View Full Version : Italy and Germany say no troops to aid U.S.

09-17-2001, 12:27 PM
What do you want to bet we end up in this alone? The only countries I have a remote hope in are Canada and Britain. Looks like everyone else wants to be a sellout. You're either with us or against us, the way I look at it, and if they're not going to kick in some help, they might as well go join the Taliban. I'm really disappointed with all these countries that are saying we are using the word "war" to loosely. How would any of their nations feel if this happened in Berlin or Rome? I bet it would be war then, and they'd be begging us to help, too.

09-17-2001, 04:00 PM
90% of the population of the world is hurt because of what happened last week.

My friend, im sure that neither Italy nor Germany are against you, on the contrary, everybody is willing to help the U.S. authorities into bringing the terrorists to justice. We are all into this, but the least the world needs is a war. Bringing the terrorists to justice does not translate into war, lets do our best to help remedy this situation. (each and everyone of us)

Remember JFK?? "Its not what your country can do for you...but what you can do for your country..." Apply that changing the word "country" for "world". Lets give it our best!!

My friends.....peace to all. :)

09-17-2001, 04:16 PM
My first post was really too angry now that I read it again and have thought about it, but I really think that the governments of the said countries have decided too early that they won't provide troops for NATO. They should leave their options open, IMO.

Rollo Tomassi
09-17-2001, 05:25 PM
Germany and Italy...hmmmm...Germany and Italy...Where have I heard those two countries taking the same side about an issue before...I. Can't. Quite. Put my finger....Oh yeah! Those were the scum sucking hate mongers responsible for the Holocaust and last World War...figures they'd be siding with the hate mongers of the 21st century!!!

( yeah, I know there are a lot of decent German and Italian sympathizers in those countries, but the coincidence is remarkable)

El Chuxter
09-17-2001, 05:37 PM
It's way too early to say, "If you're not with us, you're against us." It's too early even to say this is a war. Our government and media are using the word too liberally.

I've seen no reason to believe any Western European country, regardless of past transgressions, would side against the US in a war, if it does come to pass. The nations that once comprised the Axis have been strict when it comes to violence and hate crimes--they don't want a repeat of the Holocaust any more than the rest of the world. If Italy or Germany end up siding against the USA on the side of the terrorist groups, I'll eat my entire Star Wars collection.

09-17-2001, 05:56 PM
I would have to say that I agree with the cautious approach to calling this a war. I think that if Bush intends to go racing into the Middle East and Asia, gunning for the bad guys he's going to give us a historical error that will dwarf that of the Korean and Vietnam Wars combined. Yes, we have a violent, deadly, and ultimately evil enemy. Is that enemy defined by borders or governments like say, the Axis Powers of WWII? NO! Running into countries that have supported the efforts of terrorism blasting away at what is left of their social infrastructure after years of war, in and out of their borders, will simply serve to sway more Islamic people into the realmo of fanaticism.
Should these crimes go unpunished? Absolutely not! But the idea that storming into one or more countries, bristling with the full might of the U.S. military machine is a fool's errand of unprescedneted scale that will threaten to inflame the situation and cost more lives that it preserves on an exponential level.
If we had been invaded by an expeditionary force from another country then by all means we should go to war with said country. But we are not dealing with a clearly defined enemy in this case. It is short-sighted judgement to imagine that a war in the traditional sense is the answer, or even truly an effective solution.

09-17-2001, 09:09 PM
If they don't want to provide troops to aid in ending these cowardly people thats cool.Just don't ask for help when they come to thier homes.I believe it will take all of us not just one or two but the whole world to stop it.We as a world we need to unite and show that no matter what you believe,you don't have the right to force or even kill others into believing what you do.I believe everyone has the right to live as they choose as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.Anyways we will all have to answer to God for our own actions and sins.Don't get me wrong I'm not for war but something has to be done and it has to come from all of us{world].

09-17-2001, 09:53 PM
After we gave them all that money to rebuild their countries after WW2, this is the thanks we get. That's gratitude for ya!:mad:

09-17-2001, 10:20 PM
To paraphrase the Soup Nazi on Seinfeld,
"No troops for you"!

09-18-2001, 03:17 AM
A news report this evening stated that citizens from sixty-two nations were either killed or missing in the WTC.

I guess Italy and Germany lucked out and weren't affected....(?)

09-18-2001, 09:57 AM
I think you guys are overreacting, especially when CNN says this:

Germany's President Johannes Rau has said that he does not expect the German army will take part in a military reponse to the terror attacks in the U.S.

"My impression is that it is not called for, rather what is required is support of a logistic nature," Rau said in an interview with German radio on Sunday.

Rau said the people responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington should be found and brought before a court.

"This is an attack on the whole of civilisation...Therefore we must react with civil means."
US forces are now saying that even if Afghanistan turns over Bin Laden, that we'll still end up going to war there. How exactly is that a war against terrorism when we kill civilians whose only crimes are to live in the same country as men who would assist in the terrorist acts of September 11th, 2001? Our government needs to take a look at what many other countries are saying, if the US simply goes in and bombs a country back to the stone age, they're not interested in committing what could be seen as war crimes. However, if the US is committed to truly bringing those responsible for last week's actions to justice and to halting terrorism, then almost every country in the world will stand with us.

Rollo Tomassi
09-18-2001, 10:08 AM
Someone also made a point that the chidren in these countries are "the suicidal bombers of the year 2010." So killing them now (and I don't advocate that, I'm just stating a hypothetical) would prevent future innocent deaths.

If you could, would you go back and Kill Hitler when he was an innocent child? It's a long debated question about the line between right and wrong and the choices we make about when to cross it.

Jedi Clint
09-18-2001, 03:34 PM
Our current strategy seems to be:

We have given those countries that harbor terrorists a choice. They can either join us in our effort to rid the world of terrorists, or they can side with those organizations that they harbor. Pakistan chose to fight with us. They have their own problems with terrorists organizations. Other nations who harbor terrorist organizations face the same decision, and thus far most have shown support for our cause. Iraq will not (call it a hunch). We are basically saying that those countries where terrorist organizations have taken root, should police themselves (or if they require assistance in the effort, we will give them aid). Those that don't can expect us to do it for them. I imagine that other countries that support this decision, and suffer terrorist attacks similar to our own (even though we don't suffer attacks from those groups) are pledged support from the U.S. when they wish to deal with the terrorists that plague them.

I doubt that our retaliation will involve intentional or careless attacks upon civilians in any country. The Taliban is an oppressive government. In Afghanistan you are either with them, or you are against them and you suffer. They harbor and aid the terrorists in their country. That is their choice. This is nothing to be entered into lightly, and I have seen no indication that we are involved in any wanton acts of retaliation.

The current terrorist acts in NY, PA, and D.C. were completely unjustified. I don't care why those responsible did this. I don't want them to have the ability to do it again. If there are other organizations that have yet to face justice for similar acts of violence, then these acts of terrorism should be our wake up call to seek them out and neutralize them as well.

Hasn't Iraq afforded U.N. sanctions on it's citizens in order to avoid probes into their country's weapons of mass destruction capabilities for an extended period of time? If they have nothing to hide, then they should be willing to allow a full inspection. I have been pondering this issue in light of current events.

09-18-2001, 08:14 PM
and it shouldn't be. hopefully bush and his cronies aren't using the term "war" as in the woefully waged "war on drugs" or the "war on poverty".

i'm no military expert, but hopefully this "war on terrorism" will mainly consist of covert operations and u.s. military approved assisanations of terrorist leaders and the religious dictators that run these countries. in the past, our country has had a "ban" on assinating anyone. this should end. taking out these leaders and setting up puppet governments, if necessary, will be the only way to reduce the loss of life on both sides, the "innocent" civilians and our military personnel.

and since a war on terrorism has been declaired, the assinations shouldn't be limited to the talaban leaders and bin laden. anyone else who opposed individual rights and endorses terrorism should also be in our cross hairs.

09-18-2001, 08:32 PM
Thats not the answer to the problem at hand, bringing the terrorists to justice does not mean that we have to become terrorists. Assasinations??? Nope dont think so...remember there is no nation to fight this war against. If the U.S. go and nuke those countries, more innocent people will die and that would put the responsibles of this action in the same level of the terrorists.

I believe your contry is FAR BETTER than that and i am hoping for the hatred streak to end now.

Again, peace to all.:)

09-18-2001, 10:56 PM
i advocate the protection of the innocent. and if killing the killers is the only way to achieve this, then assinating them is completly moral. you and many others make the mistake that any like response would only lower the U.S. to the terrorists level. this thinking is wrong. there is a huge difference between initiating force, as these terrorists(and the nations that support them)have done and a U.S. response to this violence. defending yourself, or the U.S. in this case, is the only moral and proper thing to do. and since this will not be a "convential" war, the only option, short of occupication, is to take these people out. they are murders and dictators who have given up any right to life the second they violated another's rights.

these militant musulims are completely irrational. the only language they understand is force. they initiated this force. they now must bear the U.S. response. there is no hate coming from this keyboard, but the time to reason with these people is long past. this is not a law enforcement problem. this is a military problem only a bullet will cure.

no one wants war,lobito, but it has been presented at our footsteps and there is no other option. what other solution is there? if you have any suggestion other than group hugs, self sacrifice, or turning the other cheek let us know. :)

09-18-2001, 11:15 PM
The days of politically correct warfare are over. I say if we are to drive these terrorists from their holes then we need to cause as much suffering on them and their supporters as possible. If the Afghans use mountain caves to hide in, then level the mountain. It's not like we don't have the technology. Kill off all animal and plant life within a hundred miles of their bases and starve them out. If they hide in the forest, then remove the forest. The old methods of tip-toeing around and trying to carry out an un-offending war have proven useless. It's now time to reign destruction upon these people the likes of which hasn't been seen since The Old Testament.

Trust me, there's plenty of hatred coming from this keyboard. Not for any race or religion, but for these radicals who carry out these attacks. They've forfeited their right to be treated like human beings.

09-19-2001, 11:11 AM
I respect what u guys said, but i dont agree with it, do i have a solution to the problem at hand?? I wish i have...but unfortunately i dont. Hug groups and stuff are solutions some people are giving trying to heal themselves from what they have expirienced, but if that doesnt work for u, you can go and enlist with BB in the army. If i had the terrorists in front of me i would surely punish them, but i would not cross the line.

Anyway believe it or not i care for humans, mostly if i know them, BB and Derek are part of this community and i know i cant change they way u guys think, i just wanted to give u my opinion and to let you know that i care for what you guys are feeling.

09-19-2001, 02:17 PM
Lance Morrow, in the Special Edition of Time magazine puts it best:

"For once, let's have no 'grief counselors' standing by with banal consolations, as if the purpose, in the midst of all this, were merely to make everyone feel better as quickly as possible. We shouldn't feel better.

"For once, let's have no fatuous rhetoric about 'healing.' Healing is inappropriate now, and dangerous. There will be time later for the tears of sorrow.

"A day cannot live in infamy without the nourishement of rage. Let's have rage."

"America needs to relearn a lost discipline, self-confident relentlessness--and to relearn why human nature has equipped us all with a weapon (abhorred in decent peacetime societies) called hatred."

Now a quote from the Bible, Ecclesiastes 3: 1-8

To everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die;
A time to plant, and a time to pluck what is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal;
A time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh;
A time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones;
A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to gain, and a time to lose;
A time to keep, and a time to throw away;
A time to tear, and a time to sew;
A time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate;
A time of war, and a time of peace.

09-20-2001, 05:19 AM
The comment "A day cannot live in infamy without the nourishement of rage. Let's have rage." is a bit sickening to me since that rage the author is referring to lead the US to drop two atomic bombs on a nation that was already within 3 to 6 months of defeat.

This thread looks like a thesis on propeganda from about halfway down, we need to use cool, rational judgement and not give in to hatred and rage.

You want to strike out against those who aid Bin Laden and the Afghani gov't, you better look at the US gov't as well as the other suspects because we gave them training and financing and covertly monkeyed in political affairs and they turned it around and screwed us JUST LIKE PANAMA, NICARAGUA AND IRAQ (which I will only briefly mention Bush sr. and the CIA's involvement there). We need to stop thinking like the dinosaur foreign policies of the 1970s and '80s and get to friggin' WORK on taking down terrorism. You want some justice? Grab these suckers ALIVE, convict them of their crimes, strip them of human rights (as should be the custom when you help kill thousands of innocent people) and rip pertinent information about OTHER terrorist activities, members, financing, etc., from their minds. We need to end terrorism, and simply killing the terrorist along with millions of innocent Afghanis will simply make martyrs and cause terrorism to lose a face, but gain that very same "rage" some Americans want to embrace.

We've screwed up enough, we've risked American soldiers' lives in the wrong kinds of wars before and all it's gotten us is a bunch of angry Iraqis and Vietnamese and FAR TOO MANY dead Americans. Our world is so f-ed up already from dinosaur thinking, we don't need to embrace hatred and rage to win the "war on terrorism" and bring these sons of *****es to justice, we need determination and cool, rational thinking to get through this without screwing things up more. I only hope the current administration of our country is up to that task.

09-20-2001, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by JediTricks

You want some justice? Grab these suckers ALIVE, convict them of their crimes, strip them of human rights (as should be the custom when you help kill thousands of innocent people) and rip pertinent information about OTHER terrorist activities, members, financing, etc., from their minds. We need to end terrorism, and simply killing the terrorist along with millions of innocent Afghanis will simply make martyrs and cause terrorism to lose a face, but gain that very same "rage" some Americans want to embrace.

It would be nice if it were that easy. These terrorists will never allow themselves to be taken alive and it's not like we can just go knock on their door and arrest them. These people hate America, they've hated us for years and their allies are all over the globe. However, capturing one or two or 300 will avail you nothing if you try to get info based on other terrorist activity. Former Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has stated that if these people have access to nuclear weapons they won't hesitate to use them. I'm sure if they could get a nuclear device into the US they'd love to set it off in a major metropolitan area. As for our "allies" Pakistan, Tuesday there was a pro-bin-Laden demonstration of 3000 Pakistanis, they were reported as chanting in English, in unison, "Until now, only one World Trade Center has been destroyed. But we will destroy all of America. We will die for Taliban. We will die for Islam. We will die for Osama." Recently Pakistan declared itself a nuclear power.

Our timeline for pre-emption is shrinking fast. The next attack could be more devastating than anything we've ever seen before.

Jedi Clint
09-20-2001, 03:17 PM
Germany hasn't ruled out military assistance.

Our laws apply to our citizens, they do not apply to members of the state sponsored religious fanatic terrorist cells of the mid-east. I agree that we should make calculated, rational decisions in regards to any military action, and have seen no indication that we are doing anything to the contrary. We can't, however, water down the impact of the events of Sept. 11th when we control our anger. Being angry about what took place is not unfounded, but allowing anger to cloud our judgement can be dangerous. As I said, I see no indication of that taking place. If we don't act in the face of the truth (that these groups want nothing less than the destruction of The United States), then we will fall victim to it. We have an opportunity to stop them before they present an even greater danger to the free world.

I think Benjamin Netanyahu realizes the breadth of threat that faces the United States as well as Israel.

Obi-Dan Kenobi
09-20-2001, 04:17 PM
The ban on assasination only appplies to heads of state. That's why we couldn't specifially target Saddam in the Gulf War. I personally think it's a bunch of crap, anyway, but it doesn't apply to Bin Laden. I would like to see a kind of surgical operation where we go in and eliminate him, because I think it would be humiliating to his organization, but I doubt that that is likely. This is going to be a conflict that will take on many forms, but not all will be subtle.

I'm with bigbarada on the idea of "Politically correct warfare." I mean, if we really want to win this thing, we have to commit. We can't just lob a few missiles, pat ourselves on the back, and think it's over. John McCain, a politician who I greatly admire though I don't agree with all of his beliefs, was on the Tonight Show the other night. He referred to these tactics as being like fireworks---light entertainment, not too dangerous for us, and it pleases the people enough that they get off the government's back. But ultimately not too effective.

And I think we should be angry. Anger is not necessarily a good thing. But it is an antidote to complacency. Used in the right way, it gets good results that otherwise you don't get. To quote another famous Republican, Ben Stein was asked the other night if he was angry. He said of course he was. These people targeted children, unarmed men and women at their jobs or travelling, with no hatred for muslims. My favorite quote from him was when he said we need to fight them in the political arena, fight them by spying on them, fight them with our military might, and finally "encounter them in dark alleys and send them into eternity."

I'm, of course, sying this from a comfortable seat in suburban Ohio, and I dread any of my loved ones having to be sent away to fight, but we don't have a choice at this point. Preventing this from happening again will require all kinds of tactics, and working with all kinds of people. It's won't all be pretty. But it HAS to happen. This isn't going to end by peaceful means.

09-20-2001, 05:55 PM
If we are to be successful in this campaign then we need to commit fully and completely. I understand that many here hate the idea of another war breaking out, which is fine. No one is forcing you to agree with George Bush. Unchallenged leadership is lazy leadership. I just hope we don't turn this into another Vietnam, were the soldier who goes and fights becomes villified by the American public. Whether you support this conflict or not, you still need to support the soldiers sent into harm's way by no choice of their own.

The idea of going to war scares me to death. Seeing these events unfold makes me wish I had been born in different times; but it seems the responsibility of putting a stop to terrorism has fallen upon our generation. We can't shirk that responsibility, we must prevent this plague from tormenting our children and grandchildren the way it torments us now.