there any more. And besides, US needs more of the light, fast deployable force, rather than a lot of heavy tanks sitting in Germany, so some restructuring is in order.
You and Steve think we should close down our airbases in Germany. I think you will find that's not what the US military and defense want.
This BTW was a major agenda of Bush / Rumsfeld, but unfortunately, I don't know if any reforms are under way, since the DoD is busy with more pressing issues.
The Germans are not alone in having a problem with this war and the way Bush is handling it, and the best you can say is that they need therapy. Schroder will be around for awhile.....I suggest we mend this fence.
But other counties, that are, like Germany, not prepared to help, have the good grace to shut up, and not demonize the US. Btw, one of Schroeder's points was to have a common European foreign policy, but that was before his tight elections, before he started to shoot his mouth off, setting German policy without any consultation with any other European leader. UK certainly doesn't agree with him, and France and Italy are willing to listen to US arguments before making up their minds. None of the other 3 most important ones share Schroeder's absolute position.
Schroder's popularity was on the ascendency due to the way he adroitly handled the flooding in Dresden/E. Germany. His position on Iraq helped him some but in the end, his justice minister's alleged comments re Bush were believed to have neutralized any benefit he got from the Iraqi situation. As for France, one minute its siding with Russia, the next with Bush and then even later, China. Blair clearly has been supportive but he does not have the support of the English people or even his own party, the Labour Party. In fact, this weekend, some Labour Party lawmakers are leading the largest peace demonstration to date in Europe. The Canadians too have been lukewarm on this whole affair.
All the Germans have been is direct and honest. Bush has done a poor job of galvanizing support and developing a coalition..........a major disappointment to say the least. And in no small way, Bush's first year in office in which he offended many Europeans has done little to help the situation......they don't like him and he doesn't like them. In fact, one could say our foreign policy has taken a major dive in the past two years.
ted |
