emprworm Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 The Chirac-Hussein ConnectionFeb 19, 2003SummaryIn attempting to understand France Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 20, 2003 Author Share Posted February 20, 2003 how funny that no one has a reply to this?hard, substantiated, cold factual evidence that Chirac and Hussein are buddy-buds and no one says anything about it?interesting indeed.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunenewt Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Well...its interesting...maybe a bit extreme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 20, 2003 Author Share Posted February 20, 2003 sometimes the truth is the most extreme thing of all.since the 1970's Chirrac and Hussein have been working together. No wonder France wants to keep Hussein as a national slavemaster at all costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunenewt Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 To do with the oil rightAlso did you know that Russia also signed a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alejandro Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Sure, and the US goverment give saddam the VX gas to fight against Iran. They are old friends too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 20, 2003 Author Share Posted February 20, 2003 if we were old buddies, then we would be siding with Hussein like France. so....no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alejandro Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 So why you think french cant change? or why US cant change again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 20, 2003 Author Share Posted February 20, 2003 what are you talking about? THe US, along with several other nations, want to free slaves.you want to keep them slaves.white man at his old tricks again, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scy Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 But why US only want to attack Iraq?Why not Noth-Korea??The reason is Iraq weak and very tasty! as not North-Korea, fully deadly weapons,Scuds,Nuclears,etc....Did Germany or Belgium have old relationship with Iraq?US just want blood,oil(did someone remember KKND ;D),money!lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunenewt Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Everything seems to be going over your head - the French are the ones after the oil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Iraq owes Russia (or is it France?) about 8 billion dollars, and huge fields of oil belonging to france are threatening to be blown up if this goes to war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scy Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 what are you talking about? THe US, along with several other nations, want to free slaves.Cool! i never heard that, but how wars free slaves?did Saddam use Psychical towers!lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunenewt Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Iraq owes Russia (or is it France?) about 8 billion dollars, and huge fields of oil belonging to france are threatening to be blown up if this goes to war. They owe Russia around 1 billion so I think its France Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Your point, Emp? Do we have to justify the motives of France? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyarlathotep Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 if we were old buddies, then we would be siding with Hussein like France. so....no.So where it all comes down to is, as long as another country then the US is making mistakes/not complying/what ever the US government dislikes, it's wrong and all that the US does is okay ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 I think it comes down to that Sadam has basicly lost the US favour and they don't like him anymore, as they used the chemical weapons (with the compliments of the US) to gass Kuweit people instead of Iranese, while Iranese hold no economical value to the US but Kuweit people do.Furthermore, the US already has collected billions for selling all those weapons to Sadam. Since the money's in, it's time to attack and save your image as the messiah of the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyarlathotep Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 I think it comes down to that Sadam has basicly lost the US favour and they don't like him anymore, as they used the chemical weapons (with the compliments of the US) to gass Kuweit people instead of Iranese, while Iranese hold no economical value to the US but Kuweit people do.Furthermore, the US already has collected billions for selling all those weapons to Sadam. Since the money's in, it's time to attack and save your image as the messiah of the world.I think you pretty much said it all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 20, 2003 Author Share Posted February 20, 2003 what are you talking about? THe US, along with several other nations, want to free slaves.Cool! i never heard that, but how wars free slaves?did Saddam use Psychical towers!lolno slave has been set free but through war or blood. learn your history Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Slaves have hardly been freed as a direct result of the war, in the Civil War the Federal Government had to pass laws and the Emancipation Proclamation, with the additional police of the Union army getting the southern slave owners to relinquish their slaves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 20, 2003 Author Share Posted February 20, 2003 Slaves have hardly been freed as a direct result of the war, in the Civil War the Federal Government had to pass laws and the Emancipation Proclamation, with the additional police of the Union army getting the southern slave owners to relinquish their slaves. "with the additional police of the Union army getting the southern slave owners to relinquish their slaves."uh-hu.and it was the war the put them in servitude to the Union army. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 No, there was a union army before the Civil war, but the army split and the leaders from schools such as West Point went to their own sides. A lot of people were drafted, but freedom of slavery wasn't a direct result. It wasn't even a reason except in the very beginning. After that, the Southerners were defending against the Union and fighting for their own country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyarlathotep Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Hey emprworm, you're thread is going off topic here. Just thought I'd warn you in case you missed it. No thanks needed, just glad I could be of help Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 I think it comes down to that Sadam has basicly lost the US favour and they don't like him anymore, as they used the chemical weapons (with the compliments of the US) to gass Kuweit people instead of Iranese, while Iranese hold no economical value to the US but Kuweit people do.Furthermore, the US already has collected billions for selling all those weapons to Sadam. Since the money's in, it's time to attack and save your image as the messiah of the world.Of course it couldn't be the fact that he has violated his peace agreement and hoarded WMD could it? What does it say to the rest of the world if the UN will not back it's own resolutions? The UN is obsolete. Why do you think N. Korea is so bold now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 20, 2003 Author Share Posted February 20, 2003 No, there was a union army before the Civil war, but the army split and the leaders from schools such as West Point went to their own sides. A lot of people were drafted, but freedom of slavery wasn't a direct result. It wasn't even a reason except in the very beginning. After that, the Southerners were defending against the Union and fighting for their own country. blah blah off topic semantics, Nyar is right. If you, Acriku want to start a whole new thread on how no slave was ever freed through war, we can do that. Nyar is right, I took this off topic, of which I apologize. Please start a new thread Acriku on how slaves are basically only freed through bloodless politics and we can talk about it. Other than that, I am going to have to agree with Nyar and return to the topic of France being buddies with Hussein. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.