[simpits-chat] Dr. Fun III

Stig Joergensen simpits-chat@simpits.org
Fri, 14 Mar 2003 17:09:53 +0100

U.S. and world interest does lie in the middle east in the form of oil,
the world economy relies on it flowing, saying that I do not beleive
this war is over oil,
there was an attack on us on 9/11 and I see it as heading future attacks
off, maybe indirectly, this will not be the last, the middle east is a
hotbed of hate, terrorism, human rights violations, if democracy can
spawn in the middle east the world will be better off, democracy's do
not terrorize or fight wars against one another, simple as that.

STJ: as terrible as 9/11 was and is, terrorism must be stopped - but can
you from now hang every conflict you wish to enter on the word terror? I
think it is fair and i support the war in Afghanistan - but where will
it end? what about Shri Lanka, is that the next target? what im saying
is; you can not go after a country that you suspect houses terror
leaders - much like a court we must have definitely prove, and then
bring only the persons directly responsible to justice, holding a hole
nation responsible is plain and simple wrong. and still - i refuses to
believe that the world economy revolves around the middle east, and i
think this is just the point - ppl in the US are not prepared to pay 6
USD / gal for gas as we do in most of eu.

The UN has set resolution after resolution, only to have Husein laugh in
the face
of every one of them, 12 years of it, as for diplomacy, its over, we
have bent over backwards time and time again, the whole time being
undermined by Russia, China and France, all of whom have financial
interest in Iraq. The UN has failed the world time and time again look
at all the atrocities committed around the world w/ the UN not lifting a
finger to stop them, the U.S. shares the brunt of the financial burden
of the UN, only to have its commitees chaired by the human rights
abusers of the world, I see it as a total farce.

STJ: I agree that the UN is not performing very well, in fact i might
even just say NOT performing at all, but that can not be used as an
excuse to slaughter a nation unless some sort of body/word court agrees,
otherwise we will start acting like the terrorists, a single person can
not / should not have the power to erase a nation...

How might that be? The UN passed resolutions time and time again
serious consequences. When the resolutions are not met, the UN passes
another resolution to keep itself from enforcing the earlier one. Again,
its like watching the Keystone Cops.

STJ; Leaders have been removed by force before - without a war, check
resent history in africa.... and about the UN, should it be dismantled?
and then what? have one person that controls every thing - i think that
have been done before - and it have a name; dictator ship.....

The US  backs Israel because it is a democracy, bottom line.

STJ: You missed my point - a coalition can exists despite religion, I
used Israel as an example.....

That is over simplistic (IMHO). I find it refreshing that the US has a
leader who actually looks out for its security, I think before 9/11
President Bush would have 
had a sleepy presidency, I feel that things will get worse before they
get better,
in the post cold war erra, we see what we face, factionist extremist and
heavy dynamics in the world situation, it will take decisiveness to meet
it head on, not to burry ones head in the sand and hope everything turns
out great 10 years from now. The only time I have been disapointed in
Pres. Bush is getting the US into the UN quagmire. As for France, they
can pound sand, Germany, why do we have 71,000 US troops in a nation
who's election was determined by a cantidate who had to run on
anti-american issues to get elected, speaks volumes to me. I feel as do
other Americans, our tax dollars would be better spent moving those
troops to
former warsaw pact nations who support us and our tax money would be

STJ: you are right - my statement is over simplistic, but that was to
make a point, I will still say that when you here Pres. Bush talks, it
is like he is talking for someone else - and in interviews, when it
comes to the hard questions, he can not answer mainly because he might
not have the answers - but i would expect a president to have an answer
- and this is what makes me think, he is running someone elses
errands.... But i do agree on the question of why you still are in
germany? it would make more sense to move the troops to the balkan