New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

War and Peace

Poll Results: Hawk or Dove? State you preference

 
  • 16% (4)
    Cry HAVOC! and loose the dogs of war.
  • 33% (8)
    Follow the UN, let them lead the way toward peace or war.
  • 8% (2)
    Pay more attention to Korea
  • 8% (2)
    Pay more attention to Bin Laden
  • 33% (8)
    Find peaceful means, somehow, somewhere
24 Total Votes  
post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
I am very curious about the opinions of my fellow cooks on the prospects of war. I'd like to discuss both the overarching reasons for and against war, as well as the very specific impact that war has, not on the economy in general, but on our industry's economy.

All of us felt the massive collapse in business that coincided with the massive collapse in our hearts after 9/11. How much impact to you think we are still feeling in our business from the so-called "War on Terror"? What about Iraq and North Korea? Are these having an impact on business in your restaurants? Are people staying home and guarding their money or going out and drowning their sorrows?

And what about war itself? Will Attacking Iraq solve our problems? Is it all about oil? Are we reliving Citizen Kane with Rupert Murdoch's Fox News in place of Kane's New York newsaper? Kane said "You provide the pictures and I'll provide the war." Are those who do not study history condemned to repeat it?

Or is Saddam really the root of much of the evil in this world? Does his pursuit of power through ruthless means constitute a "clear and present danger" to the U.S. and its allies? Will defeating Saddam give the US a base of power from which to mold a freer, more democratic middle-east?

So have at thee! What does the single largest industry in America (that's you, food service workers!) think of the current state of international affairs?

PS: Fear not, my own opinions (if not already clear as grappa) are forthcoming. I just thought I'd get the ball rolling.
Peace,
kmf



Visit Edible Iowa River Valley"In the long view, no nation is healthier that its children, or more prosperous than its farmers." -President Harry Truman, at the signing of the School Lunch Act, 1946
Join Slow Food HereJoin Gather.com here
Reply
Peace,
kmf



Visit Edible Iowa River Valley"In the long view, no nation is healthier that its children, or more prosperous than its farmers." -President Harry Truman, at the signing of the School Lunch Act, 1946
Join Slow Food HereJoin Gather.com here
Reply
post #2 of 27
My opinion is not reflected in any of your choices. I believe that Saddam has violated his own treaty that "ended" the Gulf War, not that it is technically ended even yet. That requires behaviors of many people who now have different opinions. Reneging interational treaties that have been ratified by the signatory nations is not the trivial behavior all the other parties are displaying. Even the UN's behavior is hypocritcal and further eroding it's credibility.

I don't believe there is a peaceful resolution to the situation. Saddam isn't interested in what the world thinks of him. He hates Jews and America and will work to cause the damage he can. I don't believe there is a military solution either. Nevertheless, I am sure that military action will occur and that is more right than wrong in this case. It won't solve the problem, merely decrease the current behavior of a central state in the issue. There will likely be an increase in other acts in other areas against Jews and what is commonly called the Free World by one side and Crusading Infidels by the other.

What will it do the food service world? Prices will rise on the raw food products. Casual transportation will decrease. Casual dining will diminish as people's budgets adapt to the new reality. I think there will be a reduction in the labor market both for the pricing and business reasons, but also from military call-up and immigration hassles.

If your clientele is largely middle income america and lower, business is likely to stink.

phil
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #3 of 27
Thread Starter 
But President Bush has backed out of at least 2 international treaties that I know of. And seems unflustered by today's announcement that the North Koreans are backing out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty! That's the one that prevents them from selling nuclear weapons to "rogue" nations and terrorists!

GHW Bush himself said that the Gulf War was to protect the U.S. oil interests, so if we are going back there because of Saddam's treaty violations, then it's still about oil. Look out Venezuela, your next.
Peace,
kmf



Visit Edible Iowa River Valley"In the long view, no nation is healthier that its children, or more prosperous than its farmers." -President Harry Truman, at the signing of the School Lunch Act, 1946
Join Slow Food HereJoin Gather.com here
Reply
Peace,
kmf



Visit Edible Iowa River Valley"In the long view, no nation is healthier that its children, or more prosperous than its farmers." -President Harry Truman, at the signing of the School Lunch Act, 1946
Join Slow Food HereJoin Gather.com here
Reply
post #4 of 27
The two you are thinking of were never ratified. In fact, Clinton knew the Kyoto treaty would never be ratified when he signed it and therefore never submitted it to the Senate for ratification. It was his way of looking Green but leaving the dirty work for someone else to look foolish.

Phil
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #5 of 27
Thread Starter 
True enough that Kyoto wasn't ratified by the U.S. (though it was by some 150+ other nations). However I guess that one is not really gremaine to this discussion. The ABM treaty was ratified by the US Senate in 1972. Mr Bush dismissed it as if it were simply not important, a treaty that stood fairly effectively for 30 years!

While I would never stand in defense of North Korea's actions, it is easy to understand why they are doing what they are doing. When an animal feels cornered it lashes out. It doesn't matter whether the animal got himself into the mess or was put there, he'll lash out. North Korea is a failing nation, and therefore feels like the whole world is against it. Which, not coincidentally, the whole world is.

How is it that we were able to deter the threat of the far larger and more powerful Soviet Union for 50 years but can't contain Saddam's 4th rate military ambitions for 10? Meanwhile the Bush administration feels that it can easily contain another member of the "Axis of Evil" that already has nuclear weapons without even talking to it, while it completely ignores the 3rd nation in that Axis.

Remember, whenever anyone says it's not about the oil, it's about the oil.
Peace,
kmf



Visit Edible Iowa River Valley"In the long view, no nation is healthier that its children, or more prosperous than its farmers." -President Harry Truman, at the signing of the School Lunch Act, 1946
Join Slow Food HereJoin Gather.com here
Reply
Peace,
kmf



Visit Edible Iowa River Valley"In the long view, no nation is healthier that its children, or more prosperous than its farmers." -President Harry Truman, at the signing of the School Lunch Act, 1946
Join Slow Food HereJoin Gather.com here
Reply
post #6 of 27
This is about four things: oil, power, money and revenge. If you don't believe me, think about this:

W's tax plans will benefit not only wealthy people themselves, but their businesses. Reaganomics proved the trickle down theory doesn't work and produces huge deficits. The "war on terror", which is as effective as firing a shotgun to kill a swarm of gnats, will beef up revenues for his buddies' businesses- not create jobs or real wealth for the economy.

The revenge part? W said so himself: "He tried to kill my dad!"

Not that simple, you say? Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

My middle school students are starting to worry about their older siblings going off to war. One eighth grader even expressed fear of his being sent off to fight.

Phil, I think you're right: people will stay home in droves. Good time to start that hamburger delivery business after all?
Moderator Emerita, Welcome Forum
***It is better to ask forgiveness than beg permission.***
Reply
Moderator Emerita, Welcome Forum
***It is better to ask forgiveness than beg permission.***
Reply
post #7 of 27
I agree Mezz, this is about power, oil, money and revenge. We are trying to hide it behind Iraq's disregard of the UN's resolutions, but there are many other countries that are in violation of 1 or more UN resolutions, including Israel, China, Iran, Bosnia, and many others. You don't see us gearing up to go to war with them.

I think that the US would do well in taking a second or third look at some of the motivations of George W. especially in light of what is now happening with N. Korea. I think a lot of this situation is directly related to the loose mouth of our President and some of the derogitory comments he has made about N. Korea and it's leader. I truly think that George W. has his own agenda which he will further at any cost. Unfortunately, I think most of that agenda has to with pride and power.
post #8 of 27
The other signatory party to the ABM treaty no longer exists. Yes, Russia has said they would keep it in effect, but a change in the one party requires reratification on our part. Never happened.

Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly like Bush. I didn't vote for him. War on Terror has lots of problems, primarily Homeland Securty and its corrolaries.

The statement, "He tried to kill my Dad, " is out of context for what the reasons for an Iraq war would be. It shows lots about how Saddam views others though. I believe Bush II has shown plenty of ability to keep emotion out of this issue and work it on its merits. As nothing happened to his dad, there is nothing to actually avenge.

So Bush WAS an oil man. He hasn't been for many years. He was a lousy oil man. Every oil company of significance is hugely multinational. You can't say this about the oil and mean US business. Oil business doesn't work that way. Why did we defend Kuwait? Oil was the subtext of that, but it was primarily Saudi Arabia who needed Saddam put down. Why does the UK care? Go do a boolean search on Wahabbi and British Petroleum. The reading is pretty scary and it explains lots about Iraq.

W's tax plan. Well, considering that people earning over 50K pay over 80% of the taxes;a family of four earning 30K or less gets more money in the tax refund than they paid in taxes. Further considering Clinton viewed the middle class as earning less than 30K, this tells us something about the term "wealthy" and it's use by the government and the press. The median salary of the US is over 50K. Of course a tax cut is going to benefit the "wealthy"; anyone earning over 30K. They're the only ones paying any net taxes.

The list of "oil, power, money and revenge" is pretty much the description of modern politics. Sad but true.

The aggressor just wants to conquer. The people who don't want this then defend themselves. If there is no defense, there is no war. Iraq aggressed against Kuwait. Kuwait defended itself with help. That war isn't over. Saddam hasn't fulfilled the terms of his armistice. Iraq has been shooting at OUR military men ever since, practically every day. I can think of no moral reason to let him get away with it. The UN doesn't want to let him get away with it.

How is it the soviets were deterred and Saddam isn't? Soviets feared MAD and eventually lost the arms race economically. Saddam and his ilk believe their acts will earn them paradise complete with ever virginal houris. They have no fear of destruction. Their belief negates rationality, MAD is their heart's dream. This is not to paint Islam broadly, rather to paint specifically radical Islam.

North Korea is failing I agree. The only reasoning I can see is that the leader needs to distract his populace with "victorious" military posturing in hopes of extorting more money from the west.

As I said, I don't want war, but peace with Saddam is not possible. I want rational co-existence. Even that is not possible with Saddam.

Phil
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #9 of 27
For me, 9/11 was personal. I spent the first 39 years of my life in New York City and clocked many hours in the towers. It's a good thing I didn't have access to a nuclear bomb on 9/12.

If someone can find a peaceful way to stop the hearts of Hussein and Bin Laden, I'm all for it. Lethal injection would be fine. It doesn't matter that neither of them would suffer much - just so they were gone.

The Maniacal Muslim factions (not real Muslims) are taught from infanthood that dying in the name of Allah is to die with glory. Their children are not taught that human life is to be held in great santity as the gift it is - to them, it's a weapon - and a point of vulnerability. Frankly, until that mentality changes, these people will be nothing but a problem haunting us and spreading like a gangrenous toe. To hope the foot falls off on its own might be a bit optimistic.
Food is sex for the stomach.
Reply
Food is sex for the stomach.
Reply
post #10 of 27
ahh, the problem is the disenfrachisement of people - vis a vis: northern ireland during the troubles had its fair share of what one could call fanatics. Not muslim but protestant and catholic. All these things aside, the point that i am making, is that al queeda, is in itself an organisation or a society. Given that the leader is disposed of so to speak, what happens then?. What happened after kennedy was assasinated?

Easy, another figure rose up from the ranks to take his place.

Both Iraq and the Al queeda networks would function in such way, just like any other country, society or even business.

I cant give an answer as to what to do, but discretion is the key to the answer.
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
post #11 of 27
Peace at any cost is my wish.
When I get a little money, I buy books. And if there is any left over, I buy food.

- Desiderius Erasmus
Reply
When I get a little money, I buy books. And if there is any left over, I buy food.

- Desiderius Erasmus
Reply
post #12 of 27
Not saying this is the case Isa, but by your post you would endorse life with no rights under a total dictatorial regime in exchange for peace?
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #13 of 27
now, we are entering the sphere of black ops. Better done quiet than not at all.

Also, the message sent is that "it doesnt matter, we will get you, and you wont even know it".

And it doesnt take a mass deployment of troops.

Or is this going to be a drawn out show of strength/economic panacea/recovery etc.

Not that im against the concept, it seems inherently flawed.

What has been actually achieved since 9/11, realistically, disregarding an atmosphere of distrust.?
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
post #14 of 27
Remember these famouse words written by Master Sun Tzu over 2,000 years ago in his great book " The Art of War " .
" Military action is important to the nation - it is the ground of death and life , the path of survival and destruction , so it is imperative to examine it " .
I think we need to examine it and our motives before we risk one more of our boys in another altercation or war . Of course thats just my opinion .................. Doug
The two most common things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity !
Reply
The two most common things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity !
Reply
post #15 of 27
Well, it looks like war is inevitable. Though I am not really for the war, I can't be totally against it either. I just want to see the US make it's case to the UN and recieve their support. If not we just look like the big bully on the block.

One thing I know for sure though, whether I am for or against the war, I will support our troops overseas. I hope that the people of the US have learned their lesson since Vietnam. Our vets coming back from there didn't recieve a hero's welcome, often times they were cursed or shunned by the public. For what, doing what they were sent to do. Soliders don't make policy, they just follow orders, whether they agree with the war or not. They don't have the privlege of choosing if they will fight a war or not. So protest the war all you want, if you so desire, but don't let your attitudes towards the war affect how you look at the soliders over there fighting it.
post #16 of 27
for what its worth, a very good friend of mine went to the first gulf conflict, he was several years younger than i. Has 2 kids as well.

However, iam 33, and he is dead. For my country,? i dont think so -

The hardest thing was, getting the news over the phone, with the kids in the background saying "whens daddy coming home".

Despite all of your wildest revenge thoughts, bear the above in mind, because it has the same impact in any language and country, policies aside.

dont even try to tell me overwise.
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
post #17 of 27
Just a couple of notes about the UN and their validity. The next leader of the disarmament commitee is?

Iraq!

The next leader of the human rights commitee is?

Libya!

This is how you make good decisions on leading the world to be a better place?

Phil
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #18 of 27
oops, now im getting on my high horse.

Can i ask you guys a question? Are you guys comfortable with going to war against Iraq, and if so, what is it that you guys would know that we dont (in AU) that is so convincing?

(This is a political question) Iam trying to convince myself that the leader that i didnt vote for (and many others apparently didnt either) is wise and sending us to war for a just and reasonable cause(snort, laugh). (sorry)
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
post #19 of 27
Nick, can you tell us how you feel about about Iraq invading Kuwait and the armistice that ended that invasion?

Phil
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #20 of 27
err, didnt feel comfortable about that at all. However, overt threats are another thing. What im actually talking about, is that there is no clear case for such action, if so, the information that would generate popular support is has not been made available.

Im not saying saddam isnt a thorn in the side of humanity.

What i am saying is, do we need to annihilate whatever amount of civilians who are trying to eke out a relatively miserable existence just to make a point.

Because the purported 800 cruise missiles that will hit baghdad prior to the start seems to be a wee bit of overkill.

P.S, we here are still paying stoopid petrol prices that apparently would recede after the first gulf action. Now they have risen again - because action is imminent (not that it has started, but imminent)

DUH!
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
post #21 of 27
Oil prices went down in the last war with Iraq.

Phil
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #22 of 27
Like everyone else, I'm troubled by the prospect of war, the threat to the lives of our soldiers and the civilian deaths that may count in the thousands.

I'm troubled by what this will do to the safety and the economy of this country. I'm especially troubled by the question of whether any of this will justify these costs, even when, perhaps especially when we win.

And what does winning mean? Perhaps increased terrorist attacks in this country and around the world? Perhaps a devastated economy (ours) arising from the combination of tax cuts, war expenditures, for an economy that is already in the worst shape since the great depression in a world in which ours is the most robust? Perhaps an Iraq that becomes a Middle Eastern Yugoslavia with three ethnic groups out for power and very possibly blood.

Yes the postwar period might work out; I hope it does, but I'm not optimistic because of what has happened to this country in a little more than 2 years:

Even if you do not hold this administration to blame for being asleep at the switch on 9-11, they still haven't caught Bin Laden or most of Al Quada's leadership. The 'peace' in much Afganistan is shakey, and terrorism is alive in well in attacks all over the world. On the other hand, the domestic fight against terrorism will put all our citizens under surveillence and reduce civil liberties. We learned about details of this anti-terrorism campaign [against the American people] from leaks, as the administration has not even shared them with Congress.

We are led by a man who has already turned what was a robust economy with record employment when he took office, into what may yet turn out to be a double dip recession with significant unemployment (to which we must add the hardcore unemployed whom we do not even count anymore), stock market losses that have raped people's retirement funds, 40l k's turned 201k's and en route to 101k's. Meanwhile, as the administration advocates cutting taxes for the wealthiest, our states are contemplating raising them to compensate for revenues lost in the sagging economy.

Under the current regime (sorry, I can't even say 'leadership') we have become alienated from many of our traditional allies and have terminated the negotiations that aimed at keeping N.Korea from going nuclear, ironically alienating S.Koreans in the process.

It's hard to keep track of all these issues. And lets not even begin on oil...

The one (hopefully) good thing that has happened recently: Iran has invited inspectors to come into its country to examine Iran's program to develop nuclear energy using uranium mined in Iran itself. That's the good news, the bad news is that the uranium they would have received from Russia before would have been subject to controls that this lacks.

So war is bad, but what comes after may be worse. And as far as I'm aware, no one has reported a plan for the aftermath of this war.
" ...but in the spirit of 'stop, think, there must be a harder way, 'I figured starting from scratch might be more gratifying.'' (Judy Rodgers)
Reply
" ...but in the spirit of 'stop, think, there must be a harder way, 'I figured starting from scratch might be more gratifying.'' (Judy Rodgers)
Reply
post #23 of 27
While not the plan any one is publically proposing, I suspect a post war Iraq will split three ways.

1, Shi-ite islam in the south with the port to the Gulf and most of the oil, probably more westernized because of the effects of money. It's a toss-up if it will be pro-west or not in its government. Shi-ites are traditionally the more extreme flavor of Islam, but the wealth and rebellion to be unlike Saddam could take it another direction.

2. Sunni agrarian/industrial central Iraq. Likely a sharia based government. This area has virtually all the water in the Tigris and Euphrates. The Sunnis are traditionally the more moderate Islam, but they are also the ones with the cultural and familial ties to Saddam. They will bear the brunt of the war and rebuilding.

3. Kurds in the North, more primitive economy and lifestyle with tribal warlord control, sort of like Afghanistan.

I don't think any will have a stable democracy as the west uses the term, but more like Iran has. While the effort will be to establish a westernized democracy, the level of remaining education and information dispersal isn't up to supporting it until at least one generation grows up with the concepts. That's a long occupation/rebuild.

No matter what we say about the oil and foreign exploitation of it, oil would likely be nationalized, just as Saudi Arabia did and then kick out all the oil foreign oil companies who built the infrastructure and wells.

Regarding the anti-terrorism efforts, yes, we are taking a beating. But the TIA wing of the military is being strongly curtailed. Not done away with though. We'll do it to ourselves without the government though in the name of copyright and content control.

3Com, Adobe, AMD,Compaq, DELL, HP, Intel, Microsoft, Motorola, NEC, Philips, Siemens, Sony, Toshiba, and many more with TCPA and Palladium

Here is the anti's FAQ: http://www.againsttcpa.com/tcpa-faq-en.html

There's a link there to the group in favor of TCPA too.

Phil
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #24 of 27
This AM's NYT op-ed piece by Krugman shed an interesting light on why our allies are way less than enthusiastic about joining us in Iraq. It made some points I hadn't yet seen. Whether you do or do not agree with the French and Germans, he goes a long way towards explaining why they react as they do.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/11/opinion/11KRUG.html
" ...but in the spirit of 'stop, think, there must be a harder way, 'I figured starting from scratch might be more gratifying.'' (Judy Rodgers)
Reply
" ...but in the spirit of 'stop, think, there must be a harder way, 'I figured starting from scratch might be more gratifying.'' (Judy Rodgers)
Reply
post #25 of 27
At another forum I visit, some well written words on this topic merit posting here. The Phil quoted here is not me, but another Phil I correspond with occasionally.

Sharp Phil:

Morality is what guides our actions regarding what we should and should not do in keeping with our standard of value. Objectively, this standard of value is the promotion of rational, individual human life. An action is morally right if it promotes rational, individual life, and morally wrong if it works against this goal. There's a <a href="http://www.philelmore.com/objectivism/concepts.htm" target="_blank">longer version of this on my web page</a>, but the short form is that initiating force is wrong because it is the rejection of reason, which we embrace when we choose to live objectively and morally.

If it can successfully, logically be argued that war with Iraq constitutes retaliatory or retaliatory, preemptive <a href="http://www.philelmore.com/objectivism/force.htm" target="_blank">force</a>, war with Iraq is morally just. If this cannot be done, then war with Iraq is morally unjust.

To say that it is <i>never</i> morally justified to wage war or to take human lives is to establish false moral equivalency between aggressor and defender states, between initiated and retaliatory force, between rapists and their victims, between pedophiles and children, and between muggers and the mugged.</font></p>

- Phil

P@triot responds:

thanks Phil. Perhaps my mistake was a common one in looking at the subject emotionally rather than logically. I guess that I question the "morality" of war with Iraq because I can never be sure that:

1) our motives are truely pure and just. And,

2) we have totally exhausted, within reason, all other available options.

Yes it is true that war with Iraq could very well ease economic sanctions that make life hard for the common people, and yes destroying Saddams army means more bellies will be filled because there will remain less to fill but still....<img src="images/smilies/frown.gif" border="0" alt=""></font></p>

Ken Cox chimes in with:

I think we have impure and injust motives in addition to our pure and just motives.

This lack of perfection should not deter us from our responsibility to our own children as well as Arab children to end this as quickly and humanely as possible.

_________________________________________

Full discussion: http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/sh...hreadid=242782
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #26 of 27
On the subject of our allies, and in the spirit of balance, I'm submitting 2 articles from Asia Times that have divergent points of view on the dissenting allies.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EB05Ak02.html

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EB12Df02.html
" ...but in the spirit of 'stop, think, there must be a harder way, 'I figured starting from scratch might be more gratifying.'' (Judy Rodgers)
Reply
" ...but in the spirit of 'stop, think, there must be a harder way, 'I figured starting from scratch might be more gratifying.'' (Judy Rodgers)
Reply
post #27 of 27
its all a terrible conundrum & i guess thats why we elect leaders to make these terrible decisions for us. were damned if we do & damned if we dont.my only issue is that we cannot do nothing but we seem to be very selective in who the tyrants are.if the un becomes the worlds police then we should extend the permanent
member vetos votes to include arabs.ive been to some arab countries & the people are great The arab civilisation gave us many thing s including maths & medicine.by all means despose of dictators but we cannot impose a western will on a culture that doesnt want or need it.all you need is love.......
champagne for my bad friends
& bad pain for my cham friends
(Francis Bacon)
Reply
champagne for my bad friends
& bad pain for my cham friends
(Francis Bacon)
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Late Night Cafe (off-topic)