If I may add....
 

I was so disappointed I couldn't reply to the 9/11 question. Seems like not just Europeans replied. That day I kept thinking how it didn't feel like it had been two years already, and several times on Thursday I kept remembering where I had been, what I had been doing when 9/11 happened. I was pregnant on 9/11 and my husband and I kept thinking what world are we bringing our child into. What a sad day it was.
I had no problems with us going into Afghanistan to take down a regime that supported and harbored the man and his terror group responsible for 9/11. And anybody correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think there was a country in the world that had any problems with us doing that.
Iraq is a different issue. We went there because Saddam had weapons of mass destruction or so we were told. He could launch chem and bio weapons within 45 minutes notice or so we were told. Well...we can't seem to find them...and the WMD ARE WHY WE WERE TOLD WE WERE GOING TO WAR.
Now suddenly Iraq has become "the central front in the war on terror" says our President. If you believe that, then maybe you are one those people who can't name all nine democratic candidates. If you don't have any problems with your goverment changing its reasons for going to war, more power to you. I never thought our govt made its case in the first place and got called all kinds of names from certain fodorites because I chose to still enjoy my French wine (people got down right nasty).
And how funny that we know need the U.N. and "Old Europe" because of the mess we started and are having trouble finishing? "Old Europe" whose opinions we refused to listen to, preferring to insult them?
And you know what the truly sad part is? We still haven't found Osama, the man who is responsible for 9/11.

And so say all of us!!!

The other sad thing is all those innocent young soldiers dying for what really? And the $56 billion we taxpayers have to hand over-where do we get this money from and why don't we help ourselves first?

My three truths:
1) If the path that GWB is on works out, everybody in the world ( nearly everybody) will be extremely grateful 10 years from now.
2) The path will not work out.
3) If we spend 400 to 500 billion dollars in Iraq, we will not walk away from the oil.

CaribTraveler,

Very well said!!! I agree with you on EVERYTHING you wrote!

We lost an acquaintance on August 23rd, when he was killed in Basra, Iraq. He was a civillian that was called up, through his being in the UK territorial army, to help the Iraqi police. His car was ambushed and three were killed. What exactly did he die for?
He was home on leave for his daughter's 6th birthday party the week before and told horror stories of Iraq - the most frightening being that the US army was trigger happy and no wonder the Iraqis were angry at their country's occupation. You only have to see last night's news of US tanks firing at Iraqi police for 45 minutes to see that perhaps he was right.
This unfortunate man told stories of first hand experience and not propaganda. Unfortunately he now lies in a grave in our town. So much for freedom.

Well said caribtraveler. Until recently, whenever anyone voiced doubts about the wisdom of going to war against Iraq, they were called anti-american and worse. I am European, but have lived in the US, and love that country and its people. I do not think that the war against Iraq is in the best interest of the American people. Think of how many American children could have free healthcare for the dollars that are being spend.

What a thought provoking thread. I will print it out before the American faction awakens and forces Fodors to pull it.

Americans are typically generous and many feel that the government is doing the right thing. However this herd mentality is alarming and disturbing. We are not children. We must keep aware of human pain throughout the globe. And, are we truly alleviating this pain or are we causing more?

Many don?t understand the unfair allowances made for those flashing the blue passport cover. But the rest of the world does, and many resent it.

Thanks Caribtraveler,
A post full of truth.
I totally agree with your summing up of the situation.
I wonder if the invasion of Iraq would have happened if she didn't have oil.
;-)
Mr Blaire will go down in History as one of the worlds most uninformed idiots. Afraid to say no to the mighty Bush, and not listening to the British people.He will pay with his Job at the next election.
Mr Bush....what can I say ...words escape me.
AR do you mean the soldier from Bridgend in Wales?
That is typical example of the waste of this conflict.
There is no solution to this war.Once Amrican companies have made $billions from rebuilding Iraq who will Bush focus on then.
Look out world !!
Muck

You guys need to wake up to the terrible threat that Islamic extremists pose to the entire world.
Handwringing and appeasement didn't work in 1938 and it won't work know. Sticking your head in the sand and hoping the storm will pass is a recipe for disaster.

Bush and Blair have got it right about how to confront and defeat the terrorists.

Unless they get some better support, you guys best convert, get some prayer rugs and get ready to kiss your freedoms good-bye.

Travel won't be so fun to Europe when that happens.

These points come from the previous correspondence
For rquirk: Are London police using the anti-terrorism act, or just the old-fashioned laws on public order ? As I understand long-standing law we can publish what we like so long as it is not racist or libellous, and speak it at Hyde Park, in public halls, and at licensed demos, on Trafalgar Square for example. What we cannot do is go with banners on batons and hit policemen, nor walk uninvited into private property. More basic, we have every right to vote for members of Parliament who will reverse government policy.

I have just seen your later note, and that you have with much goods sense dropped the line about the arms sales meeting in London and turned to affairs in LA, of which I am afraid I know little.

The British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs thinks, as I do, that a threat to my freedom is the imprisonment without trial of Britons now at Guantanamo Bay.

Dumas 1870: My last sentence answers your question of how American action threatens liberty, but needs widening to the threat to holders of many passports that are not British who are in the Bay. You go on to discuss how to settle disputes. The Pope settled the dispute on frontiers between the Portugese and Spanish in South America. Queen Victoria settled a similar dispute between Argentina and Chile. French and British were on the verge of war over the Fashoda incident 120 years ago: diplomats solved the matter. About 1960 Austria and Italy settled the problem of the German speakers inside north Italy. In the late twentieth century Pakistan, India and Bangladesh saw each other as threatening to build dams to take the water with which people downstream farmed: diplomats solved this. Much the same applies to the Nile. Hungary is negotiating her relations with neighbours who have thousands of Hungarians in their countries, and is getting on well: nobody there plans to use war. Decisive military victory is not at all the only thing that has been consistently successful in solving major disputes.

The American declaration of independence declares that all men are created equal. It calls no man a mad dog, and offers equal protection to all under the law.

[email protected]

Yes Mucky, I mean Dewi Pritchard from Bridgend. My daughter is in school with his daughter, Kira, and they are the best of friends.
Dewi told the family and friends a lot of things before he returned to Basra the day before his death.
Try telling Tracey, his widow, that all this is worth it.

Ben, I can see you know your history, but must also note that the disputes that you cite are all, for the most part, rather small and very regional in nature. And the Pope had powerful influence in South America because they were both Catholic countries.

I stand by my statement that MAJOR disputes require decisive military victory before a settlement can be reached. Religious fanatics don't sit at a table and calmly talk out issues.

I can tell that you and I both love freedom and value liberty, but I'm more willing to give up a little for more security given the grave threat that Islamic extremists pose to the world.

Its a terrible shame they have hijacked a peaceful religion and fouled its name.

Well-said, caribtraveler. The spin-meisters are trying to retroactively change the justifications they used to proceed into Iraq and for all the resources being expended, the world is not becoming a safer place.

I posted this on another 9-11 thread, but in case you didn't see that one, I thought you might like another perspective:


That day, I was driving up to our base, and heard about the events on BBC Radio. I had my infant son with me. Crying with horror and sadness, I pulled over and called my husband, who was at home. The phone rang and rang... A few minutes later, I called again, and my husband answered. He had been outside mowing the lawn, and our British neighbor had come running out of his house to tell my husband what had happened. My husband went to our neighbor's house, and together they were watching the tragedy unfold, when suddenly the second plane hit. My husband said he was so sick with sadness and bewilderment. I hung up with him after a few minutes, and continued up to our base. When I got to the gate, the atmosphere was so intense, so full of dread and shock, so full of AWARENESS, because all the security people were on alert. We were so far away from home and the attacks, yet our world changed in those few minutes, and from then on, our base was transformed. New security procedures, people standing around on the sidewalks and in their offices crying, talking in hushed tones, ALL of us trying desperately to call back to the States to check on loved ones, the American flags that appeared on people's front lawns despite security warnings not to do that, the grim faces of the active duty members, who had their oaths of service on their minds, ready to do ANYTHING to help or fulfill their duties....

All I could do was hold my baby, and cry, and cry, and cry. I whispered in his little ear that I would do my best to make sure he was safe, always, and I prayed that he would grow up in a world that had a firm hold on sanity, a world that valued human life and all its potential. Dinner at our house that evening was very subdued, and after we put our son to bed, my husband and I just sat on the couch, holding each other, unable to speak, watching the tidal wave of news reports on all the channels. This was our country, our COUNTRY, it was humanity in all forms. Our hearts were breaking, and we never felt so far away from our loved ones as we did that day.

So many other things, but that gives you an idea what Americans overseas might have felt that day.

I don't know why I typed all this, really. I guess it still hits pretty hard. Don't mean to upset any of you.

I just hope and pray that something like this never happens again, anywhere, to anyone, no matter what nationality they are. I hope we all find peace.

i think everyone is interested in a peaceful world who posts on this forum. obviously there are 2 camps out there..those who believe in what the us and it's growing coalition are doing, and those that do not. at one of the funerals i attended 2 years ago the father of the missing/deceased gave a short speach.he said that when his daughter came over to the usa from ieland he was proud. he thought that nyc offered her more opportunity than anywhere else in the world. in his grief he said he thought the us government let the world down by allowing this tragedy to happen. he said,godbye to everyone because he would never return to the usa again because it would be too painful. i cried thinking about what these terrorists have done to the world and my home. we all hope this never happens again.

Bravo caribtraveller - I agree with you absolutely. And with most of the others replying to you. My only question is to those who point out that the billions being spent on the war on Iraq "would be better spent helping ourselves first". Well yes, better than the mess in Iraq - and sure, there are many people living in poverty in the US. Why it should be so in the richest country in the world is something to be left for another time.
What the money should really be spent on is alleviating poverty in less fortunate countries - and without strings. Clean water, education. Oh, and fair trade. I find fundamentalist Islam frightening and incomprehensible as a mindset - but don't you think that religion is not really the issue here (as it isn't in Northern Ireland). It's economic. While young men in countries like Indonesia continue to be exposed to the western way of life thru satellite TV but have no hope of getting a job - it's easy to see how they can get sucked into the schemes of Imam Samudra or Osama bin Laden.

And BrimhamRocks - thanks for posting. It was obviously a terrible day for you and so many. But it doesn't change my mind (it probably wasn't meant to). The war in Iraq should not be happening. But now that it is? Back to CaribT - what should Old Europe do?

Hi AR,
Yes I guessed it was the same soldier.
The whole of Wales especially South Wales where both you and I live feel 100% for his family.
They are in a situation that is not their fault. Along with hundreds of other families both UK & US.
9/11 was justification for the Afghanistan war.
I'm really not so sure what the justification is for Iraq.
God bless all the people wrapped up in this terrible thing, and lets hope that some good can come of this mess.

Muck

Well Alice13...Colin Powell is in Geneva today to meet with Kofi Annan and the foreign ministers of countries that are permament members of the u.n. security council. Annan called the meeting to discuss the U.S.' proposed new resolution that is asking for help from U.N. countries (troops and money). The problem with the U.S. proposal is that the Bush administration wants to retain military and political control in Iraq. If I were the leader of France or Russia or Germany or China (the permament members), why the heck would I want to send my troops to be under the command of the U.S. and why the heck would I give money when I'd have no say on how the money would be spent.
Not only that, the troops they'd be sending would most likely come under constant attack, just like the american troops.
So unless the U.S. gives in a bit (I don't think we have a choice and since we need Old Europe more than they need us right now), I don't quite see why Old Europe would help.
We'll just have to wait and see I guess.

I apologize for an error I made in my previous reply. I just remembered that Germany has no veto power at the u.n. so it can't be a permanent member of u.n. security council.