Do something?

Generalizing again... what do you mean Africa? Which of the 46 countries on that continent are you talking about?
What more do you know about Guantanamo than you do about African prisons?

A "mistake"? Like "Oups"?


Of course. Neither are Iranians or Iraquis or Afghans. So don't judge them and their civilization on what their governments do (or what you think they do).


Sure, though you might want to know who "those" are and are not, before passing any judgement.

So you wish the US had let the Nazis take over Europe?

France shouldn't have helped the US become independent?

NATO should have closed it's eyes on the balkans genocide?


We all have our own country but we are all sharing this world. We have a corresponsibility on it and what goes from bad in one place could go to worse in your place. Of course, you can let a small forest fire burn just because it's far enough from your house, even though you have the power to kill it, just don't blame anyone but yourself once the fire is at your door.


Ponrauil

The Republican Party has been running on fear,at the very least, for the past 7 years. This is how they garner support. They paint the picture that the Democrats are weak and "French Like" and then conjure up doomsday scenarios to scare people into backing the party that will kick ass. The pathetic thing is it works and that's exactly what you're seeing here with those Faux News idiots.

Now on Iran: The way to deal with Iran is clearly to communicate directly with the people. Any poll that has been carried out in Iran (and you can be arrested for conducting a poll) shows that the Iranian people feel positively toward America and want good relations with America.

Iran is not like Iraq, they have satellite television and relations all over the western world. They know what's going on. The American and Western governments could talk directly to the people and tell them we're on their side. We could tell them we support their right to enrich fuel and we could help them do that safely and efficently. It only serves us, as well as them and everybody, to wein them off their dependency on oil.
Another major point that I've only really heard Christopher Hitchens make is that there is a major Earthquake coming to Iran. It's coming like a runaway locomotive and we saw a couple of years ago how destructive an earthquake could be when the town of Bam was completely destroyed. Imagine what would happen if the next one hits Tehran? Also, there are numerous underground nuclear facilities completely unprotected from such an incident. The results would be catastrophic if an earthquake hit where one of these facilities is located. We have the know how to protect the people from this and we should be offering our help. Generating as much cooperation and as much good will with the people of Iran is the way to deal with this problem.

We can't however ignore the problem that is the current government. The president Ahmadinejad is a nut case. He's a puppet of course for the Mullahs of Iran but this is a guy who has called for Israel and all it's people to be completely wiped off the map. He's the man who has built an alter in the certain of Tehran to welcome back their tooth-fairy Messiah, which incidentally requires Armageddon to take place in order for him to return, and now he's going to get his hands on Nuclear weapons. This is a terrifying prospect. It's the meeting of medieval ideology and religious insanity with 21st century destructive capability. We really should do everything we can to prevent an individual like this from getting his finger anywhere near the button that really could bring about an all out nuclear war. Invasion obviously isn't an answer but some sort of strategic bombing to knock back their efforts may be necessary, but it would have to be in conjunction with garnering the support of the Iranian people.

The fact is Ahmadinejad is a liar and a nut job and nobody has the balls to stand up to him and say as much. A perfect example of this was when he appeared in New York to address the UN and said how dare America tell us we can't have nuclear weapons when they are buildng a whole new generation of weapons. Nobody had an answer for this and he walked away in a stronger position then ever yet this stands in complete contradiction to his previous claims the Iran had no interest in aquiring weapons.

Iran needs to know that the west is there as an ally in every possible way to Iran but they must meet their international responsibilities.

And when exactly does it threaten you?? When the Middle East is blown away? Or maybe you want whole Asia to be gone...I am sure you'll find lots of Petroleum under those ruins. And since they are in the immediate proximity, why not blow Europe away as well. Wait wait wait... maybe you'd like to wait for another Pearl Harbour but this time with nuclear weapons hitting some port in Lake Michigan...that'd be close, wouldn't it?

Now the place "sincerely" wants to exist in the 7th century?? The Middle East was probably the most prosperous part of the world at that time while your country didn't even exist...not to mention that Anglo Saxons and Vizigoths and who not were choping each other's balls of for fun on the old continent. Ahh, maybe I get it wrong. maybe it was just a metaphor. Well do you think they choose to live the way they do? Well, democracy isn't commonplace everywhere. Education is not accessible to everyone. What do you expect? Those people to jump on the Mayflower and build up their own "god-blessed nation"?

Middle Eastern countries are not "3rd world countries" you ignorant. I don't remember the Brits ruling Persia but I do however remember the Brits ruling a certain part of north America. You guess which! (hint: it was not Mexico!)

yet again, maybe when a "man-induced" Tsunami comes out of Lake Michigan flushing Wisconsin down the toilet, you'd be thinking how nice it would have been if some of those "precious precious tax-dollars" had gone exactly in that direction...


Democracy is tyranny. The tyranny of the MANY. And at this point in America there are MANY idiots, and maybe even worse, many more dupes who listen to what their dumbass neighbor says instead of forming an opinion of their own. Such a tyranny, now THAT IS A BAD THING.

I could turn that around by saying what more do you know about African prisons than Guantanamo? How do you know it's not being run nicer? The point I'm trying to make is that however bad we get (and we do get bad) it is FAR from the worst it can be.

...and speaking on the topic of generalizing...Yes, it was BAD. Would you like that bolded, underlined, how may I further convey my emphasis on it?

When last I checked, honor-killings and beheading prisoners wasn't a government thing, it sort of had a following among the citizenry. It wasn't governments dancing in the streets when the Twin Towers went down. Not saying they're all like that, but they let those radicals get a whole lot of face-time on the TV.

I don't wish a Nazi takeover, but I probably wouldn't have volunteered for the trenches of WW2. We ASKED the French for help, they didn't just decide to sweep in and do some modernizing and nation-building in their own self-interest.

I appreciate the use of sarcasm. I use it quite a bit myself. I'm talking about being prudent and not galavanting off playing policeman wherever we see some injustice going on. If we had some intel that would prevent Asia from being turned into a glass parkinglot, it'd sure be neighborly to share, in the interests of saving lives and preventing nuclear winter. However if China went to war with Iran, I'd say that was their business. Just like African tribes kill each other every day, and I sure don't think we should be over there trying to keep the peace.

Dancing in the streets on 9/11, honor-killings, beheading prisoners, stoning women to death for falling in love outside their religion...maybe they want to leave the stoneage and get some airconditioning, but a lot of mid-east culture is firmly mired in a time frame from 13 centuries ago.

You're right, I use "3rd world countries" too freely. I was merely trying to emphasize uncivilized behavior.

I think we're more likely to encounter a man-made Tsunami the more countries we meddle in. Someone screws with my country the way some here are proposing to screw with other countries, it'd sure loosen my inhibitions about travelling to their land wreaking some havoc. Our interfering in the middle-east is what's caused the plague of global terrorism. Parking our troops in their holy-lands, interfering with their governments, nation-building experiments, throwing our influence around the region, doing drive-bys on various countries *coughIraqcough*. Or does Osama just link terrorism and Iraq in his speeches because he likes the sound of his own voice?

Adrian

I think you all should watch this it might interest you . It was done last week i beleive

I don't, that's why I don't draw conclusions on the American of African civilizations based on the too light info I have on just one issue.



That doesn't give you any moral high ground to pass any judgement on any civilization.


It's just you'd just insisted on how ready you are to call a crime a crime and then just after that you qualify the Abu Ghraib outrage as a "mistake"...


Sure, they even have a league and they broadcast it on their national sport network too.
These are carried out by terrorists. The same terrorists that are killing thousands of innocent civilians in those countries.

ANd btw, why generalize the murderers rather than the victims?


The TV? Come on... It's the radicals that dance in the streets and these radicals Fox News or CNN want to you to see when they say the words "Iraqis" or "Afghans".

Just like from the European side of the pond the TV would make us generalise Americans as fat ignorants drinking gallons of coke in their new SUV with a loaded gun in their glove compartment. How close to the truth is that? Is it complete & relevant enough of your civilization for anyone to judge it?


And how would you have liked the French to answer "This is none of our business. Good luck." like your suggesting your government should do?


Ponrauil

To place Guantanamo and even Abu Ghraib on the same level as Saddam's rape chambers and plastic shredders or the stoning of women in multiple mid-east country is naive, irresponsible, and ultimately insulting to those who have truly suffered. Yes, we've done some bad stuff. I'll be the first to admit that.

See above.

See below.

Not comparable. Every time someone so much as sneezes here, you've got 300 different opinions on the news, most of them blaming a Republican (that's a joke, don't take it too seriously). When terrorists (who are citizens or are recruited from among citizens) suicide bomb an Israeli pizza parlor or mall or behead 5 of our soldiers, do you hear the same? Do you hear anything other than a quiet, polite disapproval? I realize that not everyone in the mideast is like that, I'm very aware of that fact. However, they are, at the best, awful quiet while their countrymen behave like barbarians, and at the worst, dance in the streets.

Not comparable. If the Iranians want to start a revolution with the aims of creating something other than another mid-east dictatorship, win some victories against the current government, establish their own government, and then request our aid, it'd be different. Flying in to bomb a handful of government buildings, or bombing the entire country and then sending in an occupation force is completely different. One is not reprehensible, the other is.

Adrian

Ok guys, I see that your having nice conversation, but, I would like that we return on original youtube video in first post! DO you see the connection beetween Iraq and Iran in media? Do you feel the connection and general atmosfere then and now in your country?

I'm not putting anything on the same level as anything. I'm saying everyone, every country has skeletons in their closets that should make them a little more careful before judging another civilization as wanting to live in the stone age. It's not like the Iraqis enjoyed Saddam's reign, it's not like a large majority of the people fancy stoning women. That is, again, what governments in countries like the USA or France want us to believe to justify their internal & external politics and/or business.



Man... do you know anything about human nature? Do you have any idea how shit scared the majority of the people are under a dictatorship or even repressive regime?

Do you have any idea also how such a regime can "stage" itself for it's own propaganda? (And same for our regimes...)

About the 300 opinions on the news... you get them when you're in the US. Remember the climax period of tensions between France and the US during the build up to the war Iraq? How many opinions did you get on the news about France? How many do you think did we got in France about the US?
Public opinion needs to be on your side to justify your political moves, telling all sides of one story is not the easiest way to get there.

Using what you get in general media to build your opinion on a foreign country is a mistake, always and even more in times of conflict. Remember the tight links between the media, large coorporations and governments? Journalists are a dying specie.


You know Iran is not exactly a dictatorship right? I'm sure you do... It's an islamic republic but still, people can vote (one man / on vote) like in the US for their President and their parliament. Women, unlike in other islamic countries participate in politics, science, art, economy etc... Is that a stone age society to you? It's fragile and threatened "freedom", and I am worried about human rights in that country, but it's still a billion years ahead of Iraq under Saddam.


Ponrauil

As a matter of fact, ponrauil is pretty much right with all that he has said.
Just an example, the same (at least "the same looking") people who were dancing in the streets were just a few months later putting down a statue of Saddam in front of zillions of cameras so that the whole world could see. Ahh, what a coincidence. All the cameras were there to see how happy the Iraqis were about their new freedom. Bollocks! It was all staged. American soldiers put it down after telling enough cameramen so all world could see. A different, more peaceful story about 2 dead men, Arafat and Rabin shaking hands with Bill Clinton opening his arms in the back as if he was Jesus. Staged. Rabin would have never shaken hands with what he called a "terrorist". Bill Clinton's people thought it out for a few months so that the US gets out as being the protective father...

You obviously form your opinions by what Fox news say. I am sure you must know more about Pete Doherty than anybody else on this board.

But back to the original quote. As you might see, I have changed your statement a bit because you obviously have no clue what the actual situation in Iran is. Just as a reminder, Iran actually did call for your help in the late 80s after the US was supplying weapons to all possible countries over there, but the Gulf War is a different story. Ok, Afghanistan might fit into your description. Afghanistan, before the American's bombed it down, was a country which actually needed international help in order to survive, especially since the Taliban took over. Now how exactly would you have imagined the Afghani people to start a revolution? With what weapons? with axes and forks against kalashnikov's and jeeps? Or should they have simply made a phone call directly to the White House or to the UN headquarters. I am sure the numbers were somewhere in a telephone book.

Also, how do you imagine Afghanis even starting such an upheaval which would then eventually draw international attention? They have no TV, no newspapers, their intellectual elites are either in different countries or dead, shot by both Russians and Taliban...how could one of those revolutions start? You take all you have for granted. Not everybody is a fortunate as you are. A revolution is not an easy thing to start. It requires elites, mass media, organization and manipulation. The Taliban had a perfect infrastructure. It wasn't just a crazy dictator going around killing friend and foe, like in some Carribean, African or Eastern European states. The possibly for an outcry was not there. And the possibility for an outcry isn't there in several other countries at this moment, the best example is North Korea where a lot of people actually believe that South Korea is worse of, not knowing that their crazy little dictator is watching PLASMA porn and driving Ferraris.



And now in more realistic terms:
France helped the US because they hated the English. Don't fool yourself with your "founding fathers" "asking for it". They had the chance to screw England over, and maybe become the main colonial power, so they did. When America will need something, they will also help anybody, as the Iraq War has already shown. Everything else, like people, systems, democracy, prisons, rape, killings, skeletons, dictators, plasma TVs don't matter. It's all details.