| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:47 pm U.S. a 'vital ally' for Europe |
|
| Quote: |
CNN.com
Powered by
Click Here to Print
SAVE THIS | EMAIL THIS | Close
U.S. a 'vital ally' for Europe
From CNN Correspondent Jim Bittermann
PARIS, France (CNN) -- The French Foreign Minister has called for "a new trans-Atlantic relationship" between the United States and its European allies.
Too many challenges face the world for the two not to work together in addressing them, Michel Barnier told CNN, but said France will not bow to the will of the United States.
"We are allies. Alliance is not submission."
"We have to work together in the broader sense, and probably in what I call a new trans-Atlantic relationship, and get in the habit to talk more to each other -- even when we don't agree, because that happens -- to talk more about politics," he said Wednesday.
Relations between France and the United States took a blow after the two disagreed over the war in Iraq.
The "French-bashing" that followed the disagreement may have hurt U.S.-French ties, Barnier said.
"It's not fair to ridicule France. France and the U.S. are friends and allies in the world, in history, since the beginning. Once again, alliance is not submission and we can disagree on certain subjects.
"We didn't agree on Iraq. Frankly ... I say and repeat that President (Jacques) Chirac's state of mind and my own is to look ahead and not in the rear-view mirror."
Asked whether the French are willing to compromise, Barnier said, "The French can change and the Americans can change.
"A discussion should be something frank, direct, lucid, where each one can make an effort. ... I heard my colleague Condoleezza Rice say to the Senate herself that the American administration will use more multilateral dialogue in diplomacy rather than unilateral talk."
But, he said, France will not make a "one-way compromise."
"The U.S. can't be alone to face the challenge of terrorism, poverty, development, instability in the world -- we need to be together," Barnier said.
"And why are we allies? We're allies to face that together.
"I think American people are lucid, realistic and pragmatic. We have to see that the alliance between Europeans and Americans is vital, and it should serve peace, freedom and democracy."
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/01/19/france.us/index.html
Click Here to Print
SAVE THIS | EMAIL THIS | Close
Check the box to include the list of links referenced in the article.
|
Oh they doooooo love us. I always knew that they did...they just had to find it buried deep, deep, deep in the deep depths of their hearts. I am so happy I could cry  . 
|
|
|
Defiant
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 04 Jul 2001
Posts: 15946
Location: Oregon City, OR
|
| Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:27 pm |
|
Take that RM. Its time to be friends with the Frenchies again.
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:27 pm |
|
| Defiant wrote: | | Take that RM. Its time to be friends with the Frenchies again. |
No.
|
|
|
Defiant
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 04 Jul 2001
Posts: 15946
Location: Oregon City, OR
|
| Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:34 pm |
|
How very descriptive of you Andy. How about saying why not?
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:36 pm |
|
Tsss, we should jump at any oppurtunity we get to rebuild our friendship.
|
|
|
Defiant
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 04 Jul 2001
Posts: 15946
Location: Oregon City, OR
|
| Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:48 pm |
|
Agreed. Definetly. World peace, everyone wants it. This is an important step. We have nothing aganinst France. This is an obvious step.
|
|
|
Captain Dappet
Forum Revolutionist
Joined: 06 Feb 2002
Posts: 16756
Location: On my supersonic rocket ship.
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:39 am |
|
| Founder wrote: | | Defiant wrote: | | Take that RM. Its time to be friends with the Frenchies again. |
No. |
Forgive and forget? If not, let's all be mad at America for Hiroshima, and boycott all American products!
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 2:24 pm |
|
| Captain Dappet wrote: | | Founder wrote: | | Defiant wrote: | | Take that RM. Its time to be friends with the Frenchies again. |
No. |
Forgive and forget? If not, let's all be mad at America for Hiroshima, and boycott all American products! |
Hiroshima? Um....we were retailiating against the Japanese for Pearl Habor. We had the right to fight back.
| Defiant wrote: | | How very descriptive of you Andy. How about saying why not? |
Im not going to just forgive and forget after all the America bashing from the French. A formal apology for their ignorance, racism, and disrespect will get me in the mood for peace. 
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:58 pm |
|
| Founder wrote: | | Captain Dappet wrote: | | Founder wrote: | | Defiant wrote: | | Take that RM. Its time to be friends with the Frenchies again. |
No. |
Forgive and forget? If not, let's all be mad at America for Hiroshima, and boycott all American products! |
Hiroshima? Um....we were retailiating against the Japanese for Pearl Habor. We had the right to fight back.
|
yeah, sure you did. Blowing away 2 entire cities was really fair against what happened at pearl harbor  "Oh my, our navy boys got beaten up, americans got killed! Lets kill those Japanese women and children first! lets scar the Japanese countryside forever"
They could have also just shown the A-Bomb test results.
| Quote: | | Im not going to just forgive and forget after all the America bashing from the French. A formal apology for their ignorance, racism, and disrespect will get me in the mood for peace. |
hehe, yeah right. Because the french are the bad ones, not the americans. The amaericans are never ignorant (Iraq), or racist (South vs North) or disrespectfull (vietnam).
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:46 pm |
|
Actually, statistics show that the use of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki (I think that's the right spelling) saved more lives, than the ones that were lost.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
MJ
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 266
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:55 pm |
|
Forgetting the fact that when the second bomb was dropped Japan was still in the progress of deciding wheter to go for peace or not and that it quite possibly was only used to give the Russians a scare. Also the fact that it were civilians that died and the target had no strategic purpose doesn't matter either I suppose.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:57 pm |
|
Japan was deciding whether to go for peace or not, after they killed a few thousand Americans? Silly. "Quite possibly"? Don't see any historical or scientific fact there, 
Well, the fact that they were cities was a strategic purpose. You know that there were civilians killed at Pearl Harbor, too, right?
Just saying that in the long run, more lives were saved.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
MJ
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 266
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:01 pm |
|
Just saying you can't know that. It's as much a historical fact as yours. And I was saying that Japan was deciding on that after the FIRST bomb was dropped, but a few days later, 2 I believe, the second one was already dropped. And some little cities don't make them anything strategic. Go bomb industry or some army base. Not a city. And boohoo, so many American civilians died at pearl harbor, gimme a break.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:24 pm |
|
Actually, I do know that. The military suggested an invasion of Japan, which they said would have led to over 1,000,000 deaths (Japanese and American).
What do you expect, us to simply wait while Japan decides or doesn't decide for peace? They could have launched another attack.
Yes, cities are strategic targets. If they just bombed a military base, do you that would have created as large a splash as a city? If anything, that would have enouraged another attack.
Okay, so your complaining that civilians died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it doesn't matter that some also died at Pearl Harbor? Uhm... okay?
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:46 pm |
|
| lionhead wrote: | yeah, sure you did. Blowing away 2 entire cities was really fair against what happened at pearl harbor "Oh my, our navy boys got beaten up, americans got killed! Lets kill those Japanese women and children first! lets scar the Japanese countryside forever"
Wow you're either really stupid or just a bastard. We didn't go in to kill women and children. They died because the Japanese military were cowards and placed their military installations in the middle of civilian cities. Yes it was fair. You f**k with America you're going to pay.
They could have also just shown the A-Bomb test results.
Oh yeah. Cause that would have worked. Lets send them a movie. "Hey Japan! We can do this! Scared now?"
hehe, yeah right. Because the french are the bad ones, not the americans. The amaericans are never ignorant (Iraq), or racist (South vs North) or disrespectfull (vietnam). |
Yes the French are the bad ones. How are we ignorant with Iraq? America is racist because of the Civil War? You mean the war where we fought to end slavery and free the African Americans? We were disrepectful to Vietnam? Uh huh....
Heres a word of advice. Know what your going to talk about before you make yourself look dumb.
|
|
|
MJ
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 266
|
| Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:51 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Actually, I do know that. The military suggested an invasion of Japan, which they said would have led to over 1,000,000 deaths (Japanese and American). |
Well yeah, if you're going to believe any justification the military gives you.
| Quote: | | What do you expect, us to simply wait while Japan decides or doesn't decide for peace? They could have launched another attack. |
Silly Aaron, I don't know if you know what the state of Japans fleet was, but it wasn't anywhere near capable of starting another offensive. But two days, it's not a lot you know.
| Quote: | | Yes, cities are strategic targets. If they just bombed a military base, do you that would have created as large a splash as a city? If anything, that would have enouraged another attack. |
Attack with....? Imaginary forces? The X-men!?!?!?
| Quote: | | Okay, so your complaining that civilians died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it doesn't matter that some also died at Pearl Harbor? Uhm... okay? |
You can't even compare the numbers, and it does matter wheter they were targeted or not.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:10 am |
|
I'm obviously going go with what the military said... They were the ones who suggested an invasion, and we clearly decided against it. They gave the numbers. I'm guessing they'd know.
Tssss, I'm sure Japan's fleet was just fine, they certainly managed to pull off a well organized surprise attack with no warning, after all.
You're right, the numbers are different, however, they still died. You made it sound as if Pearl Harbor was made up of only military personell. Simply letting you know.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
MJ
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 266
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:20 am |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | I'm obviously going go with what the military said... They were the ones who suggested an invasion, and we clearly decided against it. They gave the numbers. I'm guessing they'd know.
Tssss, I'm sure Japan's fleet was just fine, they certainly managed to pull off a well organized surprise attack with no warning, after all.
You're right, the numbers are different, however, they still died. You made it sound as if Pearl Harbor was made up of only military personell. Simply letting you know. |
| http://www.angelfire.com/ia/totalwar/PearlHarbor.html wrote: | | 68 civilians dead, 35 wounded [much of the civilian casualties were 'friendly fire situations', shells that were on there way down after firing and missing their target |
| Quote: | | Altogether, the two bombings killed an estimated 110,000 Japanese citizens and injured another 130,000. By 1950, another 230,000 Japanese had died from injuries or radiation. Though the two cities were nominally military targets, the overwhelming majority of the casualties were civilian. |
So we'll take a 100 - 460,000= Reasonable amount? And the Japanese did not target the civilians, they targetted ships etc. a little better than woman and childeren.
Japans fleet wasn't just fine, I don't know if you've noticed but after pearl harbor they were suffering defeat after defeat, moving closer to Japan. They were in no condition to do any sort of offensive. In my opinion the bombs, and most certainly the second one were dropped to scare the Sovjet Union. I would agree to an a-bomb being used, had it not been a civlian target and that it would have only been one.
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:54 am |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: |
Okay, so your complaining that civilians died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it doesn't matter that some also died at Pearl Harbor? Uhm... okay? |
Thats what i mean. at peal harbor the japanses targeted military targets and not houses. They destroyed an entire fleet at ancker. quite Brilliant i must say. mostly Soldiers where killed, Sailors on the ships and pilots at the bases. Of course some civilians got killed but thats war. .
on the other hand, the Americans tried too make sure too give the Japanese the biggest blow in the neck ever. They targeted to Normal cities, they didn't target a Big military base or Production cenre(not that thats possible because thats usually located at a even bigger city) 110000 Civilians where killed instanteniously with 2 Big bombs on 2 cities. Thats genocide.
what WAS 'Good' was that you guys actually managed too Bomb Tokyo and won the Pacific war in the battle of Midway. Brilliant, i'll give you that.
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:33 pm |
|
I never said that Pearl Harbor wasn't a military installation, and I did say that the numbers were incredibly different. All I'm saying is that civilians died in both places, and that yes, it saved lives in the long run. I mean, can you comprehend how many lives would have been lost in a full scale invasion (military and civilian)?
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
MJ
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 266
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 4:35 pm |
|
You can't say, but you can say wheter a decision that was actually made was moral or not.
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:08 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | What do you expect, us to simply wait while Japan decides or doesn't decide for peace? They could have launched another attack. |
But after Midway, Japan's navy was greatly reduced in power.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:13 pm |
|
Their navy, perhaps. But they did use their airforce to destroy our Pacific Fleet.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:01 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Their navy, perhaps. But they did use their airforce to destroy our Pacific Fleet. |
They had already lost the war, america could have invaded. You sayed so yourself. They navy was swiped out, their airforce was totally annihilated after midway.
All america had too do is SHOW that they had the power too defeat them permenantly. They shouldn't have used the A-Bomb.
perhaps, perhaps even then the other countries wouldn't know about the A-bombs destructivness and the cold war wouldn't have been so bad (perhaps thats not a good thing, i don't know.).
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:14 pm |
|
Neither side was "in the right". It can't be proven that more lives were saved than if an invasion took place, although I find this likely. In war the worst of people is brought out, and also the best in others. Anyway, back on topic.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
