The UN, like the "League of Nations" is impotent when it comes to decisions
regarding removal of a country's leader when it has proven that said leader
is thumbing his nose at the organization and ignoring treaties, etc. and
producing weapons he is not supposed to. Hitler started in the early 30's
rearming Germany despite Versailles... He ended up by "negotiating" with
Neville Chamberlain who brought back "Peace in our times" which lasted about
as long as it takes for the ink to dry, and hence WWII. How many times does
a destructive person have to run a country before these idiots realize he is
just dicking with them to his own benefit! Hussein has now had ten years in
excess of the years before to put together all sorts of neat stuff. HEY
WORLD! Pull your head out of the sand! He is NO gentleman, and will not
abide by his agreements- he's been given enough time to comply. What has to
happen? Does he get to launch a first strike at Israel, and attack others
abroad as well? Or should we wait then, till he has time to apologize for
those attacks, and give him more time then? NO- To defeat a cancer, you must
eliminate it. War is the most God-awful thing there is. But sometimes it is
NECESSARY and does accomplish the task, despite what every crying peacenic
says. Flowers are very pretty to look at- but they offer squat for cover.
The problem is not the US govt. not accepting- it is the UN's failure to
follow their own procedure, and back up their resolutions. Hence, they are
impotent and useless, other than filling up some fine real estate with
ideas, but no backing.
And as to the French- I like their food, but their politics suck. They've
been screwed since GO, and should look at the prime example Adolph Hitler
set for them of what happens when a madman assumes a negotiator's disguise.
We've had a UN decision- And it was a resolution, which is being complied
with only on the surface. Just Like Adolph and Versailles. Let France
ignore him. Not their problem. Yet.
So quit writing here about it. The truth is, Saddam Hussein should be
removed forthwith- and once freedom is allowed to infect Iraq(It isn't the
people there that are the problem) the whole region might come into the
20th(yes 20th) century.
Oh yeah- Sweden is neutral- I remember them selling ball bearings to Germany
during the war- as well as allowing Allied intelligence operations to
operate from there at the same time. It had been stated they would have
been with the allies- had they not been where they were geographically.
Shell made their money.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Odd Hedberg" <odd@triumphclub.se>
To: "1-Triumph List" <triumphs@autox.team.net>
Cc: <d_hammond@charter.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 5:05 AM
Subject: Re: NO LBC CONTENT - Friday French jokes - Why did it end up here
then!?
> Dave,
> I don't think your message will offend any French members of this
> great _Triumph oriented_ e-mail list. They're used to 'murricans
> being rude and self centred. We all are...
>
> The problem is not the French, Germans or Russians. Or any other
> European nation for that matter. The problem here is the US Govern-
> ment not accepting what they once created themselves;
> an international forum for handling intergovernmental issues [the
> UN - that's why it is HQ'd in New York] and
> a middle east dictatorship [the Iraqi government was useful for
> fighting the Iranian ditto...].
>
> What the Americans seems incapable of grasping is that, as long as
> the UN and its Security Counsel haven't decided to go to military
> action against _any_ nation, it's an illegal action doing so.
> [It would most probably end up with GWB being indicted to the war
> crimes tribunal in The Hague together with his top military staff
> - just as Milosevic and the rest of the Balkan Bunch was.]
> There is a vast difference in this compared to the 90/91 Gulf War
> - that one was sanctioned by the Counsel. And as it was: most
> nations was in on the game. Even our Swedish Army sent a contingent.
>
> I'm sure we'd all rally this time also - if only the Americans
> could stop rushing into it and waited for a proper UN sanctioned
> campaign. As it seems now this is mainly a campaign to secure
> more overly cheap oil to the US, and other domestic issues. And!
> Mopping up what daddy [George Bush Sr] didn't finish last time...
>
> Wait for a UN decision - and you'll have most of the world behind you.
> Don't - and you'll have most of the world in opposition to you.
> It's as simple as that.
>
> Can we now get back to matters Triumph, please.
> /Odd
> A small side note;
> For those who don't know, Sweden haven't been in war for close to
> 200 years now [1814 we had a short skirmish with Norway...] and we
> do not believe in war as a means of solving disputes - but! To UN
> called upon conflicts we usually contribute - in one way or another.
> By having one of the strongest defences in Europe [As an example:
> in the fifties and sixties we had the fourth largest air force in
> the world...] we've managed to stay out of the surrounding conflicts,
> just as the Swiss have done. To the Gulf conflict we sent MASH units,
> just as we did to Korea. To the Congo we sent strike fighters and
> regular army units. In Korea today we are, together with the Swiss,
> the only ones manning the DMZ...
> War is the last option - not the first.
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|