Discussion Forums for the Dialogue Paper

The Three Pillars

Thank you for participating in the Dialogue on Foreign Policy. The interactive web site is now closed. The Minister's report will appear on this web site once it is released.

This Forum is bilingual, and participants post messages in their language of choice.

Previous Topic | All Topics |

Start Topic | Next Topic

Beyond policies and ideals

Contributor: cfallon

Date: 2003-02-25 15:53:30

To suggest that Americans are interested in creating an empire a la Rome is a little bit silly.

Colin Powell and Condi Rice are not advancing the cause of white neo-imperialism like a stupid pair of Uncle Toms.

Europe is divided. It will not form some military balance to the US. If it did, I don't think we should cheer: NOTHING GOOD HAS EVER COME FROM FRANCE AND GERMANY BUILDING UP THEIR MILITARY.

Why should African nations be investing in weapons of mass destruction? How does this help illiteracy, disease and hunger? Will hungry Ethiopians be grateful to their leaders for preferring plutonium to protein?

The US is the best hope we have for realising peace in the world. Canada, Russia, France and these waffling countries will do nothing to contribute to bringing stability, liberty and justice to all.

Reply to this message

Show in topic

Beyond policies and ideals

Contributor: Fleabag

Date: 2003-02-25 19:28:51

On the contrary, African nations buying weapons helps the US economy greatly, ending disease does not. One must keep in mind that the US has only 1 interest in mind in ALL policies. 'How does this action help maximize profits in the US?' All other things must serve this ideal, therefore reducing illiteracy in the third world must have a tangible and immediate benefit to the US economy or it is a bad investment. Now, more than ever, investors want to see returns in the next quarter, not the next generation. That is what led to Enron, AOL, etc to fudge numbers to appease investors. Profits must happen now, not later and certainly not for other peoples or countries own benefit.

Reply to this message

Beyond policies and ideals

Contributor: cfallon

Date: 2003-02-28 16:06:18

I don't believe that for a minute. The US is not as stupid as you think. Also, Enron-style fraud is happening everywhere - look at Ahold!

African nations buying weapons is SO MUCH LESS CRITICAL than Americans themselves buying socks, apples and light fixtures.

Also, the US is doing more to end disease in Africa than any other nation outside Africa. So, doesn't that seem strange, by your reading of US thinking?

Reply to this message

Beyond policies and ideals

Contributor: fatmomma

Date: 2003-03-01 21:19:51

If the US is the best hope we have for realizing peace; the world is in big trouble. Mr Bush has but one thought on his mind and that is WAR. He didn't draw a breath after Afghanistan. That was supposed to be targeting terrorist but too many innocents were killed including our 4 Canadian soldiers but also Afghan civilians whose only sin was to be tall like Osama bin Laden.The American's claims of proof of Iraq"s weapons were all bogus, Saddam is an evil dictator but Mr Bush is much more dangerous. Canada, Russia, France, and Germany are NOT waffling. They have said NO not without UN approval. Why do you and Bush not understand. As an previous president"s wife said: Just say NO

Reply to this message

Beyond policies and ideals

Contributor: cfallon

Date: 2003-03-04 16:22:32

Well, I guess its hard to take opponents of the war seriously when they say, "all you/Bush have on your mind is WAR."

Don't you think this is pushing it a little? Shouldn't you give people you disagree with the benefit of the doubt and argue based on their stated goals and objectives and not those you concoct in the quiet of your basement?

Reply to this message

Beyond policies and ideals

Contributor: fatmomma

Date: 2003-03-05 23:22:56

Shouldn't Bush give the people of Iraq the benefit of doubt. There is no evidence of Iraq having "weapons of Mass Destruction" What there is is being legally handled by the UN weapons inspectors whom Mr Bush does not want to be allowed to succeed. The weapon inspectors are having Iraq to destroy the missles that exceed their allowed force. Mr Bush still protests that it isn't fast enough for him; he wants to attack with or without UN approval. The Iraq government has no proven ties to the terrorists that attacked the world trade center. You say nothing .
The only goals I hear from Bush is to invade Iraq and the government He is going to set up. He is president of the USA not the world. That is what the UN was designed for. You listen to too much CNN propaganda

Reply to this message

Beyond policies and ideals

Contributor: Vox

Date: 2003-03-06 18:47:50

Fatmomma, you stated "Shouldn't Bush give the people of Iraq the benefit of doubt.(?)"

By "people of Iraq", would you include the thousands of Iraqis that Saddam Hussein murdered or the still-living Kurds in the north and the Shiites in the south? Do you honestly believe public opinion is freely expressed in Iraq?

The UN was unable to get Iraq to even consider UN inspections until the US and the UK took decisive steps. This fact proves the UN is effectively irrelevant without the US and the UK. The UN is now nothing more than a windbag, a safety valve for issues that stop short of someone walking away from the train wreck that the UN has become. Bush decided to try the UN route probably because of Powell and Blair. Bush is no diplomat and after 9/11 he probably made up his mind what he has to do regardless of what other nations or the UN may think. It is because he has sufficient proof that the US is already at war to the death with Al Qaeda and he has enough proof of Iraq's role.

Bush is blunt and no longer trying to be diplomatic but he has also completely exhausted his diplomatic options to get constructive action from the UN and other nations. His bluntness is at least honest and not pretentious in light of the gravity of what he means to do. The brinkmanship with Iraq is now past the point of diplomacy. Unless Iraq complies without even whimpering Bush means to attack and remove the threat. For the Bush Administration, the risk of escalation appears to figure as lower than the risk of leaving Iraq alone. They have a much broader picture of the situation than most other countries have.

As for Iraq's links to Al Qaeda there are credible allegations that a special Iraqi chemical warfare organization called UNIT 999 trained Al Qaeda people on chemical warfare at the request of bin Laden after a non-aggression pact was arranged with Saddam Hussein in 1993. Some senior Al Qaeda are from Iraq. In particular, Mamdouh Salim (AKA Abu Hajer al-Iraqi) served as liaison with Iraqi intelligence. He is alleged to have been Al Qaeda's chief of chemical weapons development. Salim is now in custody awaiting trial in New York.

Another Iraqi by the name of Abu Ayoub al Iraqi was a key organizer of Al Qaeda way back in 1989. There are others. Bin Laden's second in command al-Zawahiri is also alleged to have made a secret visit to Baghdad in 1992. Iraq is a police state and no one gets in or out without Saddam Hussein's knowledge. That is probably one reason why he has evaded all attempts to overthrow him.

Some of this information comes from the voluminous testimony of Jamal Ahmed Mohammed al-Fadl. He defected from Al Qeada to the US in the 90s and was kept secret for years and only known as CS-1 (confidential source one) until he testified in 2001. His statements are now public record. You should read them to be more informed. It has additional worrisome information on The Sudan. The picture I have is one where the US knows a lot more than they can publicly discuss because if they did then all the prospective targets of future US anti-terrorist activities would be alerted. There are probably other reasons why the US is dragging its feet. It has been very reluctant to act because it basically had this information for several years.

Try this URL:

http://cns.miis.edu/iiop/cnsdata?Action=1&Concept=0&Mime=1&collection=CNS+Web+Site&Key=pubs%2Freports%2Fbinladen%2Ehtm&QueryText=CS%2D1&QueryMode=FreeText

If you want to discuss your ideas you need to first do some research.

Vox Canadiana

Reply to this message

Beyond policies and ideals

Contributor: welsh

Date: 2003-03-10 01:00:11

Canada cannot even act as peacekeepers as in the past; our helicopters collapse as they take off on rescue missions and we limp home with our tail between our legs! Supporting America before the vote in the security council is the only way to save face.

Reply to this message

Previous Topic | All Topics |

Start Topic | Next Topic

Visit us online at: http://www.foreign-policy-dialogue.ca