Apologies To Most!

[Georgie-Porgie]

I just wanted to apologize to any Australians that I have offended in the last few days. I have already PMed several contributors to this board expressing my regrets. I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings.

I started putting up posts critical of different aspects of Australia, simply to show, the so-called "gentleman" what it feels like to have one's country jumped on and soiled by outsiders.

It worked, he bumbled, had no real answers to any criticism, and it was obvious that he didn't like it, but, unfortunately, I also started to hurt other Australian people, good people.

I thought that everyone would understand what I was doing, but people started answering the posts and, in a few cases, arguing with each other.

Several people contacted me privately and asked me not to tar all Australians with the same brush. They said that there are some people like the "gentleman" in Australia,

" ignorant busybodies", but that there are a lot of good people, people who love their country and can mind their own business, too.

They also said that to join the SAS, one must have a high school diploma, so in the "gentleman"'s case it would be very unlikely that he would be allowed to enlist.

I don't know much about Australian laws, but I know that the U.S. stopped taking illiterates many years ago, but it is possible that the "gentleman" finagled his way in somehow.

I've been told that, sometimes in the U.S., judges will give a defendant a choice between jail or joining the Army as a Grunt soldier. From what I understand, in these cases, sometimes educational requirements can be waved, for what amounts to, future cannon fodder.

Anyway, I had toyed with the idea of sending in critical posts for each and every country, to prove that none of them are innocent, and, perhaps, give some of the "gentleman"'s ilk a taste of their own treatment, but when I saw how strongly good-hearted Australians reacted to this treatment, I knew that I could never sink so low as to do what the jackals on this web-site do, try to make other people feel bad about their countries.

I'll leave that to the squalid, uneducated "gentleman" and Butterfly types, and stick to fighting my war with these vermin, not innocent by-standers.

[meadish_sweetball]

IMO, to critize any country or its leaders for its digressions is not evil, and has very little to do with jackals, no matter what country. I know my own birth country has been involved in plenty of things I object to, and I fully support and believe in my own and other people's right to criticize those actions based on facts and opinions.

I really don't see the need for apologies, Georgie. Most educated people in any civilized country have grown out of identifying themselves so strongly with their nations. Justice and freedom are certainly not served by people sticking their head in the sand when it comes to wrongdoings commited by their countries.

I like the good things about my country, and dislike the bad. One of the things I am the most proud of is that our media is generally very critical of the people in power - a sign of a true democracy, because the grass roots as well as the media are responsible for keeping those mechanisms at bay which cause greed, power hunger and arbitrary decisions.

If apologies are in order, they are to be made for unnecessary personal remarks, for not checking up the facts properly before posting, and for not managing to keep one's temper at bay.

That would be the basic rules for a normal debate... right?

[Axel]

If apologies are in order, they are to be made for unnecessary personal remarks, for not checking up the facts properly before posting, and for not managing to keep one's temper at bay.

That would be the basic rules for a normal debate... right?

meadish_sweetball, sorry for quoting only the rest of your statement.

But you are right up to the point.

'unnecessary personal remarks, for not checking up the facts properly before posting, and for not managing to keep one's temper at bay. ' is the call of the day.

By now my feeling: Georgie-Porgie went over the treshold and the Gentlemen cannot really comment, despite off all researches.

So my opinion, Send them both to NZ, they might wake up.

[Jeepz]

What, now it's whack Georgie-Porgie for apologizing? Whack him for talking. Oh, look his lips are moving. Hit him again!

It appeared as if he was being thoughtful to some folks who found his Australian theme disconcerting. Hopefully they will take the apology in the spirit it was offered.

Meadish's point is a good and thoughtful one. Would have made more sense someplace back around the third or fourth wave of spud attacks (do you folks remember spud guns?) when taters were dropped and buffalo dung was used in its place.

I'm pretty sure that both of the primary combatants here lost their tempers many times. No doubt stored someplace thought to be safe, but a moments diversion and the next thing you know, those little tempers were off doing a walkabout.

And of course, there was the greek chorus in the hen house, egging them on. "Ewww, got him with a double yolker that time! Pass me another one, I think I've got the high ground on 'em now."

Jeepz (hiding an egg behind his back)

[the gentleman]

I just wanted to apologize to any Australians that I have offended in the last few days. I have already PMed several contributors to this board expressing my regrets. I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings.

Couldnt handle the back lash Georgie?

[Georgie-Porgie]

I just wanted to apologize to any Australians that I have offended in the last few days. I have already PMed several contributors to this board expressing my regrets. I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings.

Couldnt handle the back lash Georgie?

What back-lash?

You call that a back-lash? There have been wacky anti-American posts on here every day for as long as I can remember, so I'm rather used to it. It doesn't matter to me if they are about World War II, Vietnam, Afghanistan or Iraq. They are attacks.

However this is the first time an American struck back by pointing out other countries' "shameful secrets", and as far as a tactic goes, it is a good one.

Yeah, there were a ton of anti-American posts, but there always are, however, when I posted shameful incidents in Australia's history, people were most happy to criticize them TOO. Also, I was PMed and told to carry on the good work, Australians could "dish it out, but couldn't take it".

However, as I have said, the reason that I spend so much time on here attacking aszholes who attack my country, is because I think that it is petty, negative behavior by worthless scum who have no lives other than bothering people on this Forum.

I don't want to hurt good people's feelings by criticizing their countries, and, I certainly don't want to emulate pathetic losers like the "gentleman" and Butterfly; peas in a pod.

[Georgie-Porgie]

If apologies are in order, they are to be made for unnecessary personal remarks, for not checking up the facts properly before posting, and for not managing to keep one's temper at bay.

That would be the basic rules for a normal debate... right?

I respect what you have to say, except I differ with one paragraph. Remember, this is The Bear-Pit, no apologies for outrageous personal insults necessary!

[the gentleman]

I just wanted to apologize to any Australians that I have offended in the last few days. I have already PMed several contributors to this board expressing my regrets. I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings.

Couldnt handle the back lash Georgie?

What back-lash?

You call that a back-lash? There have been wacky anti-American posts on here every day for as long as I can remember, so I'm rather used to it. It doesn't matter to me if they are about World War II, Vietnam, Afghanistan or Iraq. They are attacks.

However this is the first time an American struck back by pointing out other countries' "shameful secrets", and as far as a tactic goes, it is a good one.

Yeah, there were a ton of anti-American posts, but there always are, however, when I posted shameful incidents in Australia's history, people were most happy to criticize them TOO. Also, I was PMed and told to carry on the good work, Australians could "dish it out, but couldn't take it".

However, as I have said, the reason that I spend so much time on here attacking aszholes who attack my country, is because I think that it is petty, negative behavior by worthless scum who have no lives other than bothering people on this Forum.

I don't want to hurt good people's feelings by criticizing their countries, and, I certainly don't want to emulate pathetic losers like the "gentleman" and Butterfly; peas in a pod.

I think you should re read the posts about your Attacks on Austalia, I think you will find we agree with you, but there is not much we can do about it - we dont swear blind faith to our leaders, if they are wrong- we agreed and then countered your posts!

Recently divorced Georgie?

"I don't want to hurt good people's feelings by criticizing their countries, and, I certainly don't want to emulate pathetic losers like the "gentleman" and Butterfly; peas in a pod."

Well it seems in your blind posting, you have gone beyond any of us

[Georgie-Porgie]

I think that I have written fairly extensively about my feelings toward Bush. If anything, I have mostly belittled him, however, I do think that he has done the right thing in both Afganistan and Iraq and I'm afraid that all this second-guessing will eventually force him into turning in the wrong direction.

He badly needs people's support. He is being hounded from every direction, but I'm supporting him!

[Bluecat]

I think that I have written fairly extensively about my feelings toward Bush. If anything, I have mostly belittled him, however, I do think that he has done the right thing in both Afganistan and Iraq and I'm afraid that all this second-guessing will eventually force him into turning in the wrong direction.

He badly needs people's support. He is being hounded from every direction, but I'm supporting him!

Hmm. I did not read the whole thread, so pardon me if my remarks/concerns have been answered already.

So you mean it is right to invade ANY country in this world if you consider that what does happen in that country is not in accordance with your beliefs?

And, of course, the people in those countries do not know also what is good or bad for them since they did not "push" for a change.

Fortunately, we know better than them and we can help them see the light,...

Pardon me again but like most European, I do not buy it.

History wise, the people from the country HAVE to change their country and the way it is governed. Outside influence has very seldom been successfull,...

[Guest IT Manager]

Here is the thing for me. Politics, religion and sex should be put into a special group of things to talk about along with "do you still beat your wife", and who is the loser at the end of the bar? Looks like your father".

The bear pit is about harrying each other in policy discussion and expressing views about issues that many people don't care a lot about (many, not all).

I haven't heard anyone beating off over who said what to whom and thats good, however, I don't really understand the need for such emotion anyway.

Politics is about lying to the stinking masses, and getting paid to do it. End of story. Doesn't matter what side of the court you stand. If you find that the leader of someone else's country isn't a liar, chances are you missed something. If you believe the leader of your country isn't, same same.

Take a break now and then, but thanks for your words Georgy. The Australian thing didn't sting me, the personal bit did. I left as soon as I was asked to get a licence to change my mind.

[Bluecat]

Politics is about lying to the stinking masses, and getting paid to do it.

I agree, but are you sure only the stinking masses believe them?

Especially in the US, I would say, not because they are dumber than anywhere else in the world ( ) but because they are brainwashed by a constant flow of biased information from their media, however neutral they think they are,...

[Georgie-Porgie]

About the personal bit, I assume that you are talking about a post I directed to you, maybe a week ago? I'm working 12 hours a day. 7 days a week, and have been for the last 4 years, so I get confused sometimes.

Anyway, it was meant to sting, but not to hurt. As I said, I normally think that you do an extraordinary job on here, but you got a little weird on me that one time; You seemed to temporarily be confusing my Internet "character" with my real life, and unlike some people on here, I do have one, but, anyway, that is all in the past.

By the way, remember, that while I'm doing this, I'm also attending to work, and many times I am quite busy, so I can easily miss subtleties like this:

I left as soon as I was asked to get a licence to change my mind.

I've got to run, but if I remember it, it gives me something to wonder about tomorrow!

[davidm]

they are brainwashed by a constant flow of biased information from their media

Is the European media any less biased than in America? Are Le Figaro, La Stampa and The Guardian really telling it like it is? At the other end of the political spectrum (to The Guardian, at least) most of the Italian media that matters is effectively owned by the Prime Minister.

The BBC's vendetta against America is painfully embarrassing to watch. Certain German and French media companies are just as bad. The issue for them is not whether America is right or wrong but whether America is an ally or rival. Many politicians in Europe now view America as a threat to their own aspirations, and I believe that is the root cause of their opposition to the war.

If Europeans in general decided they were against the war with Iraq, that's their right. Somehow, I doubt they reached that decision thanks to impartial information provided by the local media.

[Bluecat]

If Europeans in general decided they were against the war with Iraq, that's their right. Somehow, I doubt they reached that decision thanks to impartial information provided by the local media.

Hmm, maybe, maybe.

But we did not want to go in the first place, if I well remember (before the media talked about it).

We still did not want to go when the American wanted to go.

How did the American reach the decision to go?

[the gentleman]

I think that I have written fairly extensively about my feelings toward Bush. If anything, I have mostly belittled him, however, I do think that he has done the right thing in both Afganistan and Iraq and I'm afraid that all this second-guessing will eventually force him into turning in the wrong direction.

He badly needs people's support. He is being hounded from every direction, but I'm supporting him!

Georgie, why is he badly in need of support and why is he being hounded from every direction? could it be that the world, including the majority of Americans, think he made a mistake and lied to the world - haven't they also got a democratic right to not support him and ridicule with the same fervor as do the people who support him?

[Membrane]

Sure they have a right to disagree. That's one of the components of a democratic style of government. (And what we unconciously all want, even expressed here in this forum). Better to be allowed to disagree than to be told to shut up or risk losing a hand or a foot or your LIFE, like in repressive governments like Saddams.

[Bluecat]

Georgie, why is he badly in need of support?

[snip]

Why does GWB need support? Because there is SO MUCH at stake, that's why. This is a point you have consistently failed to understand, gentleman.

What is at stake, Membrane?

The freedom of the world and the threat of terrorists?

Where are the terrorists coming from, from Irak? From Afghanistan? Sure, they come from these two countries but these two countries only?

Terrorism is not dependent of any country, it existed in the past and will exist in the future. Terrorism comes from many sources, in many different forms and is the result of people being frustrated against SOMETHING. It can be because they are poor, it can be because they do not believe in the same god than you, it can be because they do not understand you but it is sure not because they are Iraki or Afghan,...

Wanting to be the white knight of the world is a very noble cause but unfortunately, the way the US applies this concept these days shows very little understanding of history, past or future,... (and it is not at all a comment against American people).

I could comment further on the freedom subject, the equality of chances for everybody and how they are applied in the States but I prefer to stop here,...

[Jeepz]

Bluecat~

As I recall, Bush made repeated attempts to bring the UN onboard the Iraq venture. They refused. He or some of his staff made extensive elaborate presentations about the threat(s) Iraq was thought to have. Ultimately a date was set for a decision, when the UN still balked, the US and its few allies went ahead and started.

Now, much after the fact, one ex-cabinet member is claiming that Bush had an agenda to take Iraq out prior to the 9/11 attacks. But, I have to say, I find his testimony suspect at best. A dismissed (okay, they let him resign) former cabinet member seems to have some axes to grind. Also, the temper of Bush admin prior to 9/11 was pretty much "isolationist", not overseas gunboat adventuring.

As an "American" ('scuse the term, we use it here in the States alot) I was rather puzzled by Europe's reticence toward dealing with Saddam. Even more so as the prelude to war led the US citizens to believe that there was a real and immediate potential threat from Iraq.

I thought that part of the reluctance was due to a sort of wierd anger/envy thing going on. Countries that were happy to be part of the Western Alliance when the big bad Red Bear was pacing their borders no longer had to worry about that. So now they felt that with the Soviets out of the Big Picture, they wanted to take their place, fill the vacuum so to speak. The French (bless their peeked little hearts) have traditionally been superb at this. At least they are consitent. Others were a bit more surprising, but still I guess it shouldn't be all that amazing.

To discuss the various influences that I think are at work would take way too much space. But basically, the EU is in the process of trying to produce at least the semblance of a "superpower" out of itself. One that can deal with the US and other emerging powers as an equal. They are defining their own self-interest and not particularly interested in accomodating US interest.

The US is left, of course, with the full weight of fifty years of standing as the primary shield against Communism. Though that has pretty much disappeared, the effect of it has not. Having spent all of their adult lives in that contest, it is not surprising that many of the politicians don't drop the burden. They are used to it and it had its perks.

Lastly, US's unique interests exist and it is unlikely we will simply ignore them because they may be unfashionable at the moment. If we perceived Iraq as a real threat (which most of us did) then in the aftermath of 9/11 we were going to deal with it, regardless of how most anyone felt about it. We were (and are) seriously torqued about the terrorist attack and not much in the mood to play nice.

None of the above should be viewed as an excuse for the real possibility that there were no WMD's in Iraq. As it looks to be likely, it will cause an immense stir here in the US. While I admire Georgie-Porgie's continued support for Bush, I cannot fathom ignoring an intelligence failure of such a proportion that it led us to war.

Tenet (head of the CIA and a Clinton appointee) has been saying that the CIA made no such claim, but simply said that there "might be" some bad stuff there. He was darn quiet during the lead up while Powell, Rice, et al made those presentations using pictures and intel his people provided. As they say, "something smells rotten".

Jeepz

p.s. All you Frenchies out there, you are the cat's meow when it comes to wine, women, and fashion. Je t'aime!

[Axel]

"Apologies To Most", I believe is not necessary, however, I am glad to read some posts in here, that do not carry personal attacks, just clear opinions. And surprisingly(?) the threat switched back to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr. Bush managed one thing in Europe, he brought France and Germany closer together by trying to divide Europe into new and old. Without doubt, Germany was, and is, a close ally of the th USA, on the other hand, the present relation between these two 'old' Europeans are better than ever druing the last 130 years, somthing I feel personally when talking to my business partners from both countries.

I recall one incident, Schroeder had talked to Bush and reported an agreement for mutual consultation b4 any action. The next he learned of 'George's' intention from the news. He was fuming, if one can believe the press and the interviews.

Right or wrong, Schroeder felt ignored, claimed 'instructions' has nothing to do with 'consultation'.

An influential political magazine (Der Spiegel) showed Bush and his team on a front page as "Rambos" with the head line 'The Bush-warriors' expecting protests. What they got, a request by the White House for extra-copies. GWB liked it. LOL.

Bush's first Europe-visit took him to Spain. Now nothing against Spain, but most Europeans feel it is not necessarily the center or power within Europe.

By taking these 3 examples let us think about Bush's diplomatic tact, combine it with his 'reputation' and lack of verbal expression you have the position into which Schroeder was pushed. Now conisdering that politicians, lying or not, do the same as all of us, protect their job(s) it explains why Schroeder became anti-Bush (not anti-American). Once he came forward, announcing that he will not risk a single soldier's life for this, he turned around the election campaign in his favour. Why? He just hit a point with the voters. No war and especially no war for GWB.

Sure, my opinion is biased but the election results for Schroeder's second term seem to confirm it. No, I don't thank GWB for this, Schroeder got another 4 years to make a total mess.

[adjan jb]

QUOTE: "All you Frenchies out there, you are the cat's meow whent it comes to wine, women and fashion" Jeepz

You've forgotten "surrender" and "arrogance". Otherwise the clichés are accurate.

[Georgie-Porgie]

QUOTE: "All you Frenchies out there, you are the cat's meow whent it comes to wine, women and fashion" Jeepz

You've forgotten "surrender" and "arrogance". Otherwise the clichés are accurate.

Jeepz even desisted from calling you guys "surrender-monkeys". I think that you might have another American fan, adjan jb!

[Bluecat]

Je t'aime!

So do I

But I still did not make up my mind whether I should be honoured or injured to be taken for a French.

Maybe I should ask my American and French friends what they think of it,...

But would it really help?

[Jeepz]

Bluecat~

Sorry, it was one of those unconscious or subconscious utterances. I didn't intend to imply you were French. But I see that perhaps you should have been.

I did much enjoy your postings on jazz. Not much experience in that area but occasionally I come across some of it that I like quite a bit.

adjan jb~

Growing up in rural midwest USA, cliches were as close as we could get. However, I do plan to rectify that after I retire. I look forward to seeing Paris, the beaches of Normandy, and hopefully even spending a month down in Nice, living like a pauper, but eating well and admiring the girls on the cote d'azure.

Jeepz

[adjan jb]

adjan jb~

Growing up in rural midwest USA, cliches were as close as we could get. However, I do plan to rectify that after I retire. I look forward to seeing Paris, the beaches of Normandy, and hopefully even spending a month down in Nice, living like a pauper, but eating well and admiring the girls on the cote d'azure.

Jeepz

We could also drink a few bottles of a 10 year old Burgundy while we practice the national sport: watching the trees grow.

[Basher]

QUOTE: "All you Frenchies out there, you are the cat's meow whent it comes to wine, women and fashion" Jeepz

You've forgotten "surrender" and "arrogance". Otherwise the clichés are accurate.

Jeepz even desisted from calling you guys "surrender-monkeys". I think that you might have another American fan, adjan jb!

Guys

French people don't surrender, French politicians surrender, please don't forget how many battles and wars have been fought and won in the previous 3 centuries by gallant and fearless French. They had a huge empire, controlled it well (apart from IndoChina) and have better relations with their old colonies than we Brits do.

Americans, please rememeber that without French money and arms you buggers would still be under our flag, Queen and counrty drinking tea!

I have personaly served alongside these strong brave Frenchmen, great guys.

Basher

P.S. I would bring US empires into the chat, but only being a couple of hundered years old they only have a couple of south american 'Juntas' to their credit/detriment.. ho ho ho (for those who rise to bait, that was a joke not a jibe)

[Jeepz]

Basher~

You don't know the number of times in the last year or so I have had to remind people that I chat with in real life that there wouldn't even be a USofA if the French had not bankrupted themselves supporting us. I don't even go into the battlefield contributions.

Quick Quiz For US Citizens only: Why did the British surrender at Yorktown?

[Bluecat]

Basher~

You don't know the number of times in the last year or so I have had to remind people that I chat with in real life that there wouldn't even be a USofA if the French had not bankrupted themselves supporting us. I don't even go into the battlefield contributions.

But I want to comfort all the American, the French did not do it for them, they did it AGAINST the British,...

[Georgie-Porgie]

Do the French have something against Super-Powers?

[Bluecat]

Do the French have something against Super-Powers?

The French have something against not being a Super-Power anymore,...

They must like having responsibilities because with Super-Power status comes a lot of responsabilities,...

In the "past", the idea of Super-Power responsibilty was to invade whatever country you could invade and convert the ignorant people in those countries to your "ways of life". The British Empire as well as the French Empire are very good examples of that philosophy,...

Fortunately, we evolved, we are far wiser these days and the Super-Power(s?) know better. We do not invade any country anymore, we do not try to convert people,...

How ignorant, stupid and arrogant the British and the French were last century, isn' it?