So which country is next.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Still wonder why even people in democratic countries become anti-American?

The fatal flaw in your theory Map is that these people were anti-American pre-Bush. While it would be convenient to lay everything that is wrong with the universe at Bush's feet, most of these conditions existed prior to his administration. Why don't you explain the anti-Americanism throughout Europe and other parts of the world going back since at least the 60's? I certainly experienced my fair share of it when I was over there in the late 80's and early 90's. These same people have mostly always been anti-American and Bush is simply the current focus.

[Jason Menard]

AJ: I 've never believed in wmd-production in Iraq nor in very effective Al Quaeda links (hate-against-america as only ideological link between Hussein regime and Al Quaeda might be to weak as a basis for an effective alliance).
This is a common misconception. While it does appear as if there was at least some level of support for Al-Qaeda in Iraq, probably based on the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend doctrine if nothing else, that's besides the point. It wasn't that they were supporters of Al-Qaeda rather that they were supporters of international terrorism. Al-Qaeda don't own the market on international terror, and Iraq ceratinly was a supporter of some of these other groups. Their sponsorship of terrorism was well known. Whether the groups they supported included any Al-Qaeda linked organizations or not is irrelevant. The war on terror isn't just a war on Al-Qaeda, and Bush has stated this all along.
AJ: There are so many stories of soldiers spontaneously helping the occupied in trouble with food or other in Germany. We hear no such stories about Iraq.
You don't hear these stories because people don't want to hear these stories. These stories don't sell newspapers or garner tv ratings. They are over their helping with food, building schools, working on water and electricity projects, and all the wide-ranging humanitairan support that we always provide when we go into these places.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
This is his official duty. Jason, if you think UN is irrelevant, why doesn't the USA simply cease to be a member of UN?

The UN has its uses.
In this case "illegal war" argument would hardly even be brought up
It's a dead end argument anyway. UNSC Resolution 1483 provided UN recognition of the UK and US as occupying powers of Iraq, with all the implications this carries in international law. This makes any argument of legality moot.
I suppose signing any international convention can be considered "forfeiting our independence", no? ...
No. There is a big difference between granting a foreign body legal authorization to make decisions on your behalf and abiding by a treaty or some other form of agreement.

[Mapraputa Is]

Jason: The fatal flaw in your theory Map is that these people were anti-American pre-Bush.
No. I committed the same mistake I tried to correct in your post - unqualified use of "people". "... follows from people's desire for democracy" can be read that I am speaking about all people. I am not. Actually, I started my post with "regarding anti-Americanism, there are a lot of different reasons and motivations for it, but here is one". Sure, some people were anti-American long before latest events, but frankly, I am not very interested in their motivation.
What I am thinking about is sharp increase in negative attitudes toward the US -- all around the world. In some countries twice as many people have negative impression now compared to a couple years before. I posted statistics in this forum, if you insist I can probably find it... What explains these people's negativism -- this is what I am interested in. Again, not all of them are becoming more anti-American out of love for democracy, sure. But to believe that the rest of the word -- all of it -- is simply stupid or evil... I am not so cynical and I am not so pessimistic.
[ November 21, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
What I am thinking about is sharp increase in negative attitudes toward the US

I would think the recent proliferation of satellite news (and even the Internet), particularly in places like the middle-east, is as good a theory as any. The Arab public now gets to watch the US kick the living tar out of Iraq's military on television for instance, along with the ever so inciteful commentary provided by stations such as Al-Jazeera. They are also fed a constant stream of images showing the Israeli and Palestinian conflict (doubtless a very one-sided view at that). Don't you think that this is more likely the cause of the problem you perceive? As for Europe, the media explosion applies somewhat, but as I've said, there's been anti-Americanism there for quite some time, so you can't point to any recent trend and say that's the reason for it.

[Mapraputa Is]

The Arab public now gets to watch the US kick the living tar out of Iraq's military on television for instance, along with the ever so inciteful commentary provided by stations such as Al-Jazeera.
Arab public opinion isn't my main concern, as you can probably guess.
As for Europe, the media explosion applies somewhat, but as I've said, there's been anti-Americanism there for quite some time, so you can't point to any recent trend and say that's the reason for it.
So whatever increase/decrease there is, it's because of the media explosion and/or because anti-Americanism was always there. Ok, I got it. Thanks!

[Anonymous]

Jason: As for Europe, the media explosion applies somewhat, but as I've said, there's been anti-Americanism there for quite some time, so you can't point to any recent trend and say that's the reason for it.
For forty years or so America was viewed by one half of the world as the enemy. The other half were our allies who viewed the U.S. as the lesser of two evils; although the alternative has since disappeared, the U.S. has continued to hold up its end of the bargain impressively.

[Joe Pluta]

although the alternative has since disappeared, the U.S. has continued to hold up its end of the bargain impressively.
How has it done that, Al?
Joe

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
How has it done that, Al?
Joe

The Soviet Union, Joe. Communism. The "Evil Empire." Remember them? Remember the good ol' days when Europeans were actually given a choice of evils? Lately there hasn't been much of a selection in this regard: the United States has basically assumed the role of the world's last remaining evil. Oops, I meant to say superpower! Oh well, at least we've got an entire ocean to separate us from our enemies. I mean, it's not like we'll ever have to answer for the decisions of our leaders, right?
Al

[Joe Pluta]

I'm still not sure what this means, Al. Are you saying that America is evil, or simply that we're occupying the vacuum left when we basically won the Cold War? I can't tell from your sarcasm whether you:
1. Think America is a big bully run by witless dolts and naive in thinking it's not going to get its ass kicked.
2. Think there are people out there who hate America simply because they're the kind of bratty kids who key the nicest car in the parking lot.
Or maybe a combination of the two, or something else.
The truth of course is much, much more complex.
America is a huge, frighteningly complex beast. Less of a predator than earlier in its life, and even then it tended to hunt only in its own back yard. We haven't actually taken anybody over in a while, and in fact our policy toward vanquished foes was well known enough to prompt the story The Mouse That Roared. If we were anywhere near the conquering beast we were portrayed, there'd be several glowing holes in the ground. Because, as you so fondly put it, we ARE the only superpower. Good thing Hussein isn't running America, isn't it?
Being a large beast, America gives rise to many parasitic vermin. These come in many guises, from self-serving politicians to greedy corporate executives. In that way, we're no different than any other country - out of politeness, I won't mention any particular scandal, but at the same time I don't think you need to search too hard to find a government, civic or corporate scandal in England, France, Germany, India, Iran, Russia, South Africa, Venezuela or Yemen. And while the current group of bloodsuckers is about as malevolent a group as you can get, we tend to keep them at enough length from the government to keep the wheels of state turning. Remember, we had one try to pull some dirty tricks just a few decades ago, and we made the bastard resign in a bloodless change of power. That doesn't happen too often in the rest of the world. We're reasonably civilized and we tend to keep order here on our little continent. Can't say the same about the rest of the world, but that's not our doing.
Do we hate Arabs, or love Jews, or detest Frenchmen? Well, we DID do EuroDisney, and for that we apologize, but other than that, we don't hate anyone. We want democracy everywhere, with elected governments based on basic human rights. And while it's largely a part of our innate nature to want everyone to be free, it doesn't hurt that those governments tend to thrive and in the end provide us with consumers. We're no idiots. We want everyone to buy Happy Meals!
That's kind of the point - it's never blakc and white, either/or. To say we're always the best and the brightest and the fairest and the most just is to be blindly jingoistic. But to paint us as some sort of heathen nation run by greedy, immoral idiots is to over-simplify the truth. Let's not beat around the bush (no pun intended): the world is better for us being around. I can pretty much guarantee that every person reading what I type here is using some American product or another, and is benefiting from at least one American invention. Our research has forwarded scientific effort the world over; our aid has supplied food and medicine that has saved millions of lives around the world. Are we perfect? No, far from it. But the people who stir up the hatred against us - the people who cherish fear over progress, who need repression rather than freedom, who live for darkness instead of liberty - those are our enemies, and they should be yours too! And the reason the hatred is getting stronger is because those people, the hatemongers, are getting scared, and they're enrolling the naive and the disenfranchised with stories of the great hegemony of America.
Pshaw, the world as been wearing our jeans and eating our food for a long time now. This is not about "Americanizing" anything, it's about America finally raising its voice and saying, "We're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it anymore." 9/11 started an irrevocable chain of events, and those that even countenance such things will be made to pay, and they are scared, and they want to start "anti-war" rallies which are in effect thinly disguised "pro-terror" rallies. And it's all because we're finally doing something.
Yeah, that's right. We're starting to kick ass. We're actually enforcing UN policies, unlike our erstwhile allies. We're willing to take out a brutal, genocidal maniac without waiting for our allies to get their kickbacks. Yes, some people will make money and some of it will be corrupt and I hope those people have to answer for it in the afterlife, but let's be honest here - how many government projects in ANY government are immune from corruption?
I guess what I'm saying is that America has the same problems we always see when people get together in large groups. And yeah, you might want to watch who you do business with these days, because we're a little less tolerant of jerks than we used to be. And that attitude may piss some people off, but guess what? Given what we're seeing around the world, maybe a little ass kicking isn't such a bad thing.
Joe

[Axel Janssen]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
[b]
It wasn't that they [Hussein regime] were supporters of Al-Qaeda rather that they were supporters of international terrorism. Al-Qaeda don't own the market on international terror, and Iraq ceratinly was a supporter of some of these other groups. Their sponsorship of terrorism was well known. Whether the groups they supported included any Al-Qaeda linked organizations or not is irrelevant. The war on terror isn't just a war on Al-Qaeda, and Bush has stated this all along.

The most dangerous arabic terrorists group these days are motivated by a fanatized, narrowed and wrong interpretation of Islam (Al Quaeda, Hamas). Hussein had a different background (arabic nationalism), which allways was anti-american too, but traditionally they didn't care very much about islam. They are no natural allies.

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
[b]
You don't hear these stories because people don't want to hear these stories. These stories don't sell newspapers or garner tv ratings. They are over their helping with food, building schools, working on water and electricity projects, and all the wide-ranging humanitairan support that we always provide when we go into these places.

[comparing occupation of Iraq with occupation of Germany 1945-49]
I didn't meant the oficial reconstruction work, but individual acts of helpfulness. The pragmatic, compassionate, unbeaurocratic GI became something like a positive symbol during early reconstruction of the destroyed country. Lots of small gestures are much more effective than 1000 big words about liberty, democracy and freeedom.
Of course the ongoing street-guerrilla activities of the terrorists in Iraq seeds a climate of fear among the american soldiers which is contra-productive for such a sympathetic attitude.
[ November 22, 2003: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]

[Axel Janssen]

Originally posted by <Al Labout>:
[b]
For forty years or so America was viewed by one half of the world as the enemy. The other half were our allies who viewed the U.S. as the lesser of two evils; although the alternative has since disappeared, the U.S. has continued to hold up its end of the bargain impressively.

Its really an honour and very instructive to have here so inteligent contributors who can explain to me what the 2 halves of the world think.
[ November 22, 2003: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]

[Anonymous]

Joe,
Thanks for the explanation. Even though I may not agree with what you're saying, I do appreciate the fact that you're saying it. If only everybody in this country were as articulate as you...
That said, I have to object to something you mentioned in your post. Actually, I could probably object to most of what you wrote but the following statement really jumped out at me:
Joe: 9/11 started an irrevocable chain of events...

What do you mean, started?! Do you think the Arab world sees it that way? Don't you think 9/11 could be looked at as a single link in the middle of a much larger chain? And who's to say that if we trace the chain back far enough, we'll be in the right?
I'd almost be willing to bet that many of the 9/11 "terrorists" wore blue jeans. So why did they bomb us? I mean, shouldn't they have been a bit more appreciative of all we've done for them?
Not to say that America is the only evil country in the world; of course there are others. It's just that it is very short-sighted for our government to be so blatant and arrogant with the evil that it does. In a world where a handful of men with boxcutters can "start an irrevocable chain of events" it is the DUTY of our government to be more conscientious with its foreign policy and more prudent with its invasions of other countries; otherwise it's only a matter of time before the rest of us suffer the consequences....
...And when that does happen it will not be the start of anything either.
Al

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Axel Janssen:

Its really an honour and very instructive to have here so inteligent contributors who can explain to me what the 2 halves of the world think.
[ November 22, 2003: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]

Axel,
Your welcome.
Alan

[Joe Pluta]

Joe: 9/11 started an irrevocable chain of events...
Al: What do you mean, started?! Do you think the Arab world sees it that way? Don't you think 9/11 could be looked at as a single link in the middle of a much larger chain? And who's to say that if we trace the chain back far enough, we'll be in the right?
It depends on how you look at things. If you want to get all fuzzy about it, you can say that everything goes back when the first hominid whacked another over the head with a bone. I'd have been more correct to say this started ANOTHER chain of events, but the irrevocable part is the same. It was a massive, unprovoked attack on a civilian population.
And don't even try to tell me it was provoked by some perceived slight of American policy. Unless you can point to the specific American act that this was in response to, and the formal declaration of injury by the terrorists, and the warnings given to the civilian population prior to the action, then the 9/11 terrorsits were nothing more than car-bombers, the lowest form of life on the planet. Except that they were stupid enough to car-bomb the only remaining superpower, and thus the retribution will both be awful and fierce.

Al: I'd almost be willing to bet that many of the 9/11 "terrorists" wore blue jeans. So why did they bomb us? I mean, shouldn't they have been a bit more appreciative of all we've done for them?
Despite the obvious sarcasm in your rhetoric, the truth is that, yes, the entire world ought to be just a little more grateful for what America has done. I've laid it out in the past - if you just look at the amount of aid to other countries that comes from America, it's clear that at least by that measure we're one of the most humanitarian societies ever to exist.
And you can counter that some of that aid is needed because of our own actions, but it's by no means all of it. A lot of it is just because it's what we do. Go tell someone in the Peace Corp that they're all part of the military-industrial plot to overthrow the world, and you'll likely find out it takes tough individuals to work for that organization .

Al: Not to say that America is the only evil country in the world; of course there are others. It's just that it is very short-sighted for our government to be so blatant and arrogant with the evil that it does. In a world where a handful of men with boxcutters can "start an irrevocable chain of events" it is the DUTY of our government to be more conscientious with its foreign policy and more prudent with its invasions of other countries; otherwise it's only a matter of time before the rest of us suffer the consequences....
You calling my country evil, Al? You rate it as a BAD influence on the world? What country do you consider a good influence?
Alright, this is the real point. I get sick when I hear someone say that America somehow caused the 9/11 bombings. I might understand that coming from an uneducated mind indoctrinated from birth with the concept that strapping a bomb to yourself and blowing up children is a sure way to Allah, but it's absolutely untenable coming from anybody else.
Point to the "evils", Al. In fact, point to one evil act that justified flying two jetliners into thousands of civilians. What exactly have we done to justify that? Enough of this hand wringing and soft peddling. No, it's time that we get down to the brass tacks here and make a stand.
You either accept terrorism as a valid act or you don't, Al.
You either justify the 9/11 attacks or you don't.
You're either against us, or for us.
This is where we need to get. We need to get to a world consensus that terrorism must stop. This may be the first step towards world peace, I don't know. But somehow claiming that America caused the 9/11 attacks is heinous, and me and a few million of my friends would be willing to argue the point.

...And when that does happen it will not be the start of anything either.
As the first mass attack on civilians on American soil (with the possible exception of McVeigh's heinous acts), it definitely is the start of something, Al, and it's not going to be pretty. These idiots car-bombed America, and they're going to pay for it. And if you want to justify it, go ahead, but without some serious facts, you're just going to sound like the defense attorney for a mafioso.

Joe

[Paul Stevens]

You missed the first trade center bombings Joe. Just because it didn't kill allot doesn't mean that they didn't try.

[Joe Pluta]

Thanks, Paul. You're right of course. That really was the first in this chain of events.
Joe

[Mapraputa Is]

Al: If only everybody in this country were as articulate as you...
Hey, why do you put me down like this! If I don't know how to use articles, it doesn't mean I am not articulate...!

(just kidding!)
Axel,
Your welcome.
Just for record, Axel is good. He isn't a member of our Slavic Union but he is good. No need to fight with him.
And Axel, Al is good! I mean there is no need to fight with him!
Hm... 7 am -- it's time to go to bed for me, ah?

[Joe Pluta]

Map: Just for record, Axel is good. He isn't a member of our Slavic Union but he is good. No need to fight with him.
And Axel, Al is good! I mean there is no need to fight with him!
Meanwhile I evidently am an emissary from Satan himself, and must be struck down with the Flaming Scimitar of Terrorist Apologism .
Joe

[Mapraputa Is]

Joe!
You are a member of our Slavic Union, so you cannot be bad!!!
Which is to say I really need to get some sleep this night!

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Which is to say I really need to get some sleep this night!

Map, I have to be the one to break this to you... 7:40 am is not night.

[John Smith]

Map: Just for record, Axel is good.
I am not sure about that. Axel is European, and this fact alone makes me xenophobic. You know what they do to private businesses in Germany? The government comes to visit a private business, checks the refresh rate on the computer monitors, and if it is set to below 75Hz, the government shuts down the business. This is not a joke! We had a software vendor from Germany on site, and they told me about this fascinating fact. I wouldn't be surprised if this measure is recorded as an ammendment to Germany's constitution (or whatever the equivalent of it) as the means to promote the general welfare of German people.
On the second thought, however, the US is not much different, -- only it applies the "general welfare of American people" principle to its foregn policy too literally. The German precision is lacking in its implementation, however. But at least the discipline (along the party lines) is there!
[ November 23, 2003: Message edited by: Eugene Kononov ]

[Mapraputa Is]

Joe: Meanwhile I evidently am an emissary from Satan himself, and must be struck down with the Flaming Scimitar of Terrorist Apologism.
There is some mystery about you, Joe. I disagree with lots of your views, but I love to read them. Your posts bring a sense of harmony to my soul, "healing" is probably the word I am looking for... I do not know how it works, maybe you remind me some member of my family I forgot long ago, or, more likely, never had and only dreamed about.
[ November 23, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

[Mapraputa Is]

Jason: Map, I have to be the one to break this to you... 7:40 am is not night
Night is when I said it is!
Oh my It was my mother's voice!

[Mapraputa Is]

Eugene: On the second thought, however, the US is not much different, -- only it applies the "general welfare of American people" principle to its foregn policy to literally. The German precision is lacking in its implementation, however. But at least the discipline (along the party lines) is there!
How anti-American...

[John Smith]

I never realized how divided the US congress is until I saw one of Bush's televised speaches to congress. At predetermined time intervals, the entire right isle would raise and give the president a standing ovation, while the entire left isle would grimly look down on their shoes. Pretty pathetic picture, if you ask me. A bunch of zombies commandiered by two leaders from the left and from the right. It's very American to disagree and to have your own opinion, but it seems that the partisans on both sides of the axis forgave their good old Americanism and traded it for the European crowd following instincts. Very anti-American, indeed!

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by R K Singh:
I think now "no" country(let us say Lebanon,Syria, N Korea etc ) will be attacked in the name of "War on Terror".
Because they dont have anything to offer :-|
and second they dont listen UN.
[ November 10, 2003: Message edited by: R K Singh ]

without reading all other posts, i want to add my 2 cents. forgive me if i am too rude.
which country is the next? are people supposed to guess? are you starting a thread to discuss something just like which team will win super bowl this year?
well, that is one way of thinking. there are others. there are so many american citizen here, every their vote counts; there are so many tax payer here, every penny is their hard work; there are so many world citizen here, we only have one world.
so don't just guess, have your own opinion, let your voice be heard, be the captain of your own destiny.

[Mapraputa Is]

Map, I have to be the one to break this to you... 7:40 am is not night.
7:40 is a song.

[HS Thomas]

7:40 is a train.

[R K Singh]

I was thinking to reply Joe first but .. now you are here.

Originally posted by <David Iowa>:

without reading all other posts, i want to add my 2 cents. forgive me if i am too rude.

You should have read all the posts. And you are not rude at all. Thanks for your comments.
which country is the next? are people supposed to guess? are you starting a thread to discuss something just like which team will win super bowl this year?
No, its different from disscussing which team will will the game.
Attacking a country is not game, (winning or losing the war might be game and we can bet on it if you want ).
War is always pre-planned and with some motivation.
We are discussing, which country could be next and why ?
Feel free to contribute.
[ November 24, 2003: Message edited by: R K Singh ]

[Richard Hawkes]

Originally posted by Eugene Kononov:
It's very American to disagree and to have your own opinion, but it seems that the partisans on both sides of the axis forgave their good old Americanism and traded it for the European crowd following instincts.
It's very European to disagree and to have your own opinion, but it seems that the partisans on both sides of the axis forgave [forgot?] their good old Europeanism and traded it for the American crowd following instincts.
Is that what you meant to say?

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
You calling my country evil, Al?
Joe

I dont know whether Al lives in US or not. But he is talking about US.
I said it earlier also, and would like to repeat too.. please discuss country, dont discuss "my country" or "your country".
You can talk about India, but dont talk about Ravish's country.

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
Yeah, that's right. We're starting to kick ass. We're actually enforcing UN policies, unlike our erstwhile allies. We're willing to take out a brutal, genocidal maniac without waiting for our allies to get their kickbacks.

I wanted to give you a big reply quoting lot of quotes but will do this later for the time being.
So which ass is going to be kicked next ?? and that is my qiestion.
I tell you, you have perception that US is doing some thing for world or because of 9/11.
But I can tell that if this is the case then there has to be some more attackes .. some more asses need kicks from bully.
And I am saying that now after Iraq, there will be no more attacks or in your words now bully will not kick any other ass.
But the people who stir up the hatred against us - the people who cherish fear over progress, who need repression rather than freedom, who live for darkness instead of liberty - those are our enemies, and they should be yours too! And the reason the hatred is getting stronger is because those people, the hatemongers, are getting scared, and they're enrolling the naive and the disenfranchised with stories of the great hegemony of America.
If like others you think that anti-bush is anti-US then you must be knowing about all anti-bush rallies in the countries where recently Bush visited like Japan/ Australia / UK .
I did not know that people of these countries also cherish fear over progress, need repression rather than freedom, live for darkness instead of liberty etc.

[Joe Pluta]

I said it earlier also, and would like to repeat too.. please discuss country, dont discuss "my country" or "your country".
You can talk about India, but dont talk about Ravish's country.
Ravish, you can do whatever you want, but I will continue to refer to the US as "my country". If we were talking about another country, I wouldn't really care. You may not want to refer to India as your country, but that's a personal decision.
Joe

[Joe Pluta]

I tell you, you have perception that US is doing some thing for world or because of 9/11.
That is correct.

But I can tell that if this is the case then there has to be some more attackes .. some more asses need kicks from bully.
First, don't call my country a "bully", or if you do, explain why. If you call deposing a genocidal maniac being a bully, then you are an appeasement junkie. Second, whose ass needs to be kicked, and why?

And I am saying that now after Iraq, there will be no more attacks or in your words now bully will not kick any other ass.
Again, I never used the word bully. You may not respect my country, but from now on at least have the respect to quote me properly. Misquote me again and I will absolutely never respond to another one of your posts. It's simply not worth the effort. You obviously have little regard for any words but your own.

If like others you think that anti-bush is anti-US then you must be knowing about all anti-bush rallies in the countries where recently Bush visited like Japan/ Australia / UK .
I did not know that people of these countries also cherish fear over progress, need repression rather than freedom, live for darkness instead of liberty etc.
Okay, Ravish. Find some quotes as to what they are protesting. In many cases, they are simply protesting "Bush". This is as stupid and naive as it gets. These are exactly the type of naive peaceniks I am talking about - the ones who the terrorists are trying to sway because they are so frightened.
Before you side mindlessly with the protestors, why not find out WHY they are protesting and let us know. Otherwise you're as bad as them.
Joe

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
First, don't call my country a "bully"

OK, I take my words back.
Please forgive me for using word bully for YOUR country.

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
I will continue to refer to the US as "my country".

In public I dont discuss personal problems of anyone.
Sorry Joe, I want to reply but [you be happy] I cant.
I can discuss US or India or USSR or Germany or XYZ country but I cant discuss someone's country.
And good that you agree that anti-Bush are not anti-US.

[R K Singh]

If a journalist writes something about actress X, then should the son of actress get upset because she is his mother ?
Though journalist is writing about actress X, not about his mother.

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by R K Singh:
Thanks for your comments.
[ November 24, 2003: Message edited by: R K Singh ]

you are welcome!

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
Misquote me again and I will absolutely never respond to another one of your posts.

Joe, I'd like you to meet Ravish.