Yet Another Anti-American Middle East Thread

Ok, I can't help myself. Not only does Bush tell Blair 'no you can't go to the Middle East' to try and help resolve the problems, he holds off on sending Condi to give time for the Israeli's to bomb the hell out of Lebanon.

My latest gripe is with Condi. Yesterday I saw her giving a press conference when she said 'It is time for a new Middle East, it is time to say to those who do not want a different kind of Middle East that we will prevail; they will not'. I just thought, how fucking arrogant! 'We', America and our poodles want the world to run our way and it's gonna happen no matter what you say or do. I know the 'right' in America believes God is on their side but they are getting more like how the British Empire ran itself, we have God, Queen, Country, Civilisation and Cricket (Baseball) and we will bring it all to the ignorant and uneducated. Like all empires and 'world' conqueror's previously (Egyptian, Aztec, Greek, Roman, etc) the British Empire collapsed in on itself. It's just a matter of time!

Hear hear fatman!
Really fatman, I am seriously thinking of joining in on some 'acts of evil' myself. Any recommendations? Perhaps, and I know this might offend, but 7'11 parties, could they catch on?

I thought exactly the same when I saw that bitch on the 7.30 news. Who exactly do they think they are? I am almost French in my disdain at the Americans already. I was this close at throwing my plate of dinner at the screen, if it wasn't Meissen I almost surely would have.

A new Middle East!!! And that smirking self-righteous, self-aggrandised shit head, Olmert. If this is not a call for every Muslim nation to take up nuclear testing, what exactly is.Diplomacy is probably something Americans can't pronounce never mind exercise, though it is no longer just a question of such.
This is enough to put one off the Americans for a life time, not to mention how the millions of people in the middle East must feel. As though they ever needed an excuse?

I am almost French...

That explains our "disdain" of you, too.

Certain sectors of the American population should no longer sit and point fingers at Puss and think that that alone exonerates them. If they had half an inclination they could get off their fat heiss pussy cushion, and get rebellious. I take my hat off to the French in this respect, they truly understand democracy and are willing to fight it's cause.

It would appear that it takes the flakey sentiments of Hollywood to even fleetingly come out of the "fear zone" sic. I believe the Americans are led by fear propaganda into acceptance and subjugation, to the point where this decides who runs their "god given country". Since the cold war this has been the method of facing the world. A mentality, that despite all reason, has lodged in the brain like a blood clot.

French fries anyone?

[Aunty]

French fries anyone?

Non!


Give me freedom fries!

[Aunty]

If they had half an inclination they could get off their fat heiss pussy cushion, and get rebellious. I take my hat off to the French in this respect, they truly understand democracy and are willing to fight it's cause.

Well what do you think the American War of Independence was all about? Fought after the French Revolution I might add!


Why do the Frecnh plant trees along the Champs-Elysees?

So the German army will have some shade to march in.

Ha ha ha hee hee hee. Make mine a Belgian patat met mayonnaise then, far nicer any-way. Don't mention the war. You know it causes you to pupate into a raging nationalist.

A New Zealand nationalist? Never have I heard of anything so silly.

A New Zealand nationalist? Never have I heard of anything so silly.What is it? 3 miliion people at the arse-end of the world?

[gearguy]

after the American Revolution, 1776

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_revolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_revolution

[Aunty]

after the American Revolution, 1776

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_revolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_revolution

I stand corrected, but I knew they were close.

[Aunty]

Ok, I can't help myself. Not only does Bush tell Blair 'no you can't go to the Middle East' to try and help resolve the problems, he holds off on sending Condi to give time for the Israeli's to bomb the hell out of Lebanon.

My latest gripe is with Condi. Yesterday I saw her giving a press conference when she said 'It is time for a new Middle East, it is time to say to those who do not want a different kind of Middle East that we will prevail; they will not'. I just thought, how fucking arrogant! 'We', America and our poodles want the world to run our way and it's gonna happen no matter what you say or do. I know the 'right' in America believes God is on their side but they are getting more like how the British Empire ran itself, we have God, Queen, Country, Civilisation and Cricket (Baseball) and we will bring it all to the ignorant and uneducated. Like all empires and 'world' conqueror's previously (Egyptian, Aztec, Greek, Roman, etc) the British Empire collapsed in on itself. It's just a matter of time!

I've just watched a press conference with Dr Rice in Rome. She has called for an urgent and immediate ceasefire so that the people of Israel and Lebanon can live in peace. Is that an arrogant call and statement of American imperialism too?

Like the Australians the Newzealanders have a kind of added adopted nationalism.

Just try telling a wombat that the Queen is a filthy dirty land grubbing German peasant that focks corgi's and owes her crown not only to the seedy back-stabbing slaughter of the fairest Scottish Queen, but to a fascist francophile uncle, who could only have been suffering from degenerative brain disorder when he decided to abdicate in favour of marriage to an American, that she was a gold-digging slapper, with as much pedigree as the present queens imbecilic son and heir to the throne, is besides the point. The latter of course,now married into a long line of prostitutes with chronic dental disorders. Her only hope, is as an out of season extra in "My fair Lady".

Yes it is Aunty! Ever heard of slut?

[Aunty]

Yes I have. I get called that a lot. At my age I take it as quite a compliment.

Condo thingey of course.
Would she say anything different, after the fact, standing on European soil? After the Israelis bombed the UN observer quarters and long after trying to give the Israelis time to sew up the war, so "the people of Israel and Lebanon can live in peace". Who ever feeds her this crap should be shot. She is even out of sink with the Europeans on this one. Does she really think the Europeans are as stupid as herself or her country people?
I think it's high time the Europeans put some kind of sanctions on Israel.


Make mine a French fry sans gefiltered trash.

I've just watched a press conference with Dr Rice in Rome. She has called for an urgent and immediate ceasefire so that the people of Israel and Lebanon can live in peace. Is that an arrogant call and statement of American imperialism too?

I am naive as regards many things Aunty, but my eyes are open when it comes to American Foreign policy. I couldn't put it better than Die Welt newspaper:

"Condoleezza Rice's trip is not geared to mediating between the parties to the conflict, it is not a peace mission. It looks rather as if Washington has sent her to show its presence as a world power with a sense of responsibility - and to strengthen Israel's position once again".

What exactly is Rice doing to achieve peace? Is there any sign from Rice and the Whitehouse that they are 'pissed' at Israel, are they pressuring Israel in anyway to abandon the bombing? Perhaps when public opinion shifts in the US against the war they may make more of a conserted effort, however, with the Jewish lobby so strong that seems unlikely.

Back to my original thoughts on American arrogance. I believe when Rice states 'It's time for a new middle east ... we will prevail' it is not only arrogant in terms of her 'belief' that the American way is the right way and that the middle east is 'their's' to tinker with but also shows that, perhaps, there is a method behind this mad war. When she says 'It's time for a new middle east', don't you begin to suspect that there is something more going on than a skirmish between Israel and Hezbollah. Isn't there a pattern forming where Afghanistan is invaded, Iraq is invaded, Lebanon is invade, Iran is ostrocised, Syria is sidelined with both of the latter lined up for future conflicts with the warning that 'we will prevail'.

Then of course, we do have Condi looking all intense down the camera lense into the homes of the great American public and calling for peace ... Do I believe her or do I believe my own eyes? Actions speak louder than words.

[Aunty]

I've just watched a press conference with Dr Rice in Rome. She has called for an urgent and immediate ceasefire so that the people of Israel and Lebanon can live in peace. Is that an arrogant call and statement of American imperialism too?

I am naive as regards many things Aunty, but my eyes are open when it comes to American Foreign policy. I couldn't put it better than Die Welt newspaper:

"Condoleezza Rice's trip is not geared to mediating between the parties to the conflict, it is not a peace mission. It looks rather as if Washington has sent her to show its presence as a world power with a sense of responsibility - and to strengthen Israel's position once again".

What exactly is Rice doing to achieve peace? Is there any sign from Rice and the Whitehouse that they are 'pissed' at Israel, are they pressuring Israel in anyway to abandon the bombing?

Actions speak louder than words.

Yes actions do speak louder than words, which is presumably why she is in the Middle East and not at home in the US entertaining the foreign minister from the Cook Islands. Of course your sentence above could easily be rewritten:-

What exactly is Blair, Putin, Merkle, Assad, Chirac, Ahmadinejad etc., etc., etc., doing to achieve peace? Is there any sign from Blair, Putin, Merkle, Assad, Chirac, Ahmadinejad etc., etc., etc., and their governments that they are 'pissed' at Israel, are they pressuring Israel in anyway to abandon the bombing?

and it would still be as meaningless as it is self-serving.

What exactly is Blair, Putin, Merkle, Assad, Chirac, Ahmadinejad etc., etc., etc., doing to achieve peace?It would of course be more correctly written as "What exactly are Blair, Putin, Merkle, Assad, Chirac, Ahmadinejad etc., etc., etc., doing to achieve peace?" but that would be a mere detail. The answer to the question is "Oh, and you expect it to be in the newspapers or on television as it's happening?"

The fact is few of us know and possibly will ever know what they are doing since these things are properly carried out beyond the public gaze. I remember that Warren Beatty, who was then screwing the Material Girl, remarked in the docu-movie In bed with Madonna that if it wasn't being caught on film then in her opinion it wasn't really happening. Many people seem to think that if it's not in the mass media it can't be happening. Nothing could be further from the truth

Yes actions do speak louder than words, which is presumably why she is in the Middle East and not at home in the US entertaining the foreign minister from the Cook Islands. Of course your sentence above could easily be rewritten:-

What exactly is Blair, Putin, Merkle, Assad, Chirac, Ahmadinejad etc., etc., etc., doing to achieve peace? Is there any sign from Blair, Putin, Merkle, Assad, Chirac, Ahmadinejad etc., etc., etc., and their governments that they are 'pissed' at Israel, are they pressuring Israel in anyway to abandon the bombing?

and it would still be as meaningless as it is self-serving.

Perhaps Ms Rice would be better off in the cook Islands!

As for what other nations are doing, I believe Blair falls in line with whatever Bush wants (as proved recently with the unnoticed mic), and the Germans are basically just guilt ridden over the holocaust to take extensive action against Israel. As for Russia, France, Japan, Italy & Canada (other members of the G8), they wanted to put out a far more critical joint statement against Israel at the recent summit but were blocked from doing so. Putin offered to host a peace conference, which was rejected by Israel. The question though is not what these other countries are doing, they are not the ones with ulterior motives in the middle east. Yes they would like to see an end to fundamentalist extremism and terrorism, but they are not the ones invading other countries to achieve this. The fact remains that the USA is happy, at the moment, to see Israel bomb the hell out of Lebanon in an attempt to get rid of Hezbollah, the fact there are civilian casualties does not way heavy on the mind for them, it's not Americans who are being bombed. America, if they wished, could simply tell Israel to 'give it up', instead, they send them more rockets. There may well be negotiations behind closed doors, more than likely, but do you think these are about Israel falling back, doubtful. More likely it is discussions centred on how long they can continue to bomb, the likely chance of exterminating Hezbollah, how to link Syria and Iran more closely with radical extremism and how they can move in a western peace keeping force to keep Hezbollah down.

Believe me, I am no fan of Hezbollah but I do believe in people's rights not be bombed out of their own homes. Isreal had every right to fight back against the constant bombing they received, but this is too much and is not targetted directly at Hezbollah.

By the way, I saw on CNN today Ms Rice referred to as 'Secretary of Rice, Condoleezza State'. Now there is a job she could handle.

Fatman I heartily agree with your last 2-postings. Now where is that powerful and threatening Russia with it's loads of weaponry to hand out. Just when you need them.
I am full of hope and optimism, that China and not a united Europe will be able to fill the gap. Let them first finish the trade war and then sink the beast with it's new found power.
And good riddance. Any detractors to America's policies within America have had plenty of time to act, or find suitable exile else where.
There is mass grieving and much indignation at Israel and the USA in China, at the purposeful and cowardly slaughter of one of their UN observers in Lebanon.

This might not be the time but what the "heck", bless the good old BBC for keeping up the pace. When are the Americans going to face the charges of war crimes in Iraq, for the systematic torturing of all their prisoners of war? This has already been widely accepted even by their allies, and the fobbing off with the disciplining of a couple of low ranking USA soldiers, is not going to make the grade?

[cottmann]

The American and Israeli position is one of hubris - in the original meaning of the Ancient Greek term: "a reckless disregard for the rights of another person resulting in social degradation for the victim." (Oxford Classical Dictionary, "hubris," pp. 732-733.) Rice's position represents the moden meaning: "overbearing pride or presumption."

If this Australian military commander's action "helped the Americans produce a more effective and ETHICAL targeting policy during the war," who were the Americans targeting?


From http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=96953

"Aussie commander vetoed US military action: book
Saturday Jul 29 06:04 AEST
A former commander of Australian forces in Iraq vetoed a number US military actions against Saddam Hussein's regime on ethical grounds, according to a new book.
The revelation of how Australia actively and successfully used its veto power in the 2003 invasion of Iraq is contained in The Partnership, a new book on the US-Australian alliance by The Weekend Australian's foreign editor, Greg Sheridan.
Major General Maurie McNarn, then a brigadier and commander of Australian forces in Iraq, on several occasions played a "red card" against American plans, which included hits on individuals.
The book reveals that Australia, as a member of the so-called coalition of the willing in Iraq, was given a power known as a "red card" that let Major General McNarn to veto US military actions, including individual targets and the types of weapons used.
Australia's proactive use of the veto power - on strategic, military and ethical grounds - helped the Americans produce a more effective and ethical targeting policy during the war.
┬йAAP 2006"