[email protected] (markfromsf) wrote:

    >"Alex Starke" wrote in message news:...

    >> Don't let fear rule your life buddy, you may get hit by a bus tomorrow. Get
    >> over there and enjoy!
    >Exactly! wouldn't it be a real bitch if you got run over by a bus
    >while you should have been on vacation in Europe?

But wouldn't it be a greater bitch if you got run over by a bus in
Europe when you could have been safe at home?

Decisions, decisions.

PB

    >rg wrote in message
    >news:A%s8a.68870$F%[email protected]...
    >> "Charles Hawtrey" wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]...
    >> > On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 18:12:03 GMT, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz) wrote:
    >> >
    >> > >rg wrote:
    >> > >> We had plans to travel to Germany. We cancelled them. Not because
    >of
    >> a
    >> > >> terroist, but for political reasons. We do not support with our
    >dollars
    >> > >> those countries that oppose the US when we agree with what the US is
    >> doing
    >> > >> and what the UN ought to be doing.
    >> > >
    >> > >Do you only make this determination on a country-by-country basis?
    >> Because
    >> > >somewhere around half of the people in the US also don't support it.
    >> > >Presumably this includes the management of a lot of companies you do
    >> > >business with on a daily basis.
    >> >
    >> > Would Iraq show even their present grudging and incomplete compliance
    >> > if the US said "we're rattling our sabres but don't really intend to
    >> > attack you"?
    >> >
    >> > Am I alone in thinking that the present situation is actually rather
    >> > effective? On the one hand we have US and UK war-readiness giving
    >> > Saddam motivation to disarm (even Chirac has said that Iraq is
    >> > complying mainly because of US military pressure). On the other hand
    >> > we have Europe and others restraining the use of this force. Sort of
    >> > a "good-cop, bad-cop" arrangement. It's kind of unfortunate that the
    >> > US has to take criticism for playing the bad-cop role, but that's
    >> > life.
    >> >
    >> > With luck and the grace of God we will see eventual compliance by Iraq
    >> > without war, and all the troops can come home and start a baby boom.
    >> I agree.
    >> The ONLY reason the inspectors are making even slight progress is because
    >of
    >> the military camping outside SH's door. If they were to leave, the
    >> inspectors would be a joke to SH. And, the military cannot stay there for
    >> the 100 years it will take the inspectors to hunt and find everything.
    >Do you wonder why there is increasing spread of anti-Americanism?
    >Bush and his colleagues have done a very poor job of sellling this war to
    >the world at enormous cost to America and her allies. Your attitude of
    >"support us or else" shows your lack of appreciation for things democratic.
    >This is not good cop, bad cop, it is America expecting everyone to fall in
    >line after a few politicians made a decision to wage war on a dictator that
    >has been relatively well behaved of late. Why not calm down some of the
    >existing hotspots on the planet instead of creating new ones?
    >---
    >DFM
Poor Germans, whatever they do is wrong. First we boycotted them because we considered
Germans to be warmongers, now we should boycott them because of their pacifist attitude.

RH

"Padraig Breathnach" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > [email protected] (markfromsf) wrote:
    > >"Alex Starke" wrote in message
news:...
    > >> Don't let fear rule your life buddy, you may get hit by a bus tomorrow.
Get
    > >> over there and enjoy!
    > >
    > >Exactly! wouldn't it be a real bitch if you got run over by a bus
    > >while you should have been on vacation in Europe?
    > But wouldn't it be a greater bitch if you got run over by a bus in
    > Europe when you could have been safe at home?
    > Decisions, decisions.
    > PB
Ah, but at least I would get hit while I was having an adventure in Europe,
not sitting around the US worrying.
If I did get hit, it would probably be after too many pints of Guiness or
kruegels of Gosser. What a way to go!

Regards;
Alex

"Magda" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 19:35:33 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "rg"

    > arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
    > ... I really don't know. Perhaps you could tell them for me.
    > They are already celebrating your absence - many read this ng. :-))

I don't doubt they are. I will certainly pass this information along to all
my acquaintances.

But perhaps the minister of tourism would have a different opinion than you.
Perhaps you could inform him/her of your celebration.

rg

"Magda" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 19:37:41 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "rg"

    > arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
    > ... >
    > ... > Who do you think you've hurt?
    > ...
    > ... Hopefully, the Germans and the French.
    > ...
    > ... rg
    > ROTFL
    > Good riddance !

I will pass your sentiments along to my congressman. It is high time
Germany takes care of it's own. I support closing our military bases in
Germany.

rg

"Magda" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 19:30:32 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "rg"

    > arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
    > ... Yes, miguel. I make it on a country by country basis. I feel those
countries
    > ... that "should and ought" to be supporting and are not doing so should
be
    > ... especially singled out for criticism.
    > You only want to make Europeans cry. :-ppp
    > Go on begging for "support" - it's so pathetic it's almost funny.

Whose begging?
America isn't. You are digging your own hole.

If you thought "I" was begging for your support, then you are badly
mistaken. But then, you are badly mistaken on other things too so that is
not foreign to you.

rg

"Deep Floyd Mars" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > rg wrote in message
    > news:A%s8a.68870$F%[email protected]...
    > >
    > > "Charles Hawtrey" wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 18:12:03 GMT, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz) wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >rg wrote:
    > > > >> We had plans to travel to Germany. We cancelled them. Not because
    > of
    > > a
    > > > >> terroist, but for political reasons. We do not support with our
    > dollars
    > > > >> those countries that oppose the US when we agree with what the US
is
    > > doing
    > > > >> and what the UN ought to be doing.
    > > > >
    > > > >Do you only make this determination on a country-by-country basis?
    > > Because
    > > > >somewhere around half of the people in the US also don't support it.
    > > > >Presumably this includes the management of a lot of companies you do
    > > > >business with on a daily basis.
    > > >
    > > > Would Iraq show even their present grudging and incomplete compliance
    > > > if the US said "we're rattling our sabres but don't really intend to
    > > > attack you"?
    > > >
    > > > Am I alone in thinking that the present situation is actually rather
    > > > effective? On the one hand we have US and UK war-readiness giving
    > > > Saddam motivation to disarm (even Chirac has said that Iraq is
    > > > complying mainly because of US military pressure). On the other hand
    > > > we have Europe and others restraining the use of this force. Sort of
    > > > a "good-cop, bad-cop" arrangement. It's kind of unfortunate that the
    > > > US has to take criticism for playing the bad-cop role, but that's
    > > > life.
    > > >
    > > > With luck and the grace of God we will see eventual compliance by Iraq
    > > > without war, and all the troops can come home and start a baby boom.
    > >
    > > I agree.
    > > The ONLY reason the inspectors are making even slight progress is
because
    > of
    > > the military camping outside SH's door. If they were to leave, the
    > > inspectors would be a joke to SH. And, the military cannot stay there
for
    > > the 100 years it will take the inspectors to hunt and find everything.
    > >
    > Do you wonder why there is increasing spread of anti-Americanism?
    > Bush and his colleagues have done a very poor job of sellling this war to
    > the world at enormous cost to America and her allies. Your attitude of
    > "support us or else" shows your lack of appreciation for things
democratic.
    > This is not good cop, bad cop, it is America expecting everyone to fall in
    > line after a few politicians made a decision to wage war on a dictator
that
    > has been relatively well behaved of late. Why not calm down some of the
    > existing hotspots on the planet instead of creating new ones?
    > ---
    > DFM

I think you are confused. I do not wonder why anti-Americanism is rampant in
some parts of the world. I think I understand perfectly well why.
Bush should not have to "sell" this war to the French and the Germans. They
should be supporting UN resolution. They are NOT. They don't have to
support America. But they should either support and enforce UN resolutions,
or go home. They are doing neither. They are standing in the way.

I do not ask them to help. They probably couldn't anyway. But I do require
that if they are not going to help, that they at least get out of the way.

I think your understanding of geo-political turmoil is elementary.

We will calm down some of the hotspots on the planet as soon as we calm this
one down. And we are not creating new ones.

It seems your attitude is to leave the bad ones alone and maybe they will
get better by themselves.

I disagree.

rg

"RH" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > >rg wrote in message
    > >news:A%s8a.68870$F%[email protected]...
    > >>
    > >> "Charles Hawtrey" wrote in message
    > >> news:[email protected]...
    > >> > On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 18:12:03 GMT, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz) wrote:
    > >> >
    > >> > >rg wrote:
    > >> > >> We had plans to travel to Germany. We cancelled them. Not
because
    > >of
    > >> a
    > >> > >> terroist, but for political reasons. We do not support with our
    > >dollars
    > >> > >> those countries that oppose the US when we agree with what the US
is
    > >> doing
    > >> > >> and what the UN ought to be doing.
    > >> > >
    > >> > >Do you only make this determination on a country-by-country basis?
    > >> Because
    > >> > >somewhere around half of the people in the US also don't support it.
    > >> > >Presumably this includes the management of a lot of companies you do
    > >> > >business with on a daily basis.
    > >> >
    > >> > Would Iraq show even their present grudging and incomplete compliance
    > >> > if the US said "we're rattling our sabres but don't really intend to
    > >> > attack you"?
    > >> >
    > >> > Am I alone in thinking that the present situation is actually rather
    > >> > effective? On the one hand we have US and UK war-readiness giving
    > >> > Saddam motivation to disarm (even Chirac has said that Iraq is
    > >> > complying mainly because of US military pressure). On the other hand
    > >> > we have Europe and others restraining the use of this force. Sort of
    > >> > a "good-cop, bad-cop" arrangement. It's kind of unfortunate that the
    > >> > US has to take criticism for playing the bad-cop role, but that's
    > >> > life.
    > >> >
    > >> > With luck and the grace of God we will see eventual compliance by
Iraq
    > >> > without war, and all the troops can come home and start a baby boom.
    > >>
    > >> I agree.
    > >> The ONLY reason the inspectors are making even slight progress is
because
    > >of
    > >> the military camping outside SH's door. If they were to leave, the
    > >> inspectors would be a joke to SH. And, the military cannot stay there
for
    > >> the 100 years it will take the inspectors to hunt and find everything.
    > >>
    > >
    > >Do you wonder why there is increasing spread of anti-Americanism?
    > >
    > >Bush and his colleagues have done a very poor job of sellling this war to
    > >the world at enormous cost to America and her allies. Your attitude of
    > >"support us or else" shows your lack of appreciation for things
democratic.
    > >This is not good cop, bad cop, it is America expecting everyone to fall
in
    > >line after a few politicians made a decision to wage war on a dictator
that
    > >has been relatively well behaved of late. Why not calm down some of the
    > >existing hotspots on the planet instead of creating new ones?
    > >---
    > >DFM
    > >
    > >
    > Poor Germans, whatever they do is wrong. First we boycotted them because
we considered
    > Germans to be warmongers, now we should boycott them because of their
pacifist attitude.
    > RH

You must have been born post-1980.
Those that do not learn history will have to repeat it.

I have no idea what you mean by we boycotted them for being warmongers. If
you are referring to the Hitler era, you are grossly in error of your
assessment of their so-called "warmongering". If you mean they are now
demonstrating a "pacifist" attitude, think again. They are actually
supporting a brutal dictator, just like their Hitler. Perhaps tigers do not
change their stripes after all.

rg

On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 02:49:46 +0000, rg wrote:

    > I have no idea what you mean by we boycotted them for being warmongers. If
    > you are referring to the Hitler era, you are grossly in error of your
    > assessment of their so-called "warmongering". If you mean they are now
    > demonstrating a "pacifist" attitude, think again. They are actually
    > supporting a brutal dictator, just like their Hitler. Perhaps tigers do not
    > change their stripes after all.

Anyway, the notion that the US might have boycotted Germany during WWII is
actually quite wrong.

Surely Bush knows whom granddad Prestott Bush worked for during the war
and how he made the family fortune?

(Together with Ford, Standard Oil and a few others who supplied Germany
with critical stuff throughout the war.)

Alex Starke wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > "Padraig Breathnach" wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > [email protected] (markfromsf) wrote:
    > >
    > > >"Alex Starke" wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > >> Don't let fear rule your life buddy, you may get hit by a bus
tomorrow.
    > Get
    > > >> over there and enjoy!
    > > >
    > > >Exactly! wouldn't it be a real bitch if you got run over by a bus
    > > >while you should have been on vacation in Europe?
    > >
    > > But wouldn't it be a greater bitch if you got run over by a bus in
    > > Europe when you could have been safe at home?
    > >
    > > Decisions, decisions.
    > >
    > > PB
    > Ah, but at least I would get hit while I was having an adventure in
Europe,
    > not sitting around the US worrying.
    > If I did get hit, it would probably be after too many pints of Guiness or
    > kruegels of Gosser. What a way to go!

Stop it, you're making me thirsty!
---
DFM

Deep Floyd Mars wrote:
    >
    >
    > Do you wonder why there is increasing spread of anti-Americanism?
    >
    > Bush and his colleagues have done a very poor job of sellling this war to
    > the world at enormous cost to America and her allies. Your attitude of
    > "support us or else" shows your lack of appreciation for things democratic.
    > This is not good cop, bad cop, it is America expecting everyone to fall in
    > line after a few politicians made a decision to wage war on a dictator that
    > has been relatively well behaved of late. Why not calm down some of the
    > existing hotspots on the planet instead of creating new ones?

Because, whether or not he was elected by "the people", we have a moron
in the White House?

rg wrote:
    >
    > "Magda" wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 19:35:33 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "rg"
    >
    > > arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
    > >
    > >
    > > ... I really don't know. Perhaps you could tell them for me.
    > >
    > > They are already celebrating your absence - many read this ng. :-))
    >
    > I don't doubt they are. I will certainly pass this information along to all
    > my acquaintances.
    >
    > But perhaps the minister of tourism would have a different opinion than you.
    > Perhaps you could inform him/her of your celebration.

A) There are plenty of Americans who do NOT share your narrow-minded
viewpoint (or think our government is even remotely "doing the right
thing"). Most of them have no intention of denying themselves the
pleasure of travel in order to "make a statement" of negligible impact
upon the the countries you choose to boycott. (There's an old adage
about "biting off your nose to spite your face.....")

B) Apparently you are under the impression that the only tourists in
Europe are Americans. There ARE a few other nations in the world, and I
suspect a greater proportion of their citizens travel abroad, compared
to the percentage of Americans who do. (For starters, there's a lot to
see in our own country, and many Americans feel insecure with the idea
of other cultures - especially when it includes dealing with people who
do not speak their language.)

rg wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > "Deep Floyd Mars" wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > rg wrote in message
    > > news:A%s8a.68870$F%[email protected]...
    > > >
    > > > "Charles Hawtrey" wrote in message
    > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > > On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 18:12:03 GMT, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz)
wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > >rg wrote:
    > > > > >> We had plans to travel to Germany. We cancelled them. Not
because
    > > of
    > > > a
    > > > > >> terroist, but for political reasons. We do not support with our
    > > dollars
    > > > > >> those countries that oppose the US when we agree with what the US
    > is
    > > > doing
    > > > > >> and what the UN ought to be doing.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >Do you only make this determination on a country-by-country basis?
    > > > Because
    > > > > >somewhere around half of the people in the US also don't support
it.
    > > > > >Presumably this includes the management of a lot of companies you
do
    > > > > >business with on a daily basis.
    > > > >
    > > > > Would Iraq show even their present grudging and incomplete
compliance
    > > > > if the US said "we're rattling our sabres but don't really intend to
    > > > > attack you"?
    > > > >
    > > > > Am I alone in thinking that the present situation is actually rather
    > > > > effective? On the one hand we have US and UK war-readiness giving
    > > > > Saddam motivation to disarm (even Chirac has said that Iraq is
    > > > > complying mainly because of US military pressure). On the other
hand
    > > > > we have Europe and others restraining the use of this force. Sort
of
    > > > > a "good-cop, bad-cop" arrangement. It's kind of unfortunate that
the
    > > > > US has to take criticism for playing the bad-cop role, but that's
    > > > > life.
    > > > >
    > > > > With luck and the grace of God we will see eventual compliance by
Iraq
    > > > > without war, and all the troops can come home and start a baby boom.
    > > >
    > > > I agree.
    > > > The ONLY reason the inspectors are making even slight progress is
    > because
    > > of
    > > > the military camping outside SH's door. If they were to leave, the
    > > > inspectors would be a joke to SH. And, the military cannot stay there
    > for
    > > > the 100 years it will take the inspectors to hunt and find everything.
    > > >
    > >
    > > Do you wonder why there is increasing spread of anti-Americanism?
    > >
    > > Bush and his colleagues have done a very poor job of sellling this war
to
    > > the world at enormous cost to America and her allies. Your attitude of
    > > "support us or else" shows your lack of appreciation for things
    > democratic.
    > > This is not good cop, bad cop, it is America expecting everyone to fall
in
    > > line after a few politicians made a decision to wage war on a dictator
    > that
    > > has been relatively well behaved of late. Why not calm down some of the
    > > existing hotspots on the planet instead of creating new ones?
    > > ---
    > > DFM
    > I think you are confused. I do not wonder why anti-Americanism is rampant
in
    > some parts of the world. I think I understand perfectly well why.
    > Bush should not have to "sell" this war to the French and the Germans.
They
    > should be supporting UN resolution. They are NOT. They don't have to
    > support America. But they should either support and enforce UN
resolutions,
    > or go home. They are doing neither. They are standing in the way.

You seem to be confused. Why should they support something just because the
US put it forward?

    > I do not ask them to help. They probably couldn't anyway. But I do require
    > that if they are not going to help, that they at least get out of the way.

What you require is irrelevant. You do not control the USA.

    > I think your understanding of geo-political turmoil is elementary.

You actually think? No evidence of that here...

    > We will calm down some of the hotspots on the planet as soon as we calm
this
    > one down. And we are not creating new ones.

Iraq is not a hotspot at the moment.

Nth Korea is, much of Africa is, the Phillipines are, Afghanistan still is,
Iran could easily become one, bits of the Balkans are, Kashmere is, and
parts of South America are.

    > It seems your attitude is to leave the bad ones alone and maybe they will
    > get better by themselves.

No, I did not say that.

    > I disagree.

Well poo to you.
---
DFM

"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > rg wrote:
    > >
    > > "Magda" wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 19:35:33 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "rg"
    > >
    > > > arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > ... I really don't know. Perhaps you could tell them for me.
    > > >
    > > > They are already celebrating your absence - many read this ng. :-))
    > >
    > > I don't doubt they are. I will certainly pass this information along to
all
    > > my acquaintances.
    > >
    > > But perhaps the minister of tourism would have a different opinion than
you.
    > > Perhaps you could inform him/her of your celebration.
    > A) There are plenty of Americans who do NOT share your narrow-minded
    > viewpoint (or think our government is even remotely "doing the right
    > thing"). Most of them have no intention of denying themselves the
    > pleasure of travel in order to "make a statement" of negligible impact
    > upon the the countries you choose to boycott. (There's an old adage
    > about "biting off your nose to spite your face.....")
I don't think my view is narrow minded at all. I think it is rather dominant
at this time. Perhaps your viewpoint is the narrow-minded one. But you
never considered that as a possibility, did you?

I doubt if the impact would be neglible. Depends on the numbers.


    > B) Apparently you are under the impression that the only tourists in
    > Europe are Americans. There ARE a few other nations in the world, and I
    > suspect a greater proportion of their citizens travel abroad, compared
    > to the percentage of Americans who do. (For starters, there's a lot to
    > see in our own country, and many Americans feel insecure with the idea
    > of other cultures - especially when it includes dealing with people who
    > do not speak their language.)

I have been to Europe and you are wrong about what impression I am under.
I have been to numerous countries around the world and have never felt
insecure in any of them. Differing languages does not affect me negatively
at all. I find it rather challenging and stimulating.

rg

On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 02:46:15 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "rg"
arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :

... I think you are confused. I do not wonder why anti-Americanism is rampant in
... some parts of the world. I think I understand perfectly well why.
... Bush should not have to "sell" this war to the French and the Germans. They
... should be supporting UN resolution. They are NOT. They don't have to
... support America. But they should either support and enforce UN resolutions,
... or go home. They are doing neither. They are standing in the way.

The perfect human shield ! Shoot them.

... I do not ask them to help. They probably couldn't anyway. But I do require
... that if they are not going to help, that they at least get out of the way.

LOL

======
Due to a lack of interest, tomorrow has been cancelled.