If that is your 'masterpiece', do not quit your day job.<BR>Ha

Thanks, but I'm not about to, its too lucrative!<BR><BR>US

Getting back to the original post, I was wondering how the British people feel towards the French, and vice versa? I haven't heard of any English &quot;freedom fries&quot;. Since the two countries are relatively close (location wise) I was just wondering how they were getting along.....

Uncle;<BR>You always resort to name calling when you have nothing to stand on. Kenneth Lay of Enron, a personal freind of Bush,<BR>no indictment. Dick Cheney of Halliburton, no indictment(and who by the way was making a tidy sum with Iraq also). Even if they did their deeds before Bush why is there no push to get them? You can't just say it wasn't on my watch. It was discovered on Bush's and I haven't seen anything done about it. And whatever you are trying to say about the economy or retirement, I sure don't see any effort made to remedy anything. As far as the air goes, Clinton at least tried to make the rules stricter which is something Bush has never done. All he has done is eased restrictions againnst polluters.<BR>So come on back with more of your name calling and empty facts. I've got a lot of hard bark on me and it will take more than the likes of you and your Straw Man arguements to ever get under my skin.

Lynlor:<BR>&quot;You didn't mention CEOs, but I will. Their behavior is criminal, and clearly over half of them are liberal democrats. Their behavior was going on during the Clinton adminstration, but it is only now that we are beginning to do something about it.&quot;<BR> Kenneth Lay of Enron, Dick Cheney of Halliburton. Liberal? Who are all these liberal CEO's? I think they come from both sides of the coin. The point is no matter when the deed was done, it was discovered during Bush's watch and he is doing nothing about it.<BR>When I talk about pollution it has to do with industrial pollution and the Bush Admin. doing nothing but easing restrictions against polluters. That is a major problem that he is ignoring.<BR>He may have inherited the economic problem but I see no clear plan coming from his Admin. to rectify the problem.<BR>If you think this tax cut plan of his is a good one, I urge you to really take a good look at who it will really benefit in the long term. I mean that lynlor, really look into what he is proposing. I don't expect you to take my word on it, but don't take what anyone(liberal or conservative) says at face value. You owe it to yourself and your family.<BR>

Operaman. <BR><BR>I'm interested in what you say about Cheney. What is he accused of as CEO of Halliburton?

As a British person I would just like to make a comment about Bush here.<BR><BR>I know that there was great controversy over his election and that he has been ridiculed in America and abroad but that should not be s stick to beat him with right now.<BR><BR>In this instance we are dealing with something that goes past party politics and individuals.<BR><BR>Contantly referring back to Bush's election and his personality serves no purpose. The fact is that he is dealing with the Iraq crisis in a highly competant manner and that should be enough to silence his critics. What do you want the man to do?

Good morning everyone. Correction on the quote &quot;Bush took over while the economy was in recession&quot;. I believe it was March after the election that the economy began a recession mode. After the economic strength of the 90's, this may have happened no matter who was elected. But the sweeping tax cuts proposed will not make for improvement- many Republicans are not even supporting that route. <BR>To Eric: Hey, I found common ground with you on a previous post- No matter if it's the French, Germans whoever- one can't simply disdain the citizens due to their gov't policies.

What *else* do you want the man to do ?<BR><BR>I want him to invade african countries whenever there is a dictator. 2 million dead in the DR Congo - why isn't he there? I saw a spokesman for Ghana who has a UN vote say the hypocrisy was all to much for him to side with the US. I want him to set up a Palestinian state and remove Israel from the occupied territories. I want him to condemn Israel's 1XX human rights abuses. I want him to highlight China's human rights abuses (but with an emerging market of over 1Bn he keeps strangely silent). I want him to join all the other countries who signed up to the Kyoto accord. I want him to find alternative forms of energy and abolish the system whereby one fossil fuel burning powerstation's closure means another can pump out twice the emissions. I want him to abolish Helms-Burton law and start trading with Cuba who is a natural trading partner. I would like him to stop installing puppet regimes throughout third world countries, abolish the sale of land-mines, arming regimes throughout the world. I would like him to pay the deficit of US$15Bn that was going to rebuild Afghanistan. Finally, I would like him to police the aftermath of war instead of leaving it to everybody else. If he could learn to read that might be of benefit too ...

<BR>From reading these posts, reading the NY Times, New Yorker, WP, watching BBC, etc. it is clear to me that those who oppose Bush's policy on Iraq (Operaman, avalon) have other gripes with America that have nothing to do with liberating Iraq and preventing another 9/11. <BR><BR>Soem people have socio-economic grievances; others are pissed about Kyoto; others bring up total red herrings, like Enron. These things have nothing to do with Iraq -- except it distracts the less focused from the real issue. <BR><BR>In case you're too dense, let me repeat that Enron has nothing to do with Iraq. In Iraq there is a mad dictator who wants to create a large enough arsenal so he can pursue his murderous goals. That's what this is about. If you're okay with that, that's your problem. But don't obscure the issue with all the nonsense avalon and others spout. It's outside the scope of the debate.

<BR>I just thought it important to note that if things go the way they now appear to be headed, that is, the US and a limited number of others conduct the war against Iraq, it will mean that those nations (and their peoples) who opposed the war and did not take part in it will have NO SAY in post-war Iraq. <BR><BR>That might turn out to be a big deal. So my question to those from France, Germany, Belgium, Britain and elsewhere who oppose the war is, do you realize that by opposing the war you will not have any say in how the post-Saddam Iraqi government is construed? <BR>

Bonjour Magnus,<BR><BR>so what ? Do we (and I mean we as in you, too, unless you're top brass in the US government or its allies) have any say on what is happening in Iraq now ? Have we ever ? Do you really believe we might have, should event turn differently ?

I forgot to add:<BR><BR>;-), ;-), ;-), ;-)

Well said, Florence.<BR><BR>So the message is, as usual, &quot;It's my way or the highway&quot;. Isn't that exactly the sort of counterproductive attitude that is making the jobs of people like Blair, Aznar et al that much harder?<BR><BR>Interesting comments from Rumsfeld re: UK, by the way. I swear to God, every time that man gives a press conference he seems to manage to annoy more people. Awesome.

<BR>No, what I'm saying is every choice involves consequences. If you choose not to be involved in the war, there are consequences, and in this case, the consequences are influencing post-war Iraq. It's a free choice.

I just love this post. It goes on and on forever. I'm glad fodors has left us a place to vent.<BR><BR>Beatle and Operaman<BR><BR>I know if I keep trying I will bring you back from the dark side, thats my goal.<BR><BR>see ya later

Of course, if it weren't for the French you Americans would be Canadians with a perfect right to go around with maple leaves on your rucksacks<BR>;-)

'To the winner goes the spoils of war'. <BR>Is that what you mean Magnus?<BR>Is it for personal gain that war should be waged on Iraq?

Beatle..The stock market began to plunge in march of 2000,Clinton was still in office. The election was in november. The recession really began years efore that.

Good point, Kert.<BR> <BR>What about the poor Iraqis (and by that I mean the innocent citizens)? Aren't they going to be allowed to &quot;have any say in how the post-Saddam Iraqi government is construed?&quot; <BR>Isn't it their democratic right?