Should Poland continue to support Bush's war on terror?

It would place Obama in one helluva fix. All options are still on the table, Gordon Brown pinched that from Bush. Attacking Iran would be one of the most needless attacks ever. If they feel that the leader is being problematic, take him out and don't bomb their good people.

Just try and imagine being threatened with a bomb attack. My grandma saw a German Luftwaffe plane very near a bridge that she wasn't so far from. It's an indescribable fear. Had he dropped his bomb, she was curtains.

Yes it would. Merkel and Sarkozy can sort this out with Iran.

I agree, it doesn't need a heavy-handed approach. Bush had his way with Iraq and Putin could've been more condemnatory. However, Putin was quite clear about the Iranian question, having closer ties with the Iranians.

Time for the EU giants to step up to the plate. Thankfully, Sarkozy isn't as outspoken or hardline as that French politician who was inflammatory towards Iran. Iran has had the decency to remain a party to the major nuclear treaty.

I think Scott Ritter will have finished his book on Iran by now. I wouldn't mind getting my hands on a copy.

Yes, but I also think Georgie may try to go out with a bang. Who knows, he's an idiot. I think it would be an idiotic move.

Sb's gonna try and shoot him? ;)

That's what worries me.

Well, nothing bad so far, only invading Iraq ;)

And you don't think some crazed whitey might not try to take out Obama if he were to be elected?

*raises eyebrow*

America has its fanatics so it's possible. Just beef up the security when he goes to Texas and Louisiana, oh, Alabama too. Any redneck haven

I'm sure doubles are already being looked at. There's always 1 person out to get the President.

Yeah...and they have usually turned out to be insane, rather than "redneck".
Insane people can be anywhere!

unfortunately, "redneck haven" covers a lot of ground.. may as well throw in Indiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Pennslvannia to a degree. We may have to get Obama a pope-mobile. HE's a brave soul anyway.

You're not wrong there. Jaaawja, yeah, watch out for that place!!

A pope-mobile? A mobile tank more like :)

lol

I know people from Atlanta and they have told me that u shouldn't stray off the beaten track. U r American Wahldo?

u shouldn't stray off the beaten track

No we've seen duelling banjos.

We've seen what? What's in that pipe u r smoking Hueg? Ur character certainly looks happy :)

He may be referring to the movie Deliverance

Here is America's ally on terrorism

youtube.com/watch?v=ymnjacioEmQ&feature=related, startling!!

Deutche ist nicht so schlect, I was a soldier there.

Slovakian no. Aunts and uncles lived in Cleveland apart from me and didn't speak it too much.

youtube.com/watch?v=__VPEngBLVQm, the Saudi involvement

I'm sure he says 'f*ck off' at 3.05, LOL

Another 40 dead and countless injured.

But who is responsible?

Pakistan?

The Taliban say not them!



URL

Nasty bunch that ISI. They can all die and perish for all I care. This is not a racist remark, this is against indecency.

Why won't the Bush administration allow the Iraqi people to elect their own government instead of them (the USA) placing their own puppet administration in charge like they promised?

It must be because of the selling off of Iraqs state owned oil companies to "foreign" (and yes JohnP we all know that that means American) companies.

It now looks like Israel will attack Iran WITH america's backing!





URL

Honestly, this is news to me. Last I heard they've been elected for awhile now, and negotiations are going on with the Iraqi government for when we can leave, as they have been stepping up to the plate (as I've mentioned before, I believe) and are already in control in the majority of the country. It has been awhile since the US was running the Iraqi government. Now that there are less assassination attempts on them by those formerly in power or others with ill will, there is more interest in having US forces and the huge amount of firepower/protection that go with them, turn over the reigns.
Good on them, I say.
As for selling off state owned companies (ahem...who is the "state" in this case-Saddam? not anymore. ) Please provide more information on this. Many of the companies you might think of as American have not been for quite a few years, but at any rate, if the Iraqis want to sell their oil, now is a good time to do it as the prices are sky high. Makes better business sense than to sell when it's dirt cheap, don't you think?
Finally, as for a US backed strike on Iran by Israel, I wouldn't completely count on it. I like the rest of us here, do not know what if any plans the Israelis may have wrt the Iranians, but an educated guess would say if they did a hit on Iran it would be targeted at the reactors producing weapons grade material and any long range missile sites. The Israelis have done this before, and prevented hostile powers from gaining nuclear weapons. We all did it to the Germans, also, come to think about it, but completely missed the Japanese bomb program. That's a different topic though.
I do think that such things are too often left to the Israelis, a group so hated in the region that almost anything they do leads to someone or other being dissatisfied. They shouldn't be doing the world's dirty work. My understanding (if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will provide me with hundreds of links) is that the world was generally in denial that Iran was purifying weapons grade material until the Israelis published satellite photographs of the facility...

Anyway.
Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

John P.

Most definitely.. if the US stops giving money Israel, rubber stamping everything they do.. it might actually gain a few friends back. Israel actually got caught spying on the US in the 90's.

So you clearly DIDN'T read the article. As you can see from the quote that I even made bold....

here I'll quote again for you



There is NO EVIDENCE OF ANY DIVERSION INTO A WEAPONISATION PRAGRAMME!

It's just like Iraq again. The chief weapons inspector back then said that Iraq had no wmd's. But you invaded anyway and after one million civilians have died we find out he was right.

Now the IAEA say that Iran has NO WEAPONISATION PROGRAMME but they are going to be attacked anyway.

how is that not a form of terrorism in itself? those reactors would have mainly civillians working in them. terrorism is the active targeting of civillians right?

didn't the u.s. military blow up some cafe where they thought saddam may have been? wasn't that also actively targeting civillians?

or does the double standard apply here too?

KABUL (Reuters) "- U.S.-led coalition troops have killed eight Afghan civilians in an air strike in the western province of Farah during a raid against suspected militants"

now i guess western militaries only have to suspect civillians abroad in order kill them. kind of like the state only needing to say it suspects a citizen of being a terrorist to detain and deny them basic constitutional rights.

will the real terrorists please stand up?