Forums | MacLife

What the smurf is wrong with this country?  It's one thing when reactionary smurf on talk radio spout this kind of retarded nonsense, but someone in this position should know better than to spout off like this. 

Of course, he's just saying what the actual administration officials want to say but can't.  I'm sure a half-assed 'apology' will be issued shortly.

I miss the Clinton administration more and more every day.

Who wrote that article?  BestBuy? 

It's not very convincing, in fact, if it's true, I don't know what's more terrifying, the artice or people that would support it.

Who wrote that article?  BestBuy? 

It's not very convincing, in fact, if it's true, I don't know what's more terrifying, the artice or people that would support it.

Care to elaborate?  Or just going to stick to the usual 'puke it up and then claim repression' nonsense?

Uh, OK.  The article said, "France is no longer an ally of the United States and the NATO alliance "must develop a strategy to contain our erstwhile ally or we will not be talking about a NATO alliance" the head of the Pentagon's top advisory board said in Washington Tuesday."

What gives John Wayne here the authority to determine NATO's allies?

And it's scary because if this <Duke>pilgrim's</Duke> comments truly reflect NATO policy (a defense alliance, mind you) or if you believe in him, then you probably think that the US is undeniably right, and that if you aren't with us, you are an enemy of all of your allies.

Thinking that the US is right does not automatically lead to the assumption that dissention is punishable.

Uh, OK.  The article said, "France is no longer an ally of the United States and the NATO alliance "must develop a strategy to contain our erstwhile ally or we will not be talking about a NATO alliance" the head of the Pentagon's top advisory board said in Washington Tuesday."

What gives John Wayne here the authority to determine NATO's allies?

And it's scary because if this <Duke>pilgrim's</Duke> comments truly reflect NATO policy (a defense alliance, mind you) or if you believe in him, then you probably think that the US is undeniably right, and that if you aren't with us, you are an enemy of all of your allies.

Thinking that the US is right does not automatically lead to the assumption that dissention is punishable.

Didn't you read the article?  Or at least the part I quoted?  The guy wants to kick France out of NATO because they don't support our war.    There is no assumption, I'm talking about what the article said.

Didn't you read the article?  Or at least the part I quoted?  The guy wants to kick France out of NATO because they don't support our war.    There is no assumption, I'm talking about what the article said.

Yes, I read the article.  Accusations get you nowhere.

France does need to get kicked out of NATO.  They've displayed no interest in their (or anybody else's) defense.

So you are saying that NATO should give France the boot because they wont follow Bush blindly into war?  Wow.  Have fun with that.

France...

made and gave us our statue of liberty.

I know the French cycling press is awfully hard on Lance Armstrong. . .

Lance Armstrong is from texas.

Those French are probably just envious of people from Texas.

The French enjoy their role in thumbing their colective noses at EVERYONE, not just the US.

When push comes to shove they usually go along with things if their is an advantage for them to do so.

Of course this is hearsey, but there has been allot of rumbilings about France  and their buisness deallings with Iraq over the last few years. Building them a nuclear reactor etc and reports of them violating UN sanctions by continuing buisiness behind the scenes.

And unsubstainciated reports that they have been the ones tipping off the Iraqis about the weapons inspectors visits.

Their delay tactics could be a way of trying to hide their own complicity.

I don't really believe this all but it's been floating around for some time now.

I like France.

"France, for instance, requires all companies listed on the Paris Stock Exchange to include information about their social and environmental performance within their financial statements; the Johannesburg Stock Exchange requires compliance with a CSR-based code of conduct; and the United Kingdom (the first nation with a minister for corporate social responsibility) requires pension-fund managers to disclose the degree to which social and environmental criteria are part of their investment decisions." http://www.greenbiz.com/news/reviews_th … wsID=23758

They're redefining progress. http://www.cyberus.ca/~sustain1/Question/GPI.html

Good for you.

They're also trying to keep the middle east unstable.

Funny how France forgot what happened the last time a nutwit ignored sanctions, say the Treaty of Versailles?

When push comes to shove (the French) usually go along with things if their is an advantage for them to do so.

Yeah ... unlike everybody else, including the US!

I for one belive this article. Richard Perle is a very senior guy, and is famously hardline. Indeed, I've read that he's one of the people who helped convince a skeptical Bush to go after Iraq. Indeed, this guy's been yelling about invading Iraq for years.

The deeper point of this article is very telling: it's just another illustration that the White House is intent on throwing off the "shackles" of partnerships and alliances and going it alone; really using the nation's power like its never been used before.

It's a brave new world we're heading into. I'd like to know why the pro-war people either don't realize that or don't want to realize that.