Have Europeans Given Up?

[Dixon Carter Lee]

To take the piss is to make fun of something.

Fucking British words. Why can't you people speak English?

... it is an organisation not a government

Absolutely true, but what things like "nation", "organization", "government", "act of war" mean in an era where boundaries are disappearing, money is merging, markets are global, military organizations are international, and weapons of mass destruction are available to people is the heart of what I'm getting at here, the difference in the mindset between the Europeans and the Americans, not the difference in our moral fortitude. When I ask "Has Europe given up?" I'm not calling Europe cowardly, I'm asking has Europe accepted that their rules of engagement predispose them towards accepting terrorism as an inevitablilty to be contained and not a ideological threat of global proportions that can actually be eradicated with careful, long term planning and 21st century definitions of "government"?

 

[MunchinMark]

I was not aware that American English did not include pisstaking. Aren't we learning a lot?

Alright, yes Europeans have given in to the idea that they are Europens. You say it like it's a bad thing to be peaceable and think in the long term, or at least to not want to get hurt.

There is a lot less threat from European terrorist factions than there were say 20 years ago. So it does work to take a more long term route. And we are inclined to build on what successes we do have and advise that the next time round it should be dealt with in the same way.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

There is a lot less threat from European terrorist factions than there were say 20 years ago. So it does work to take a more long term route. And we are inclined to build on what successes we do have and advise that the next time round it should be dealt with in the same way.

That's a good point, and a situation and a progress we have not experienced.

I suppose I don't see "terrorism" as it was 20 years ago, though. I don't see it as the guys in masks taking over the Olympic Village. Today's terrorists have budgets larger than some American states, worldwide access to camps and safe havens, access to weapons that were previously only available to two or three governments. I suppose what I'm asking is, can you see the progress you've made at all applicable to this kind of "terrorist"?

 

[MunchinMark]

No, actually I don't. There can't be round the table discussions with people who want you and your way of life dead, there isn't any room for compromise. But I do think that it is important that there should be something to show the world that what you did was right. Really good evidence or ideally a trial. That way you have a better chance of preventing further terrorist action.

I have a friend who is at university studying international relations and she once asked me (about a year ago) to type up an essay for her because she had other stuff to do and was running out of time. That essay was about how bin Laden and Bush needed to act in order to win over support prior to the attack on Afghanistan. She said that it was in the interest of bin Laden (the global terrorist) to confuse the issues and create a polarisation between one side and another (to make it a war between Islam and the West) and Bush had to say that this was against the terrorists and no-one else.

I think that that is true for these situations. To deal with such terrorism you have to seperate it from the people who might support it, by making them believe you rather than the terrorist. That's why evidence is so important. You have to say, "this is nothing to do with his religion/ethicity, it's because he did... and we know he did because..."

As far as the actually act of dealing with the terrorist, I can't help wondering if we should really have operatives in a James Bond kind of way. Would it not be easier to covertly wreck their nuclear programme/chemical lab/tropical island hideaway with bikini clad babes?

 

[Rex1960]

bump

just because

 

[Rex1960]

bump

just an hour later

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

But I do think that it is important that there should be something to show the world that what you did was right.

I feel the evidence is there in photos, video, audio, inspections, paperwork, physical evidence, sworn statements by the Iraqis themselves, and the evidence presented by other nations including Germany and France. Do you feel more is neccessary to make the case before the court of world opinion, because I think once you add the evidence we've seen to the evidence only our governments have seen the conclusion that Saddam Husseim absolutley intends to use his weapons to influence and capture the region with a distraous impact on the globe is irrefutable.

 

[MunchinMark]

I agree that evidence is building up against Saddam.

The most damning evidence is useless unless it is shown though. Absolutely everything has to be presented to the International political scene and as much as possible to the general public, especially in countries likely to support Saddam. The only sensible reason why that wouldn't be done is to protect spies and informers I suppose, but it isn't that important with a 'rogue state' like Iraq. He doesn't really have any external support anymore, not after this round of inspections.

Yes the world would be safer without Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But you have to make a good enough excuse to remove him by force. And I don't think they have it yet, because if they did we'd be at war already.

Rex? Are you on holiday or something? I thought you were German and it's getting on for morning now. Perhaps your just a bit of an insomniac like me tonight.

 

[70/30]

I don't have the time to read all that crap.

Other countries {Russia, China, France, etc} don't want the USA to strictly restrict arms sales. Evidently the USA is the world's leading supplier of armaments--they also want to be the supreme authority on who to arm or disarm. Most agree that selling weapons to Saddam is over the line--but hardline ultraCONs are still setting a precedent.

The opposition's apprehension might be justified, GWB does openly suggest Tehran will be the next target. After that...? It is internationally apparent that GWB is a strong advocate for slippery slope politics.

Then you have to consider proxemics--I can't imagine why more Americans don't, especially with Sharon so intimately involved. The Syrian dude had a point, Israel is occupying territory against the UN's clear ruling--they hold that ground by threatening to use nuclear weapons.

I wouldn't be surprised if the average Muslim wanted ardent Zionist invaders to rue some days, even if they don't fight for Saddam's exact cause. I'd have to think it is better not to be in the eager to invade crowd--thus, China, Russia, France, and Germany have many valid reasons to move slowly--1.3billion of them.

 

[teddybear4play]

Sadly, I think the only thing that might change Europe's mind is a canister of smallpox at the Louvre, or a dirty bomb at the Brandenburg Gate.

TB4p

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

But you have to make a good enough excuse to remove him by force. And I don't think they have it yet, because if they did we'd be at war already.

That's an important perspective shared by many in the U.S. I do wonder why more evidence isn't publicly revealed, though I'm sated with what has been shown.

But...

I think that, beyond the evidence, it does come down to Iraq refusing to abide by the Desert Storm agreements for disarmament and compliance with U.N. resolutions, which no one disputes. After 12 years either the U.N. needs to do something about it, or admit that it can't. "More time" is not going to make Iraq reveal where its chemical and biological weapons are, and "More inpectors" aren't going to find them. I think all that was made clear by Powell's speech. So if "more time" is pointless, what should the U.N. wait for?

 

[Rex1960]

Rex? Are you on holiday or something? I thought you were German and it's getting on for morning now. Perhaps your just a bit of an insomniac like me tonight.

That's what we call night shift, MM.
So it's some special kind of insomnia.

But honestly, I only wanted to bump it back on page 1