Europe...our friends???

[southerngale]

This was Neil Cavuto's Common Sense segment at the end of his show on Thursday. I found it interesting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

With Friends Like These

Thursday, February 06, 2003
By Neil Cavuto

FOX NEWS


I just finished reading an interesting series of articles in The Economist, pretty much trashing America.

Oh, they were well written, even erudite and all that, but they made clear, in the eyes of much of Europe, that we are cowboys. And what's more, when it comes to Iraq, we are bullies -- forcing our bellicose ways on unsuspecting nations.

And it hit me like a brick: These guys hate us.

But it amazes me when push comes to shove, how much they come running, even crawling back to us.

They couldn't handle a butcher in their backyard 60 years ago, so we handled it for them.

They couldn't deal with another butcher Slobodan Milosovich in their own backyard 50 years later, so we dealt with it for them.

They couldn't muster a forceful condemnation of the attacks on Sept. 11, so we mustered it for them.

Time and time again, when they've cowered, we've crushed.

I don't think this country looks for a thank you. But I'd like to think we're due better than a "screw you."

What's amazing in the world of global opinion is Saddam Hussein is trusted more than we are. Our track record isn't perfect in this country, but I'd venture to say it's considerably more reliable than Saddam's. Nevertheless our friends second-guess us, look down on us and all but dismiss us.

You know, I've always wondered how would they act if terrorists had bombed the Eiffel Tower, or destroyed the Berlin Opera House, or worse. How then would they respond?

You know, people say, we shouldn't do anything without these guys.

You know what? I've seen these guys. I know these guys. I don't like these guys. I say, for god's sake, with friends like these, who "needs" these guys?

Better to go it alone with friends you can count on, than back-stabbing, double-crossing, second-guessing, weasel-popping phonies you'll never be able to rely on.

See how they like it when terror hits them in the face and there's no one there to help wipe the egg off.



Watch Neil Cavuto's Common Sense weekdays at 4 p.m. ET on Your World w/Cavuto.

[wx247]

This was Neil Cavuto's Common Sense segment at the end of his show on Thursday. I found it interesting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------


And it hit me like a brick: These guys hate us.

What's amazing in the world of global opinion is Saddam Hussein is trusted more than we are.

I generally like Neil Cavuto's segment, but I have done extensive research over the past two years on Europe and some of the quotes I have taken from Neil's piece are absolutely a misrepresentation of fact. It seems he has not done a lot of homework for this article.

Europe does not hate us --they disagree with us. Europe is a much more liberal place than America. They do not hate us though. Their beef lies in the way we resolve conflicts. In this case, Iraq. I support the war we are getting close to going into. France and Germany are much more peace players than activists. It is a difference in ideology, just like we have in this country (but to a much smaller extent in the US).

Sadaam is more trusted than we are...umm, I don't know of anyone who thinks Sadaam is a good man! Even Jacques Chirac of France said something needs to be done about him --just their methods of dealing with him are different (and can be argued, ineffective).

We have come to the aid of Europe several times. Why? Because war was on their soil. France helped us during the Revolutionary War, and before Sept. 11th, 2001, that was the only major conflict on US soil. After the terrorist attacks, there was huge international support for conflict in Afghanistan. There are peacekeepers there from Canada, US, Britain, Germany, France. And we use the air base in Germany for staging operations.

I am just trying to show that Neil was pushed here a little by personal convictions (like the majority of commentators on FOX) and not strictly by the facts.

Garrett :silly:

[Stephanie]

This war would be right in their backyard also. However, if Iraq ever did go ahead and use their weapons of mass destruction, guess what? It's in their backyard too! I really don't want a war either, but they have to become alittle more aggressive in their tone towards Iraq also AND begin offering some more ideas as to handle the situation IF the inspectors don't come up with anything.

[streetsoldier]

OK, lets clear the air here...

Gernamy and France want to be the "mover-and-shaker" duo in the EU; Germany has the best, strongest and most professional military in Europe, and as for
"la vielle gloire", France...they are riding Germany's coattails here.

Does anyone else find it strange that the other 8 EU nations voted a non-binding resolution in full support of the US?UK position?

Granted, Germany is in a political bind;Gerhard Schroeder had to take a vociferious anti-American stance to get re-elected and form a coalition in the Bundestag; he's skating on thin ice at home.

Jacque Chirac, on the other hand, is playing to the left, which is his primary base of support (remember that France has a very strong rightist presence, and again it is a political strategy for Chirac not to lose to them in the next round of elections).

Add that Germany, France and Russia all are owed immense sums by Saddam Hussein's regime...and a change in government may mean Iraq defaulting on payment due...

"Wallets" + internal political survival is driving the "hold-outs", ladies and gentlemen.

[JQ Public]

I know France doesn't want their oil deals with Iraq to be nullified when we "takeover" they are just not saying it. Saddam made oil deals with both Russia and France so they wouldn't like it if we decided to make our own divisions of oil. Everyone is out for their own best interests. I guess Germany doesn't wanna get involved in another war for a long time. They've started enough.

[streetsoldier]

News flash from Germany...

It seems that in the last round of off-year elections, Schroeder took a beating over his foreign policy...more, both French and German police/military/intelligence people have been going out of their way to feed us data which (among other things) Secretary Powell used in his presentation...

More telling is a shift in the European power-base to the former Warsaw Pact nations, spearheaded by Poland; added up, this shows that France and Germany are outnumbered 17-2 (3, if one cares to add Belgium) in European support for US/UK position, and have effectively isolated themselves from the "big picture".

Stay tuned..."film at 11".

[southerngale]

Yep, I couldn't agree more with Neil. Great friends we have!

Ok, if you don't like Neil Cavuto's Common Sense segment, then you don't have to read this, but here is the one from Thursday. Hmmm

A Friend in Need...

Thursday, February 13, 2003
By Neil Cavuto


I've traveled enough of this world to know two things: friends and enemies. And I'm pretty good at sorting out who's who.

Friends don't stab you in the back. Enemies do.

Friends don't cozy up to butchers. Enemies do.

Friends don't put profit over principle. Enemies do.

Friends don't spend more time trying to protect their oil interests over the world's interests. Enemies do.

Friends don't smile in public, but plot in private.

Friends don't say they love peace, but fail to protect that peace.

Friends don't cajole, or lie, or look at their own good over the greater good.

Friends know their friends' enemies could likely be their own enemies.

Friends know a friend's threat is their threat.

Friends know when a friend needs help and they give it.

Friends aren't arrogant, or condescending.

They don't second-guess in public. They seek understanding in private.

They don't ridicule the ones who stood by them and instead run to the side that would otherwise destroy them.

Friends don't strike deals with the devil.

Friends know the difference between coveting their precious Euro and just being a total "zero."

Friends know these are unfriendly times.

Friends know war isn't pretty, but ignoring evil isn't pretty either.

You stick by those who stuck by you, or you get stuck yourself.

I respect far more the enemy, who "tells" me he's my enemy and he is than the friend who "swears" he's my friend and is not.

[JQ Public]

Friends also tell it like it is. They don't want you to do smthg that will end up not helping you in the long run. What are friends for if they don't give you advice and even sometimes...tough love.

[streetsoldier]

With "friends" like that...I'd rather be a hermit.

[wx247]

Friends also tell it like it is. They don't want you to do smthg that will end up not helping you in the long run. What are friends for if they don't give you advice and even sometimes...tough love.

Excellent point JQ!

Garrett <----- ROCK ON!

[mf_dolphin]

To say that France, Germany, and Russia are doing this as our friends is both niave and incorrect IMO. They are looking out for their own best interests and nothing more. France and Russia have been one of Iraq's biggest suppliers over the last 30 years. They're looking out for their own financial interests plain and simple. Germany and France wants to dominate the "new" European economy and feel threaten by the former Soviet bloc countries that are supporting the US.

Let's understand that this is not an etherial discussion. It's about economics and power pure and simple. The US will and must do what is in our best interests. We will do so with or without the UN.

[sunny shine]

Very well presented Marshall!! Right on.

[JQ Public]

Of course they are looking out for their own interests. But ruining their economies by blowing Iraq off the map isn't exactly gonna help us out. Most of their oil comes from the middle east they don't have an Alaska or Venezuala to bail them out.

[southerngale]

mf_dolphin wrote:

To say that France, Germany, and Russia are doing this as our friends is both niave and incorrect IMO. They are looking out for their own best interests and nothing more. France and Russia have been one of Iraq's biggest suppliers over the last 30 years. They're looking out for their own financial interests plain and simple. Germany and France wants to dominate the "new" European economy and feel threaten by the former Soviet bloc countries that are supporting the US.

Let's understand that this is not an etherial discussion. It's about economics and power pure and simple. The US will and must do what is in our best interests. We will do so with or without the UN.

I agree. They're just looking out for #1 and could care less about us...until they need us.




JQ Pubic wrote:

Friends also tell it like it is. They don't want you to do smthg that will end up not helping you in the long run. What are friends for if they don't give you advice and even sometimes...tough love.

In this case, I'd have to say this is not tough love...this is them stabbing us in the back!!!

[Rob-TheStormChaser]

Think we don't need Europe? Think again...

Without a true global consensus on attacking Iraq, particularly among rich European nations, we will be saddled with a HUGE bill for many, many years. (BTW, let's not forget Japan agreed to pay HALF of the expenses of Gulf War I before that war started). You dudes that favor war, with a "coalition of the willing" (U.S., Lithuania, Bulgaria), are incredibly short-sighted and wrong headed.

The tension that is now rising within the Western alliance, NATO and the U.N. over how to deal with Iraq is deeply disturbing. It raises fears that the postwar security system, which stabilized the world for 50 years, could come unglued if America intervenes alone in Iraq. At the birth of this security system, Secretary of State Dean Acheson wrote a memoir titled "Present at the Creation." Can we deal with Iraq and still ensure that Secretary of State Colin Powell's memoir is not titled "Present at the Destruction"?

Yes, we can — if we, the Russians, the Chinese and the French all take a deep breath, understand our common interests and pursue them with a little more common sense and a little less bluster.

That means the Bush hawks need to realize they cannot achieve their ultimate aim of disarming and transforming Iraq without maximum international legitimacy. And the Euro-doves need to realize they cannot achieve their aims of a peaceful solution in Iraq and preserving the U.N. and the whole multilateral order without a credible threat of force against Saddam Hussein.

Let's start with the Bush hawks. The first rule of any Iraq invasion is the pottery store rule: You break it, you own it. We break Iraq, we own Iraq — and we own the primary responsibility for rebuilding a country of 23 million people that has more in common with Yugoslavia than with any other Arab nation. I am among those who believe this is a job worth doing, both for what it could do to liberate Iraqis from a terrible tyranny and to stimulate reform elsewhere in the Arab world. But it is worth doing only if we can do it right. And the only way we can do it right is if we can see it through, which will take years. And the only way we can see it through is if we have the maximum allies and U.N. legitimacy.

We don't need a broad coalition to break Iraq. We can do that ourselves. But we do need a broad coalition to rebuild Iraq, so that the American taxpayer and Army do not have to bear that full burden or be exposed alone at the heart of the Arab-Muslim world. President Bush, if he alienates the allies from going to war — the part we can do alone — is depriving himself of allies for the peace — the part where we'll need all the friends we can get.

No question — Saddam never would have let the U.N. inspectors back in had President Bush not unilaterally threatened force. But if Mr. Bush keeps conveying to China, France and Russia that he really doesn't care what they think and will go to war anyway, their impulse will be to never come along and just remain free riders.

The allies also have a willful blind spot. There is no way their preferred outcome, a peaceful solution, can come about unless Saddam is faced with a credible, unified threat of force. The French and others know that, and therefore their refusal to present Saddam with a threat only guarantees U.S. unilateralism and undermines the very U.N. structure that is the best vehicle for their managing U.S. power.

We need a compromise. We need to say to the French, Russians and Chinese that we'll stand down for a few more weeks and give Saddam one last chance to comply with the U.N. disarmament demands — provided they agree now that if Saddam does not fully comply they will have the U.N. authorize the use of force.

If war proves inevitable, it must be seen as the product of an international decision, not an American whim. The timing cannot be determined by the weather or the need to use troops just because they are there. You cannot launch a war this important now simply because it's going to be hot later. I would gladly trade a four-week delay today for four years of allied support after a war. I would much prefer a hot, legitimate, U.N.-approved war with the world on our side to a cool, less legitimate war that leaves us owning Iraq by ourselves.

France, China and Russia have to get serious, but so do we. The Bush talk that we can fight this war with just a "coalition of the willing" — meaning Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia — is dangerous nonsense. There is only one coalition that matters to the average American and average world citizen. It is one approved by the U.N. and NATO. We may not be able to garner it, but we need to be doing everything we can — everything — to try before we go to war.

Why? Because there is no war we can't win by ourselves, but there is no nation we can rebuild by ourselves — especially Iraq.

[mf_dolphin]

I disagree Rob on most points and most of all your "short-sighted" comment. It was the very "long-sighted" (read appeasement) attitude that allowed Hitler to destroy Europe. Saddam has had 12 years to disarm and has not. Germany, France, and Russia are positioning themselves to profit after we do what has to be done with Saddam. The "rich" European nations that you speak of contributed very little monitarily in the last Gulf War. The brunt of the cost was paid for by the Saudis, Kuwaiti's, Japanese and yes the good old US.

As far as the "post war security system" I don't know what you're referring to. NATO? NATO has been from the start dependent upon the US as it's major funding and military strength. The UN? The UN has been and continues to be a farce as far as keeping the peace anywhere in the world.

As far as us going alone, we aren't alone even in the Muslim world. Saudia Arabia, Kuwait and others are suporting us just some more publically than others. They want nothing more than tp have Saddam out of Iraq. Thay play this low key to keep their own radicals unders control but have no fear they provide a lot more support than is made public.

We can and will disarm Saddam with or without the UN. The rebuilding of Iraq will come from the countries that have to gain from the rebuilding. That includes Germany, France and Russia...they just want a free ride getting there!

[Rob-TheStormChaser]

Thats why we have these discussions...we all do not share the same views and opinions expressed here. I agree to disagree on many points as well, but sitting from my chair I really see nothing being done action-wise, opposed to spoken.

[mf_dolphin]

Nothing wrong with a good debate on this side either In fact I rather enjoy it...keeps the brain working

[Rob-TheStormChaser]

Europeans should be thankful they are not saluting Hitler. They quickly forget how many American lives were sacrificed on their shores to free their people from tyranny. Instead of getting pissed off (which means nothing to us anyway), they should show some appreciation and support the United States!!! If the U.S. ever went down, the world would go down with it. We accept 50% of the world's immigration (big mistake), contribute 20% of the UN's total budget, (and they don't even support our decisions), and get nothing but criticism in return. Why doesn't the EU wake up and take a stand against terrorism...it will after it hits their shores. Why should we care about a union that is afraid to fight for anything. Just like in World War II, we will pay the price for justice and freedom. If you don't like it, keep it to yourself.

[streetsoldier]

Strange that they have LONG memories about injustices past in America, but they suffer "blindness" when confronted with the victories they would not have had save for U.S. involvement.

Think about this fact...during WW II, ONE Chrysler plant made more tanks than the British, Germans and Japanese combined?

How soon they forget...