La coupe amère
par Jerome ITU ~ 31/07/2007, 23:55 . Classé dans : Politique US .Parfois le sport offre de vrais moments d’émotions…
La victoire irakienne dans la Coupe d’Asie des Nations, tombant l’Arabie Saoudite 1 à 0, retentit comme un exploit historique et a donné une lueur d’espoir à tout un peuple.
Et si l’administration Bush aurait pu jouer sur la récupération politique de l’événement, le capitaine et auteur du but de la victoire, Younis Mahmoud, a livré son sentiment dès le terme du match sur l’occupation américaine :
“I want America to go out,” he said. “Today, tomorrow, or the day after tomorrow, but out. I wish the American people didn’t invade Iraq and, hopefully, it will be over soon.”
“Je veux l’Amérique dehors.” dit-il. “Aujourd’hui, demain, ou le surlendemain, mais dehors. J’aurais préféré que le peuple américain n’ait pas envahi l’Irak et, avec de la chance, ce sera fini bientôt.
Le même capitaine qui a ajouté ne pas vouloir rentrer au pays pour fêter la victoire de peur de se faire assassiner.
J’entends déjà les “quelle ingratitude chez ces irakiens” des néo-conservateurs US frustrés (de victoire). C’est vrai qu’il fait si bon se promener dans Bagdad libéré…
Voeu pieux : et si cette drôle d’aventure aidait la cause du “soccer” aux Etats-Unis ?
…
01/08/07 à 01:37
1 is not a statistically significant pool. There are polls on Iraqi attitudes about the US presence, and there is anything but a consensus on when they should leave. It’s cute propaganda to quote a jock on a serious political issue, but it’s not worth much.
One thing should be abundantly clear to everyone (though it ain’t): nothing will improve if the US leaves tomorrow. It will get much, much much worse. I almost hope it happens so I can blame the “liberals” or “gauchistes” for the slaughter. And you can take this to the bank: if the US leaves within a few months, and there is widespread genocide afterwards, the US will be vilified relentlessly for not “assuming reponsibility” and for not “finishing the job” and for “abandoning the Iraqis.” Seriously, anyone want to bet? I need some easy money.
For all the demonization of neo-cons (why not put them in the axis of evil?), what exactly did the world’s leftists ever do for Iraq, except look the other way when Hussein committed atrocities, and line up to take kickbacks from the Butcher so he could avoid the UN sanctions? Neo-cons like me actually would like to do something to stop the genocide in Darfur (I mean, instead of talking about it incessantly, and asking the murderers nicely to please stop raping and killing). What the Left’s plan, exactly?
I’ve been warning people about this type of attitude toward America that I keep reading, wishing in fact for America’s defeat in Iraq. It’s having an effect, and that effect is ISOLATIONISM. Imagine a world without the US to bail everyone out of their problems, to provide a credible threat of force to back up international demands, to provide aid when no one else can/will, to open up its markets, to welcome huge numbers of immigrants. It’s coming, the anti-neo-con backlash. I hope you’re ready.
01/08/07 à 01:53
#1 That’s a typical rightist attitude. The left plan is to get out of Iraq and let Iraqis what the hell they wanna do. The Bush administration may need Iraqis but Iraqis are better of without Americans.
01/08/07 à 03:18
I’ve been warning people about this type of attitude toward America that I keep reading, wishing in fact for America’s defeat in Iraq
So you want to be right? You are hoping that “America’s defeat” in Iraq will prove you right? Being right is more important than the actual reality for the Iraqis?
Are you telling me that neo-cons, that is to say, the adherents of the “Project for the New American Century”, ie Mr Krystol et al, were all about giving a damn about the lives of the Iraquis? Please tell me that you aren’t this naive. Read the tenets that they hold true on their website and then tell me how the neo cons are all about caring about other countries. All they give a damn about is the hegemony of the U.S.
01/08/07 à 03:18
that was me posting above…
01/08/07 à 03:24
Here you go Greg. Here is the manifesto for the neo-cons:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.
This doesn’t have an effing thing to do with anything that benefits the Iraquis. It all has to do with the benefit of “American leadership”….
As if “American Leadership” was the most important thing in the world. Do you actually believe that American Leadership is the be all and end all?
01/08/07 à 05:52
Moi aussi j’aurais préféré que nous ne soyons pas allés en Iraq. Pourtant, je me permets de savourer une certaine ironie dans le fait que ce soit un jouer de foot qui parle. Un des fils de M. Hussein, Uday, s’intéressait très particulièrement au foot, et le sort réservé à une équipe perdante n’était pas des plus jouissifs.
Grande victoire, courte mémoire.
01/08/07 à 06:20
Bush’n Co ne sont pas alles en Irak pour evincer Saddam Hussein; SH correspondait plus a leur strategie d’invasion sur un plan mediatique humanitaire, pas plus. Ils sont alles en Irak pour l’or noire, rien de plus. SH etait un dictateur, c’est certain, mais il n’y avait pas de loi shariah en Irak avant lui, bref c’est Ben Laden qui doit savourer cette victoire.
Au pire si ils avaient enleve SH et rentre aux USA, alors j’aurai dit a coeur joie “bravo, champion les mecs”, mais ce n’est pas le cas, et la j’aurais entierement respecte leur philosophie d’esprit.
Ce qui embete plus les gens c’est la perte d’hegemonie des USA par rapport au reste du monde, les gens ne sont pas fous, ils voient les USA echouer. Mais que ce soit les USA ou tout autre pays, personne n’a le droit de torturer des gens pour extraire de l’information, desole:
un Irakien torture, c’est un terroriste en plus.
De plus on n’a pas besoin d’une armee pour combattre le terrorisme. Combattre le terrorisme fait d’abord partie des services secrets, et on oublie trop souvent le terrorisme de l’armee, ou il n’y a pas de regles dans une guerre (les civils); eux quand ils partent en guerre, ils n’y vont pas avec la fleur au fusil.
01/08/07 à 06:21
U.S. checking possibility of pumping oil from northern Iraq to Haifa, via Jordan
http://rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.haaretz.com%2Fhasen%2Fpages%2FShArt.jhtml%3FitemNo%3D332835%26contrassID%3D2%26subContrassID%3D1%26sbSubContrassID%3D0%26listScr%3DY
01/08/07 à 17:12
Are you telling me that neo-cons, that is to say, the adherents of the “Project for the New American Century”, ie Mr Krystol et al, were all about giving a damn about the lives of the Iraquis?
There isn’t one group that represents neo-cons, and there is considerable debate among them about the means to carry out policies. I can’t tell you what motivated the powerful people who pushed the Iraq war policy, anymore than I can tell you what possessed certain other powerful people to do anything & everything to preserve Hussein’s rule of terror. But I can tell you that many neo-conservatives sincerely believe that giving the Iraqis a chance at self-rule is (1) inherently good and (2) in America’s interests. Neo-conservatism is nothing more than a reponse to the failed policies of liberals and paleo-cons.
Anyway, I don’t take issue with those who think the Iraq war was a bad idea (except to the extent that I didn’t hear many of them when it counted in 2002/03). I take issue with the demonization of the US effort in Iraq, and of the neo-conservative movement in general. Neo-cons are usually highly educated people with ideas firmly rooted in the Enlightenment. They aren’t knuckle-dragging blood-suckers who hate muslims – far from it.
02/08/07 à 05:24
Greg—
I don’t even know where to begin with that first comment.
For one thing, the “leftists” as you call them, were already doing something about Hussein. He was contained, we had numerous inspectors on the ground and Hussein didn’t kill nearly as many Iraqi citizens as we have. In fact, I would venture to say they were better off with him than with Bush. The middle east has never been so unstable since your president went into Iraq based on lies. He needed to make Hussein out to be a bigger villain than he was in order to appease those, like yourself, into believing that we needed to do this. It’s one thing for those who were duped by Bush in the beginning, but for those like you who are still believing the fairy tale that us being in Iraq is keeping it stable…well, all I can say is there is no hope for the hopeless.
If you are so gung ho about going after butchers, why not the whacko in kim jung il? Is he not a despot, like Sadaam? How about bin Laden? Bush isn’t concerned about him? Why didn’t we go after the guy who actually planned and carried out the attacks on 911? No, instead you still insist that Iraq is better off without Sadaam Hussein. I agree…the guy was bad news, but not nearly as bad as President Bush.
I’ve been warning people about this type of attitude toward America that I keep reading, wishing in fact for America’s defeat in Iraq. It’s having an effect, and that effect is ISOLATIONISM.
You and your Republican friends have done nothing but whine and complain about how the “leftists” are doing all this damage because we are against the war. What money was NOT appropriated for this war, Greg? What was not given to our troops, Greg? Bush got every penny that he asked for and he squandered it. There was a story today about all the guns, ammo, and equipment that can’t be accounted for because it was handed out to Iraqi soldiers who took it and left to fight with the insurgents. Our guys are being killed with the equipment that was meant to be for our troops. How’s that war going after Bush was given everything he asked for, Greg? Not so hot, is it? Four years, Greg-we’ve been there for four years. How’s it going? HOw many more of our troops do you want dead before you decide it’s time to get out?
What is your definition of victory, Greg? Ten thousand American soldiers dead? 15 thousand dead? Will it take the death of one of your family members before you decide enough is enough?
You came on this blog swinging…plenty of insults and name calling towards those who don’t agree with you. You even said you hoped that we would leave Iraq and you hoped it would all fall apart to prove your point. That kinda tells me that you really don’t care about the Iraqi’s as much as you say. You only care about your political ideology. I also don’t recall hearing anything from YOUR side of the aisle, the Republican side–what is their plan, Greg? More of the same? Stay the course? Tell me Greg, what is Hillary Clinton’s plan for Iraq? Do you even know? No, I doubt that you do, because you don’t want to know the facts, you only want to throw out your stupid insults like “leftists” and “gauchistes”. Take off your blinders, Greg, and you might see that the so called “leftists” actually have a plan…and it isn’t “stay the course”. I also might add, we “leftists” aren’t up to our ankles in corruption, lies, and treason, like your group of thugs are.
02/08/07 à 05:59
J’allais ecrire un billet mais bon ce n’est pas la peine, je ne vais pas rajouter une couche sur certains propos. La droite americaine est epuisee mentalement, elle est a court d’idee, et sans sortie de secours pour l’Irak. Vivement que cette guerre se termine, c’est tout ce que j’ai a dire pour ce soir.
Peace.
.—.
.–. ___/ \
/ `.-”" `-, ;
; / O O \ /
`. \ /-’
_ J-.__; _.’
(” / `. -=: THE MAIN PROBLEM WITH OUR FOREIGN POLICY IS
`: `, -=| THAT BUSH IS TOO RELIANT ON THE ZERG RUSH
| F\ i, ; -|
| | | || \_J
fsc mmm! `mmM Mmm’
02/08/07 à 20:10
You came on this blog swinging…plenty of insults and name calling towards those who don’t agree with you.
As usual, when it comes to Iraq, you are hyperbolic and irrational. I called no one a name. I just can’t help but snort at the constant demonization of people deemed “neo-con”. They are the new nazis, people would have us believe. They are blamed for “ruining Iraq” – a country that was a disaster before one American boot set foot there. It’s ridiculous. So, in the same manner, I joke that when those who believe things will improve upon our departure are proven wrong, I shall blame them for all the death that ensues. I won’t do that in reality, because to do so would be childish, immature, wrong. But maybe I should.
You even said you hoped that we would leave Iraq and you hoped it would all fall apart to prove your point.
Again, you read what you want to read. I said “almost.” I’m not hoping for a slaughter. I’m hoping people come to their senses and see that things – as bad as they are – could get much worse. But I don’t think that will happen. In fact, I fear I will be right.
In summary, whenever the subject comes up, you accuse me of wishing for more dead soldiers, not caring about civilian deaths, and deliberately ignoring reality. It’s just the type of insulting false argument I meant to attack. At least I can thank you for the demonstration.
02/08/07 à 23:13
Greg
NO, that argument doesn’t fly,Greg. You came out making insulting remarks and calling anyone who doesn’t agree with this war “leftists” and “gauchistes”. Ya know, I don’t mind being called a liberal, when it is done in the true sense of the word, but I’m not stupid enough to think when you say it, you don’t mean it as an insult.
You were the first comment here and not one person called you a neo con until your comment was made. Way to go, Greg. You piss people off and start calling them names, then you whine about being called a neo con and talk about “the type of insulting false argument I meant to attack.” The trouble is…not one person attacked you, you were the first to comment on this thread. Nice try, trying to blame others for your childish behavior.
Your problem, Greg, is that you can’t admit that this war was a big mistake and instead of having to admit that, you would rather cheerlead for the Bush administration and see more of our soldiers killed while they are being mismanaged by a bunch of generals who are a disgrace to their uniforms. We’re talking about generals who are covering up the possible murder of one of their own and all feigning “I don’t know” and “I don’t remember” as their excuse. In fact, one of them wouldn’t even show up and went into hiding rather than face the Senate hearing that is investigating Tilman’s death. These are the guys you are supporting.
Yeah…I think you would be happy to see Iraq go down the tubes just to prove some kind of point. Again…did you ever read ANY of the plans for Iraq from the Democratic candidates? I doubt it very much.
At least you are consistent, enjoy the ride over the cliff that Bush is taking you. It’s too bad you want to take our military with you.
02/08/07 à 23:32
We’re talking about generals who are covering up the possible murder of one of their own and all feigning “I don’t know” and “I don’t remember” as their excuse. When I read these lines, I already knew you were talking about Tilman’s death.
The war in Iraq is a huge weakening of military power. While they are in Iraq, bugged down, they completely forget to take care of their own regional influence (aka Latin America).
03/08/07 à 00:26
Steven
Bush has ruined our military, pure and simple. Here is a guy who had so little respect for the military that he didn’t even finish his own tour. He refused to go in for the physical so he could continue to fly because he had drugs in his system. His papers that are supposed to show that he finished his time in the National Guard magically disappeared in a fire. Just like now, he hides and has people lie for him to cover his ass. Nothing has changed in that respect.
Our military is a mess, we don’t have enough recruits, they have lowered their standards for enlistment to the point of taking on guys who have Federal offenses and belong to gangs. The standards are so low because we have lost so many in Iraq and they can’t get anyone to enlist. Moral is at its lowest point and the guys who are trapped in Iraq can’t get out. They are re-deployed two and three times with no chance to rest between deployments. This is what that chicken hawk Bush and Rumsfeld did to our military. Not to mention, our equipment and armor are so depleted we had to outsource to get more ammo from Israel! That should go over well with the Arab states, eh?
Then we have Bush’s cheerleaders who are complaining because the large majority of Americans…not a small majority, want to get out of Iraq. Hell, even the troops want out. I wonder why they hate our troops so much?
03/08/07 à 02:42
“In some ways we probably all underestimated the depth of mistrust and how difficult it would be for these guys to come together on legislation, which let’s face it is not some kind of secondary thing,” he said.
“The kinds of legislation they’re talking about will establish the framework of Iraq for the future, so it’s almost like our constitutional convention,” Gates said.
“And the difficulty in coming to grips with those we may all have underestimated six or eight months ago,” he added.
(…)
“Talks are continuing among the heads of the political blocs. The prime minister and the (Shiite) Alliance are ready to find a solution along with the Accordance Front. Things are not that difficult,” Rida Jawad al-Takki told Reuters.
Politicians from leading groups are due to have a summit in the coming days in the hopes of restoring the power-sharing system.
“Now there are daily meetings and committees are working to prepare for the summit, in which we hope the leaders will avoid any escalations and agree on common issues,” Salim al-Jubouri, a leading Accordance Front member of Parliament told Reuters.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=84304
PS: Bush IQ is 95. He is 20 points higher than an idiot at 75.
03/08/07 à 14:06
Mary-Ellen: your problem is that you can’t stand peopel who won’t agree with you. It actually makes you angry. Disagree on Iraq? You want dead soldiers. Disagree on health care reform? That means you want sick children. Disagree on immigration? You’re a bigot. Disagree on Patriot Act? You want to tear up the Constitution. There’s no discussing anything with you, unless there is total obedience to your point of view. Tell me – is there anything I can legitimately disagree with you on? What would it be?
03/08/07 à 17:13
Hey I found how to fight the immigration problem: instead of a wall, let’s build walmarts on the border, this way Mexicans will go through the back, and people will still be able to go shopping.
#17 Ah c’mon Greg we have the right to disagree with you, and your point of views are too close from Newsmax press.
03/08/07 à 21:42
Greg said I take issue with the demonization of the US effort in Iraq, and of the neo-conservative movement in general
Please direct me to an article, pre-Iraq invasion, which said that we were invading their country and killing their king and his sons all for the benefit of Iraq?
03/08/07 à 21:44
We’re being demonized because we invaded Iraq for their oil. If not for their oil, then why? Because of WMD? Well, either way it was not for the benefit of the people of Iraq, that’s for sure. Why shouldn’t the U.S. be demonized for this unilateral invasion of a sovereign country?
03/08/07 à 21:57
The Bush administration anyway is not even able to take care of Americans, so how do you want them to take care of Iraqis? Yeah their needed their oil, that’s all, the commander-in-thief went in Iraq to steal their oil by confusing Americans between Saddam Hussein and Ben Laden. Where are the wmds? Where is Ben Laden? Is he still on the CIA payroll?
03/08/07 à 22:01
The war in Iraq is the biggest swindle in the whole american history.
04/08/07 à 00:39
Greg
Don’t make me laugh. For one thing, I’m not angry at all. In fact, I don’t think I was the one who made the first comment on this blog by insulting anyone who doesn’t agree with you or Bush’s policies and called them “leftists and gauchistes”. So, who’s the angry one, Greg. I guess I would say that you just don’t like people telling you that they disagree with you.
Let’s put this simply, maybe it will help you to understand it more clearly. If you want to keep our troops in Iraq and want to continue supporting the failed policy of Bush in Iraq…more soldiers will die. If you can tell me that this is not true…go ahead. Therefore, I am assuming that this is an ok policy for you.
If you don’t want health care reform and want to go on as we are now, there will be children who are not insured and some will die because of this. If not reforming our health care system is what you believe, then I am to assume that the death of those children have no bearing on your policies.
When there is proof that there has been illigal wire tapping being done by Bush, and this is against the Constitution of the United States, I would assume that since you don’t believe this is a problem, you must not care too much about our Constitution.
See? No anger…just simple deduction. And ya know what? I didn’t call you a neo-con, or any other such insult! So, Greg….is that easy enough to understand?
04/08/07 à 00:42
Greg
Oh…and we can agree that the Yankees suck. That’s probably about as far as I can go now. In fact, I’ll even throw in that the White Sox suck this year. How’s that?
04/08/07 à 18:22
Found that on an islamist website: here
04/08/07 à 18:23
Today, we have to go to war in Iraq without a body armor, we have to go to work without health insurance, we have to drive our cars without bridge, what else?
04/08/07 à 20:19
Hors sujet: je viens de voir pour la premiere fois le traffic d’essence aux USA. Sur le marche noir a Las Vegas, on trouve de l’essence 50% moins cher que le prix courant. Bizarre le truc, mais je ne suis plus du tout etonne. Quant a savoir si l’essence est de meilleur qualite ou pas, je n’en ai aucune idee, puisque je ne m’aventurerai jamais dans des plans comme cela, mais l’economie souterraine aux USA est de plus en plus immense:
- traffic de drogue (bon c’est normal je dirai, ca existe malheureusement dans tous les pays)
- traffic de medicaments: le prix des medicaments etant trop cher, les gens les importent du Canada, du Mexique et de l’Inde.
- traffic de cigarettes: $20 une cartouche au lieu des $40 habituels sur le marche noir. Aussi les reserves indiennes aux USA offrent un detaxage sur plein de produits dont l’alcool notamment.
… etc
Avec un peu de chance on aura un jour un traffic de pont, bon marche, pour remplacer tous les ponts aux USA:
Steel corrosion on bridges is still a major concern. Infrastructure experts worry that thousands of American bridges are dangerously outdated and overburdened. In 2006, approximately one-fifth of interstate bridges were rated as deficient, either structurally deficient or obsolete.
Overall, one-quarter of all bridges in the U.S. are considered structurally deficient, and 80,000 bridges across the country need some sort of reconstruction or rebuilding.
Other recent bridge collapses include:
# July 31, 2007: A highway overpass under construction in Oroville, Calif., collapses, crushing a delivery truck and seriously injuring a construction worker who fell 50 feet.
# April 2007: A section of freeway that funnels traffic off the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge collapses after a gasoline tanker truck overturns and erupts into flames. Only the truck driver is injured.
# September 2006: A bridge collapse in Quebec, Canada, kills five people.
# November 2005: A section of a highway bridge under construction in southern Spain collapses, killing six people.
# May 2003: A tractor-trailer slams into a bridge support on Interstate 80 in western Nebraska, sending the bridge crashing down onto the truck and killing the driver.
# May 2002: A 500-foot section of a bridge spanning the Arkansas River in Webbers Falls, Okla., collapses and kills 14 people after a barge hits it.
# July, August 2002: Two bridges in central China collapse, killing a combined 19 people.
# September 2001: The Queen Isabella Causeway in Texas collapses after a tow boat captain loses control of a string of barges and currents drive them into a bridge support. Eight people die when their vehicles plummet 85 feet into the channel.
# March 2001: A bridge collapse in Lisbon, Portugal, causes a tour bus to plunge into a river, killing more than 50 people.
# June 1998: A train traveling from Munich to Hamburg derails in Hanover, Germany, leading to the deaths of 101 people. Sections of the train flip off the tracks, causing the overpass to collapse.
# April 5, 1987: A bridge on the New York State Thruway near Amsterdam, N.Y., gives way, killing 10 people.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/02/earlyshow/main3126226.shtml
06/08/07 à 00:07
@Greg.
The English would have been able to say exactly the same thing in 1776.
06/08/07 à 00:39
#28 Comment va le lac Leman? C’est le lieu ou mon grand-pere paternel nacquit.
Bah les gens, peu importe qui ils sont, peu importe si ils ont une idee differente de nous, meme si ce n’est pas toujours supportable, ont le droit, finalement, d’exprimer une opinion. Un sociologue americain m’avait dit un jour que l’”on ne peut pas juger les gens” car on ne connait pas leur vie. Quant a l’Histoire, et bien on verra ou elle nous menera.
Aux USA on peut comprendre pourquoi les gens riches votent pour les Republicains, par contre pour les gens moins riches, je n’ai jamais compris… L’inverse par contre n’est pas necessairement vrai.
06/08/07 à 00:40
Ca sent les vacances en France…. le mois d’Aout…
06/08/07 à 01:37
Example banal de la vie quotidienne americaine, et quand je dis “banal”, je pese vraiment mes mots:
THREE teenagers were lined up against a wall of a school carpark and shot in the head in a shocking triple murder in the US for which police have found no motive.
While the precise ages of the victims was not immediately known, reports from the scene in New Jersey have said they were all teenagers.
Identification tags from Delaware State University were found on the bodies, police have said.
The three were killed execution-style in a school carpark in Newark. They were named as Ofemi Hightower, Terrance Aeriel and Deshawn Harvey.
A fourth victim was wounded in the shooting. The injured 19-year-old woman was the sister of one of those murdered.
She is recovering in hospital.
Police have said they have made no arrests and have no idea of the motive behind the shocking slayings.
A spokesman for the local prosecutor’s office said: “All four were good kids”.
“They never had any issues with the law,” the spokesman was quoted by the NJ.com website as saying. “It’s a real tragedy.”
That report suggested there may have been a confrontation between the victims and another group before the killings.
It said the shootings took place near the playground of the Mt Vernon School.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22195421-2,00.html
Savez-vous combien de fois par jour des gens se font tuer d’une balle dans la tete a Las Vegas sans motif apparent? Savez-vous combien de fois des femmes travaillant dans un casino se font violer sans que la presse n’en parle? La violence, cette grosse salope, et desole de mon langage, mais il n’y a pas d’autres mots pour qualifier ce qui se passe dans ce pays de cons, pays ou les gens pensent qu’ils sont en liberte, et pays ou les gens confondent leur liberte avec leur fantasme, continueront a abuser de l’innoncence des autres gens.
La vie americaine, de chez moi, ressemble a des gens tuant d’autres gens, bref ils s’entretuent entre eux, sans pouvoir declarer le principal corrolaire qui est le gouvernement americain.
C’est ca la liberte americaine, gout amer de chiotte, ou vous pouvez faire ce que bon vous semble avant de vous faire capter par les forces de l’ordre public. Tu parles d’une liberte…
Dans un systeme qui se croit neutre, je pense sincerement, qu’il est temps de prendre alors des mesures radicales. Ca me degoute cette violence aux USA, ca m’ecoeure, ca me fait meme vraiment chier.
06/08/07 à 02:00
Meme le FBI, lorsqu’il ne sait pas comment mener une enquete dans un Etat, comme au Texas par exemple, reconnait qu’il y a un probleme de loi entre les differents Etats americains, et s’en prendre a un autre etat. Cas typique de la psychologie dans la justice americaine pour mener a bien leur enquete.
06/08/07 à 19:45
Bravo Steven,
ton commentaire n°31 est le 13 000ème déposé sur ITU.
Allez, coupe de champ’ virtuelle. Hips.
07/08/07 à 21:44
In fact, I don’t think I was the one who made the first comment on this blog by insulting anyone who doesn’t agree with you or Bush’s policies and called them “leftists and gauchistes”.
[sigh]. Exactly the opposite. I was merely mocking the arguments made vs. neocons, like that they have ruined Iraq. The idea was that, should we retreat and there is bloodshed, I might make the same silly argument about those who advocated retreat (i.e., they must like dead Iraqis). Maybe I shouldn’t use this debating technique, but perhaps I’ve clarified sufficiently what I meant.
In any case, I stand by my proposition that rational debate on Iraq is nearly impossible with 99% of non-Americans, and about 50% of Americans. You can’t begin to talk about our choices in Iraq if the other person only wants to talk about the past.
08/08/07 à 00:02
Greg,
You comments on LA’s blog are all about your disdain for leftists and gauchistes. At least Mary Ellen is intellectully honest about her beliefs.
08/08/07 à 00:03
As for our “choices” in Iraq. It is not about “us”. It is about the citizens of Iraq. It is their lives that we have f*cked up. It’s not about us. It’s about them.
09/08/07 à 07:06
#33 Chin!
10/08/07 à 15:00
You comments on LA’s blog are all about your disdain for leftists and gauchistes. At least Mary Ellen is intellectully honest about her beliefs.
Well, then I’ll simply add you to the list of people who think they know my beleifs better than I do. Anyway, any specific examples of these comments you reference?
10/08/07 à 16:11
In fact, where I criticize the Left, it’s for abandoning its principles in recent years (esp. supporing islamists and/or justifying islamic supremacism, eg.). I don’t despise leftists per se – that’s your interpretation more than anything else.
30/10/07 à 13:24
mkkeyjjy…
mkkeyjjy…