What makes Bush think he can get away with this???

Another idea is that people see that you are kinda sorta losing it and they've learned to tune you out. You've become the poster boy for "stuck in a mentality." Your strange obsession with what a politician says is kind of freaky.

 

SD - what makes you think that Bush has thought about "this", or consequent issues about getting away with "this"?

I mean, it's not true, it's a complete fallacy. But is it a delusion? A lie? Or just a typically unintelligent statement?

 

You did notice that the Irish paper did not quote Bush directly, right? Why did they just not post his quote directly? Probably because he didn't say what they "suggested" he said.

 

February 4, 2004

Who are the current coalition members?

Contributions from Coalition member nations range from: direct military participation, logistical and intelligence support, specialized chemical/biological response teams, over-flight rights, humanitarian and reconstruction aid, to political support.

Forty-nine countries are publicly committed to the Coalition, including:

Afghanistan
Albania
Angola
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Panama
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain
Tonga
Turkey
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan

Maybe I don't understand the meaning of unilateral.

 

Well you certainly don't understand the meaning of irony, you with your list full of Afghani and Solomon Islander "coalition" members.

 

Talking of noticing ... you appear to know where to find these -->"<-- on a keyboard, but not on a screenful of rendered pixels.

Those are quotation marks, Ian.

 

You did notice that the word "France" appears outside of the Bush quote, right?

 

Palau?? Tonga??

 

Oh Ian ...

Yes, it does. But you really should steer clear of pedantry, because you're not very good at it. Or rather, it appears to obscure your in any case habitually weak grasp on the actual issue at hand more than is normally the case anyway. Superdave, remember, is accusing Bush of a delusion and/or intentional mischaracterisation when he says that (and pay close attention to the formatting of this next bit, Ian) "most of Europe supported the decision on Iraq. Most European countries are very supportive and are participating in the reconstruction of Iraq". The fact that the word "France" appears outside of the quote is hardly relevant to the basic truth of that point. Nor does it do one jot of a thing for your desperate need to exonerate Bush from another act of crass idiocy.

Are you this regularly stupid in normal, everyday life, or is it just something you struggle with when you attempt to engage normally intelligent people in conversation on the internet?

 

Matt Clark, please don't run from the truth. You appear as somewhat as a fool if you can't see that the majority of Europe, primarily central Europe, are indeed members of the Coalition.

European nations supporting USA in Iraq War

Albania
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Georgia
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
Ukraine
United Kingdom

And don't forgot to add those European nations that wanted to be unnamed:

Belgium - Allowed movement of troops and materiel from U.S. bases in Germany to port of Antwerp en route to the Persian Gulf; will allow overflights

Croatia - Allowing refuelling stops by U.S. transport aircraft.

Greece - U.S. naval base in Crete serves U.S. 6th Fleet and supports Navy and Air Force intelligence-gathering planes. Allowing use of airspace under NATO and bilateral defence agreements, but will not send troops.

Germany - Ruled out any participation, but pledges unhindered use of airspace and access to U.S. and British bases in Germany.

Cyprus - degree of support in intelligence.

That's 27 European nations. France is the only big true European country not in the original mix. But it's worthy to note how they want to jump on ship now that things will be settled.

But go ahead, reiterate like a pawn the spew that the Democrat Party wants you to believe that we're in there alone! You can run from the truth, but you can't hide!

 

Pressed enter too quickly.

The list is interesting. Does anyone have a link showing the extent of committment of each coalition member. I mean over flight rights is akin to filling the party ballons. Still, 49 is not a small number.

That said, there are a number of Euro countries I don't see on the list beyond France. There's Germany and Russia.

But where is Greece? Belgium? Norway? Sweden?

Canada? Mexico? Brazil? Argentina?

China? India?

Pakistan? Saudi Arabia?

I don't mean to denigrate the countries that area participating - Britian, Italy, East Europe, Japan, etc. But its a mixed bag - at best. I'd be willing to bet the list of the coalition in Afghanistan is (or was) a lot longer.

 

Hey Revolt, take a look at my post which you seemed to have missed. The Euro nations that are named on the official list are there because they sent troops or personnel for the Iraqi liberation. Germany and Greece are a couple of nations that assisted USA but wanted to remain unnnamed.

 

Coalition of bribery or Coalition of billing? Who wouldn't get in line with the #1 money man of the world? Remind me of the incident that Saddam got 100% of the votes in an election and he claimed, "look, we have democracy!"

What's difference with Bush's "Look, we have a coalition!"

Both are lies.

 

"From now on we'll edit posts that contain personal attacks. If you continue to do so we'll ask TPTB that you receive a card. It doesn't matter if you're a BS member, BS Premie or a mod. Mods should know better and will be held to a higher standard."

How does this personal attack thing work on BigSoccer? Are moderators allowed to engage in personal attacks and will only edit posts from non-moderators. Because if it's open season for personal attacks then I'm more than willing to be an enthusiastic participant.

 

And the depth of those nations' commitment is staggering.

Iraq Troop numbers March 2004

COUNTRY TOTAL TROOPS PER 100,000 of national pop.
USA 130,000 47.7
United Kingdom 9,000 15.2
Italy 3,000 5.3
Poland 2,460 6.7
Ukraine 1,600 3.2
Spain * 1,300 3.3
Netherlands 1,100 7.0
Australia 800 4.3
Romania 700 3.1
Bulgaria 480 5.9
Denmark 420 7.8
Hungary 300 2.9
Norway 179 4.0
Portugal 128 1.3
Latvia 120 5.1
Lithuania 118 3.3
Slovakia 102 1.9
Czech Republic 80 0.8
Albania 70 2.1
Moldova 50 1.1
Macedonia 37 1.8
Estonia 31 2.2
*out

http://www.geocities.com/pwhce/willing.html#troops

Excluding the English Lapdog, the whole of Europe COMBINED has contributed less than 12,000 troops, or less than 9% of the American commitment. We have committed 600% more troops per capita than the next "most willing" Continental European contributor.

So the Czechs ultimately caved to our overwhelming bargaining power and dispatch a mere 80 soldiers. We cut them a czech, they avoid "irrelevancy", and we add another member to our illustrious "coalition". Then you come here saying the majority of Europe supports the efforts.

When does "free will" be become reluctant acquiescence?

And European popular support for the war runs about 30%. But I'm sure you have something insightful to add concerning "focus group" foreign policy.

How do you breath with your head so deeply embedded where it is?

 

Well here we are again, hunched over the pitiful reality that is the semantic necessities of "the coalition". I'm sorry, but all I can offer is mocking laughter to anyone that accuses me of being a fool whilst giving it the large one about "the coalition" with a list that includes Albania and (still) those commie terrorist appeaser monkeys Spain and their troops in Ir... Spain.

Face it, the "coalition" is made up of about five nations that have actually done something worthy of the name "contribution" and a long list of countries that did the geopolitical equivalent of not complaining when the guy next to you in the lift drops a fart.

 

Not so much beat me to it, as did it for me.

 

Slander... excellent job on the stats!

Now first of all, you do realize that the War on Terror, which includes this Iraqi liberation, is our initiative right? Perhaps you're also expecting other countries to match our troop deployment numbers when we declared war on Afghanistani terrorist factions? Wouldn't it be lovely if everytime a country declares war, all other countries are expected to send an equivalent amount of troops. Wow, that would truly be a rosy world to live in. In that case, we wouldn't even need to have the countless negotiations, agreements, and policies that make up the numerous Allied treaty agreements, NATO alliance-policy, U.N Councils and agreements which detail the guidelines for national threats and minimum military requirements and procedures.

Or perhaps you're anticipating Estonia to send 300,000 troops like the United States into Iraq when their total population is 1.3 million and the male population between 15-49 yrs old fit for military service is 257,000. Wouldn't that be great if a country was expected to send almost their entire male population into someone else's war simply because they agree with its purpose? With United States' population of 292 million, it is about equivalent to western AND east central Europe.

This is basic ratiosand policies that meet their military requirements to assist us in the U.S.-led War on Terror.

How do you reason and function in your life with such quick ill-fated observations for ignorant conclusions?

 

I just want to know what the rules are, whether they are different for moderators or if they are held to lower standards. Moron.

 

We don't have allies. We have mercenaries.

 

Just the Coalition of the Willing to receive American foreign and economic aid.