Cristobo,

Please explain something to me that I honestly do not understand. How could anyone living in Spain, that historically has had its own problems with the Arabs, not have sympathy when we here in the U.S. are currently having our own problems with the Arabs? Have you forgotten your history so soon? Maybe I'm just assuming that you are a Spaniard? But I know that many Spaniards also protest the war in Iraq.
To read your posts, one comes away with the feeling that you are obsessed with the political aspect of the war. Don't you also feel that there are some cultural aspects of this war. What I mean is, don't you feel this war is at least partly a cultural clash between Western civilizations and the Arab world?
I, like you, love politics. But this war wasn't started just because our "evil" American president just decided to win the next election by starting a war.
By the way, good job Kurt.

Gazpacho
I would never define myself as “Spanish”, it is a label I don`t feel at all identified with, but yes, I am a Spanish subject. I live in a country where it is regarded as quite “cool” to be fond of Islamic and African cultures. It is said to be very “enrichening”, and the word that cool people most like is “mestizaje”, “miscenagation”.
Well I am not that way. I don`t like Moslems, I don`t like those dusty, underdeveloped, tyrannical and corrupted countries where a bunch of self-righteous clergymen control what people say, think or do. I like Europe, I think our culture is “rich” enough without need of being enrichened with Islamic influence. I like our political tradition, I enjoy civil rights and I think moslems can teach us nothing at all.
But all the former is irrelevant. I am sure Moslems don`t need my approval to live as they like to do. As long as they respect me, and stay at home, I have nothing against them. My theory is, just leave them alone and things will go on as peacefully as ever!
If you ask me yeah, I guess terrorism is a problem. I guess I don`t like Arab tyrants. But what do you want to do? Should we invade all the countries where terrorists are strong?

Kenya is a “friendly” and “almost democratic” country, but apparently terrorists are powerful there; there have been several bloody terrorist attacks in the area, in recent years. It would be stupid and useless to invade Kenya, Tanzania, Indonesia (remember the Bali attack) because of their unwillingly harbouring terrorists. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are pro-western regimes, which have been closely under American survey for the last fifty years. However, they are also Islamic countries, where human rights are violated in the worst possible way every minute. They harbour and actively support Islamic terrorism (includind those of 9-11-2001). Let`s invade them, too?

Just the war and aftermath period in Irak may be enough to lead America into recession. And should the US along with Europe start a row of endless wars against some billion and a half people? Should we start WWIII? That is plain nonsense.

You can quest for terrorists if you like, you can offer a reward for Saddam and Osama, but you can`t say that the key problem today is terrorism, because it is NOT. Starting wars will bring only more wars. So far, neither Afghanistan nor Irak have reached the least political stability, on the contrary they are close to anarchy and civil war. As long as the US focus on wasting $ billions of wars, they will be wasting a precious time (and economic resources) which could be being used to solve what real problems are today: environment and underdevelopment.

Cristobo,

Thanks for a very good answer. Unfortunately, the Arabs (that is Arab terrorist) did not stay home and respect us in our (the U.S's) case. If they did, then I would agree with you to leave them alone to their own way of life.
As I've said before, I really wish our government would have a post-victory plan before we go to war. What I see going on in Afghanistan and Iraq is what is known to this former military personel as a cluster. This administration's foreign policy is way too socialistic from my point of view. Instead of trying so hard not to step on anyones toes in the region, and constantly having to demonstrate our sense of fairness and justice to the rest of the world, we should be occupying conquered territory and forcing them to adopt our way of life. Who cares about the opinion of other countries? And as for the people of Iraq, could they hate us any worse?
I still feel the war was necessary to remove any doubt in our strength as a nation. By now our enemies should understand that when anyone steps on American soil, they are stepping on sacred ground. Ground our forefathers won with their blood. The Arabs don't even know the meaning of Jihad until they come here intending to do us, a free people, harm. It's a shame that so many innocent Arab people must die in our demonstration of strength, but since the war, I haven't seen to many of their government sponsored demonstrations in which they are shouting "death to America".
As for this war being economically disastrous, you are right. My solution would be to compensate ourselve with their oil. Yes, corporate America will turn a profit by reselling the oil to the U.S. tax payers. That's the price of our 'no free lunch' world.

Kurt:

It seems that you have VERY bad sources of information or want to confuse readers. I don't know about other countries, but in the theree ones that had the Azores meeting, USA, Great Britain and Spain, it is now well known that:

-In Britain, there is a process on, where it has been uncovered that the Blair Government included false informations (the 45' Saddam response with ABQ weapons), and exagerated greatly the magnitude of the threat, to encourage people's feelings for war. That's why Blair's popularity has reached a low, in spite of his many positive actions in the other areas of actuaction.

-Spanish government recently affirmed (after being chased by press and PSOE) that they obtain that information from supposed UN files!!! In fact it's obvious that the UN did NOT any report regarding the Saddam military attack/response capability but on his having possibilities to acquire/develop nukes or other mass killing weapons. And the resutl were not concluyent thanks to Bush's war starting before they ended. Plus, Blix was very doubtful as he has said after he has retired and was free to talk. It happens that he had reasons to doubt, more time would have result in seeing that the country was mass weapons free, and Bush plans to enrich oilo companies would be over.

- In the USA, CIA has declared that they felt very under pressure by the frequent visits of (I think it was) Mr. Rumsfeld, asking wether they had found by then the evidence he wanted was "found". Hence, the "creativity" of the information, among others, of the false information that Saddam had bought Uranium in Africa.

So, it seems that, form the 3 ones I know, who are the impulsors of the war, 3 were wrong (or lied to their people to support war).

Syria and Lebannon are NOT satellites of Saddam, and DID NOT have to follow Saddam hosting those weapons. May I remind you what happened with the remains of the Iraki air force in the 1st gulf war? They send them to Iran to preserve them from destruction in american hands, but Iran stayed them and jailed the pilots. SO, what's the sense of Saddam sending weapons to others?(who, by the way, feeled very tense with his formerly agressive neighbour).

What no objective observer can deny is that more than one hundred thousand + invading soldiers, the CIA, MI5 and others couldn't find a PROOF supporting the supposed Al-quaida/Saddam connection. In fact, Saddam's regime is well known for being laicist, for which he had a lot of problems with islamic factions, but which was the only way that a country with two main muslim factions, who consider the other heretic: sunni an shii, can be ruled.

Thank you for not considering me of your ilk , but a different one. As for the 'Eurabia' name, I will not make any comments, our History and past political actions speak for us. The fact that we don't follow US government warmongers, does not tear us apart from West, only pushes the USA to the Far West , and Bush's politics resemble a lot the Hitler's invading policies. Imperialism.

As for the TotalFinaElf matter, I don't know if that Canadian guy is who you say he is, but I'll swallow it. However, what are you condemning? Trade relations?

Because to many of us, when we lost markets abroad, we were told that it was because the USA were more competitive. Now we send better offers, get a deal through the markets laws, and then
the USA sends their troopers, kills some tenths of thousands and states a new puppet government and the agreements are over. Good bussiness, no?

Sounds like dirty tricks. But these dirty tricks include killing irakis AND american soldiers for some corporations to earn more.

About the USA in the UN: DO YOU think YOUR country and those that at that moment are allied with it are always the TRUTHHOLDERS? I Don't think so. The USA has a lot more power in the UN that the deserved, starting by having a permanent member in the Executive Council, plus a Veto, just like the other 4, Which is unfair in both cases, AND also has political, economical and militar power to bully most of the rest most of the other times, and that's exactly what they do.

So, don't complain and cry because once you were not winning, because the UN are not meant to be subsidiary to the USA, but an organization that's is above the country because of the political decision of all the signatary countries (including the USA).

As for staying together and forcing Saddam out of IRAK, you are making political-fiction, in your dreams anything can happen, but what we know is that Saddam was not a menace and that the country has been destroyed, and that's a fact.

If you knew some politics, you'd know that islamo-fascist is an imposible word, as much as islamo-jew, because fascists hated and despiced Arabs (remember Berlusconi, so close to Bushs plans, he is praising Mussolini these days, and saying M. sent jews "on holidays to a cam" only ).

The fact that, in Europe, we tend to consider countries able to self-govern and that Bush-Blair-Aznar don't, doesn't make us Arabs at all. Europe's position has always been trying to mediate between Israelis and palestinians to abide UN resolutions regarding Israel, for example, whereas the USA has always supported Israel while they violated them repetidly.

By the way, Israel was not invaded by any country for violating so many UN resolutions, being a Terrorist State (assesinating its own citizens of palestinian origin), without a trial or anything, ..., and for so many blatant crimes. Even being it so, the EU haven't been against that bloody regime either. Only long-lasting peace preservation was important as a goal. A goal now almost impossible thanks to US annual gifts in cash to Israel, and in making it a nuclear power, unstable and bloody as its behaviour is.

Let´s invade israel! As bloody as Irak, But this time, they truthfully have nukes! Wasn't this the reason for the war? Clearing ruthless bloody regimes with nukes and the like?

Europeans countries are not policial states, such as what the USA is becoming right now, with people (some their own citizens) in jail for months without a trial, that's why terrorists are freer, just as the rest of us. But we also suffer terrorism (some islamic) in our territory, and we fight it with as many weapons we have.

Unfortunately we haven't yet the mind-reading device needed to guess that some groups of five people scattered along Europe were planning to do the usual terrorist action consisting on smashing some planes on skyscrappers. If we had known that, we would have done something about that.

But, again, don't try to move the discussion to other matter, for, again, no relation has been found at all between Al-Quaida and Irak.

As for the Two Hamas: There are not two Hamases. There is Hamas, which is a terrorist group (Have the Israelis left another way? They don't have an army and can't have it, and if they had, they wouldn't have the USA tech they have got and the nukes), and there are a number of humanitary organizations and ONG's most of which are independent and care of population welfare in those super-poor countries that have been unfairly been pursued economically, politically and judicially by the USA, and the EU countries as far as the fear for the USA impulsed them to.

I don't have thirst for american blood, but I firmly believe that, unless this war is very costly to America in lifes and/or money, we will have more and more innocent countries invaded, ruined, contamined (with uramium loaded projectiles), people (including "soldiers") assesinated defenceless by american bombers, children born dead or handicapped by exposition to american weapons radiation, and so on. Remember, after Irak, Bush was about to invade Jordan, accusing them of hosting Saddam and the rest, of the hosting weapons lie, and of border attacks.

The americans are the only ones who can stop the America war machine, that's why they have to learn again the lesson of life cost, which is only one hundreth of the ones they have caused, and the recession menace that the cost of this nonsense war is bringing upon their country, not to support any warmonger anymore.

O my God!

Gazpacho, I hope ( with not much confidence) that you are making a joke here:

This administration's foreign policy is way too socialistic from my point of view. Instead of trying so hard not to step on anyones toes in the region, and constantly having to demonstrate our sense of fairness and justice to the rest of the world, we should be occupying conquered territory and forcing them to adopt our way of life. Who cares about the opinion of other countries? And as for the people of Iraq, could they hate us any worse?

This is Exactly what most of the people hate of the worst of the NAm people. No respect for other opinions or ways of living, and imposition of yours.

And now, this:

I still feel the war was necessary to remove any doubt in our strength as a nation. By now our enemies should understand that when anyone steps on American soil, they are stepping on sacred ground. Ground our forefathers won with their blood. The Arabs don't even know the meaning of Jihad until they come here intending to do us, a free people, harm. It's a shame that so many innocent Arab people must die in our demonstration of strength, but since the war, I haven't seen to many of their government sponsored demonstrations in which they are shouting "death to America".

This is so unfair! Imagine that Iran had to show that nobody can walk on their toes and makes some groups of people enter the USA and explode portable nukes in NY, LA and others. A pity for the poor americans dead, but we had to show our power. Just give me a minute (to vomit) and I'll go on.

Yeah, I have refreshed myself. OK, let's see:

As for this war being economically disastrous, you are right. My solution would be to compensate ourselve with their oil. Yes, corporate America will turn a profit by reselling the oil to the U.S. tax payers. That's the price of our 'no free lunch' world.

Now, that's also a jewel : First we destroy a country, impoverishing their people by destroying their meagre industries and setting a war economy, and a blockade, then we steal their only resource to pay for our unwanted help to the "world".

Suspicions confirmated.

Sorry, my stomach is not OK today. Bruarggghhhh!

LOL

I'm tired of the arguing about the war.

This may seem ignorant and callous to some but if you want my opinion I think we should just pull out of the Middle East. Give the Iraqis what they need and get the hell out. Let the Jews and Arabs kill each other. Until the collective mindset of these people changes there is no reason for us to intervene. Try to give them power to govern themselves and they kill each other over tribal vendettas. Try to start a peace process and they blow each other up, yelling "You started! No You!" like 3 year olds. Who is going to change the mentality of these people, the U.S.? Every time we try we f*ck it up. The EU? The EU countries have enough internal problems to focus on. The UN? (or maybe a wet rag in its place?)

Thank you Mikey. And the only way we can do that is to stop being so dependent upon Arab oil....you do remember that this is all about oil. So let's conserve energy, carpool, drive smaller cars..... I imagine 87 billion would buy an awful lot of insulation, solar energy tubes, and technological advances in energy production and conservation. But now I'm falling off the left coast.

It's very sad that my Spanish and Italian friends and family won't come to visit the US as long as that cowboy is in power, and they really don't understand what's wrong with us--why are we so arrogant? I think that the anti-American sentiment which Bush has created by declaring anyone who disagrees with him to be irrelevant is a giant step backward in human development. America hasn't been this divided since the Civil War. It's heartbreaking.

Uh...so, Ignacio,

Am I to assume you disagree with my opinion?

No, just kiding.

Just a note about American arrogance. I think the myth of "I'm American, so f*ck you!" is a little larger than life. I think a lot of people like to think that Americans are that way because our government/policies are. I can tell you I've visited Spain numerous times and have been confronted by the most arrogant of people. It works both ways.

Another thing I notice people like to harp on is the supreme ignorance of Americans and their blatant refusal at wanting to be informed.

The first couple of times I visited Europe and talked to people my age I felt kind of dumb because I wasn't as informed about world events as they were. News in Europe is very informative because...well it's in Europe. The nature of the countries requires that all be informed albeit slightly about the workings of the surrounding countries. However, the more I listened I figured out that even though they're more informed doesn't mean they care more. Just like me they take it in and go about their own.

I then thought about why I don't get the same information as they do. I mean I try to get my news from all mediums. But you know what it won't happen because THE MAJOR STORY ON THE NIGHTLY NEWS IS IF JLO AND HER FAT ASS BROKE UP WITH BEN AFFLECK. AM I SUPPOSED TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE PREMIUM CABLE CHANNELS JUST TO SEE THE INTERNATIONAL NEWS? IF I COULD AFFORD MORE THAN THE BBC USA NETWORK AND ITS 30 MINUTE NEWS PROGRAM I WOULD.

So in response to those who are believers in the inherently ignorant and close-minded Americans I must say take a time-out and think before you speak. It's not that we don't want to know, it's because hey, we're busy just like you and the convenient forms of information we have suck and are filled with garbage.

-Temporarily disgruntled.