U.s. Foreign Policy

[j2k4]

Ah, the French.

My sister actually just returned from Paris (MontMartre); she tells me the French are shopping for American-trained pilots to see if the weapons systems on their Mirages actually work-their own pilots never learned how to trigger them.

[j2k4]

Ms. Aliot-Marie's remarks would seem to indicate a serious cranial malady.

She is suffering a hitch in her mental "giddyup".

[echidna]

Originally posted by j2k4@17 June 2003 - 15:06

Echidna-without being sure of what the figure actually is, I can state positively your figure of 3+ guns per person is way the hell and gone high-absurdly so.

j2k4 :: i don't think that the spread of firearms across the population is anything like 3 to 1
but the figure is not entirely unbelievable when considering theta there would be 10,000s of collectors owning 10s of guns each, 1000s of collectors holding 100s of guns each and 10s of collectors possessing 1000s of firearms, plus all the guns held by k-mart and other retailers of firearms.
i'm sure there are 10,000s of people in the USA who have never owned a gun, but there are more guns than people in the home of the brave

[have you seen 'bowling for colombine'? if yes, what'd you think? if no, do you disparage michael moore? what do you think of him? what do you think of the NRA?]

[clintonesque]

" Here's one I'll feel safe leaving overnight:

All of you who aren't from the U.S.; those of you who are, and really think U.S. foreign policy sucks-

What would YOU do, if you were (dare I say it) George Bush?

Likewise, what would you NOT do?

Please resist the urge to be flippant in your answers. "





Take some classes in diplomacy, also have Mr. Rumsfeld accompany him?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by echidna+17 June 2003 - 01:14--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (echidna &#064; 17 June 2003 - 01:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@17 June 2003 - 15:06

Echidna-without being sure of what the figure actually is, I can state positively your figure of 3+ guns per person is way the hell and gone high-absurdly so.

j2k4 :: i don&#39;t think that the spread of firearms across the population is anything like 3 to 1
but the figure is not entirely unbelievable when considering theta there would be 10,000s of collectors owning 10s of guns each, 1000s of collectors holding 100s of guns each and 10s of collectors possessing 1000s of firearms, plus all the guns held by k-mart and other retailers of firearms.
i&#39;m sure there are 10,000s of people in the USA who have never owned a gun, but there are more guns than people in the home of the brave

[have you seen &#39;bowling for colombine&#39;? if yes, what&#39;d you think? if no, do you disparage michael moore? what do you think of him? what do you think of the NRA?] [/b][/quote]
Echidna-

Isn&#39;t it a bit disingenuous to lump gun "collections" into the mix?

Somewhat analogous to decrying the existence of a stockpile of metal as "would-be" guns.

C&#39;mon, E-you know better.

Re: Michael Moore-do a forum post search in my name, keyword "Moore"; that&#39;ll get you my thoughts on him.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@17 June 2003 - 05:48
The Associated Press

PARIS June 14 —
France&#39;s defense minister criticized her American counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, in an interview published Saturday as someone who considers the United States the world&#39;s only military, economic and financial power.

Michele Alliot-Marie also accused American industry of waging "economic war" by trying to "take over the capital" of European defense-related industries. Europeans must regroup to resist, she said, according to the interview in the daily newspaper Le Monde.

Alliot-Marie&#39;s blunt remarks recalled the bad blood between Paris and Washington over France&#39;s leading role in opposing the U.S.-led war in Iraq.
Rumsfeld&#39;s January dig at France and Germany as being part of "Old Europe" epitomized the problem that both Paris and Washington have been working to repair.

"The American defense secretary believes that the United States is the world&#39;s only military, economic and financial power," Alliot-Marie told Le Monde. "We do not share this vision."

Alliot-Marie also said Rumsfeld&#39;s thinking seems to be out of line with that of the U.S. military and intelligence services.

"During the period of Franco-American tension, relations between our intelligence services remained perfect," she said.

The article was reread and "amended" by her, which is a relatively common practice here, Le Monde noted.
Alliot-Marie&#39;s comments were geared to the opening of the Paris Air Show, the largest display of aeronautical technology and might in the world which is held every two years.
However, this year&#39;s show, which French President Jacques Chirac and Alliot-Marie visited Saturday, is a scaled-back affair, with no U.S. flyovers and the number of attending U.S. aircraft reduced from 11 to six.
The Pentagon&#39;s decision to trim its presence was widely seen as a snub of France because of its opposition to the U.S.-led war to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

The French minister voiced concern over U.S. industrial might and tactics she said were akin to "economic war." She called on Europeans to "regroup" to better withstand the competition.

"American industry is in a logic of economic war," she said in Le Monde. "This attitude is not connected to the Iraqi episode. European industry must regroup to be in a position to resist them."

Alliot-Marie said she was "truly concerned" by efforts of some American companies to "take over the capital" of defense-related European enterprises and said she has asked for a study of the situation. She was not more specific.

"We must be vigilant and better foresee risks and dependencies ...," the minister said.
ABC News
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who can believe a word that paper prints when the person being interviewed gets to edit it.
Common practice too&#33;

I think that she is complaining about American Arms Companies buying up European Arms Companies.

Its been happening for years and is unconnected with Iraq etc.

They were warned years ago it would happen too, when the regulations for the ownership of these companies was relaxed here, but not in the USA...so it would be very difficult for a European Arms company to buy out an American one.

The EU as a whole are looking to redress the balance here, and this is only part of the process.

There is also a closed market in the US, so rather than buy European equipment direct, they get a license and manufacture a copy in the US.

..eg Harrier Jet (which i believe is a favourite of the US Marines)

I think they are looking as to whether its worth it to do the same type of thing in Europe...ie instead of buying the equipment off the US, just build them on license themselves.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@17 June 2003 - 11:16
I think that she is complaining about American Arms Companies buying up European Arms Companies.

Its been happening for years and is unconnected with Iraq etc.

They were warned years ago it would happen too, when the regulations for the ownership of these companies was relaxed here, but not in the USA...so it would be very difficult for a European Arms company to buy out an American one.

The EU as a whole are looking to redress the balance here, and this is only part of the process.

There is also a closed market in the US, so rather than buy European equipment direct, they get a license and manufacture a copy in the US.

..eg Harrier Jet (which i believe is a favourite of the US Marines)

I think they are looking as to whether its worth it to do the same type of thing in Europe...ie instead of buying the equipment off the US, just build them on license themselves.

Just so, Rat-

[echidna]

Originally posted by j2k4+18 June 2003 - 00:33--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 &#064; 18 June 2003 - 00:33)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by echidna@17 June 2003 - 01:14
<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4

@17 June 2003 - 15:06

Echidna-without being sure of what the figure actually is, I can state positively your figure of 3+ guns per person is way the hell and gone high-absurdly so.

j2k4 :: i don&#39;t think that the spread of firearms across the population is anything like 3 to 1
but the figure is not entirely unbelievable when considering theta there would be 10,000s of collectors owning 10s of guns each, 1000s of collectors holding 100s of guns each and 10s of collectors possessing 1000s of firearms, plus all the guns held by k-mart and other retailers of firearms.
i&#39;m sure there are 10,000s of people in the USA who have never owned a gun, but there are more guns than people in the home of the brave

[have you seen &#39;bowling for colombine&#39;? if yes, what&#39;d you think? if no, do you disparage michael moore? what do you think of him? what do you think of the NRA?]

Echidna-

Isn&#39;t it a bit disingenuous to lump gun "collections" into the mix?

Somewhat analogous to decrying the existence of a stockpile of metal as "would-be" guns.

C&#39;mon, E-you know better.

Re: Michael Moore-do a forum post search in my name, keyword "Moore"; that&#39;ll get you my thoughts on him.[/b][/quote]
guns hurl metal at velocity in order to wound or kill, right. (i don&#39;t wanna deal with "guns kill people, people kill people&#39; argument)
if civil order breaks down any available weapon would be used. stockpiled metal could be manufactured into firearms but otherwise is probably just a badly shaped cudgel at best, while any gun is a viable deadly weapon, the english conquered half the world with barrel-loading muskets, it needn&#39;t be an UZI

all i&#39;m saying is that there is an extraordinary quantity of firearms in the USA, and i think that makes the chances of getting shot a lot greater than if those guns were unshaped metal stockpiles, and if civil order disintegrates then the chances of getting shot are probably better still

i don&#39;t see any disingenuousness, i honestly believe that a place becomes more dangerous the greater the number of weapons there are there.

[the search system is turned off by VB or Paul so i&#39;ll have to try finding you views on mr moore later :: unless you can PM me a link]