Send the USA the bill

**Biggles** · 04-30-2005, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by JPaul

One would have thought that if the majority of Scots felt this way then they would do better in the elections to the Scottish Executive.

True, although I was only talking about the principle, not whether it was desired at this moment in time.

**JPaul** · 04-30-2005, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by Biggles

True, although I was only talking about the principle, not whether it was desired at this moment in time.

Ah, sorry, thought you were making a party political interwebcast. I half expected to hear seen canary, speaking from the Carribean.

**GepperRankins** · 04-30-2005, 05:55 PM

if you want independence you gotta have your politicians back

**JPaul** · 04-30-2005, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by GepperRankins

if you want independence you gotta have your politicians back

Indeed.

If we were independent why would we need elected representatives in a parliament which was no longer ours.

**Rat Faced** · 04-30-2005, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by Biggles

.....should be allowed to *cough Scotland cough*

I've told you... only if you move the borders back to those the Romans enjoyed.

Your not leaving us alone with those snobby bastards.

btw JPaul... who's Seen Connery lately?

**JPaul** · 05-01-2005, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

I've told you... only if you move the borders back to those the Romans enjoyed.

Your not leaving us alone with those snobby bastards.

btw JPaul... who's Seen Connery lately?

He hasn't bean sean in these parts recently.

**Tikibonbon** · 05-01-2005, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by SideSwiped

You know, it's funny. Every little misdoing the US does is instant world criticism, but the Chinese communist government ratifies a law(how since no one outside the party has a say so)that gives China the right to use any and all force to prevent Taiwan from seeking it's freedom from China, but it seems that that kind of oppression is okay. You all also seem to think that Hussein's gasing of thousands of people was okay. And, what of the way Russians handle terrorists and civil unrest?

I'm sorry for the girl, that she lost a brother and suffered injuries, but, be realistic. The US does not provide healthcare for it's own citizens, and no matter what some outdated agreement says, I seriously doubt that this medical bill will be paid. She should have been sent to a US hospital if payment for services was so important.

As long as the U.S. is one of, if not the most powerful countries in the world, it will be open to critizism. Just the way things have always been. If Italy currently enjoyed it's position it once held in Europe, but on a worldwide stage, you would see the same critizism the you see directed at the U.S. directed at the Italians.

It is almost in a way similiar to a retail establishment. After a bad experience in a shop, a person will tell an average of 10 people about it, but only about 2 or 3 people about a good experience. Hence, all you hear about now is the invasion, but never about the Americans, English, and whatnot who are against the war, but are in fact there trying to help people.

Of course, there will always be those that think a country is wholly evil, and label all citizens of a country as murders. But it is easy to ignore this sort of idiodicy. A truely informed person will be aware of the good things as well as the bad things. While they may never mention citizens of this "evil" country who are in places like Iraq trying to help instead of destroy, you can let them wallow in their pessimism and look to the good things in the world for inspiration.

**JPaul** · 05-01-2005, 07:07 PM

If the USA and it's allies are willing to set up and fund hospitals in Iraq. If they are keen to treat civilians who were / are injured as a direct result of actions they have taken. Then surely it makes sense to pay for this treatment. One assumes that she was moved because the treatment was not available in Iraq. However that does not really change the responsibility for taking care of injured civilians.

Indeed, If we are supposed to be helping the new regime to get up and running, then surely medical care must be one of the main areas.

Having said that, I do not know the stance which the Belgian authorities took. If they supported the action, then it would make sense for them to cover the bill themselves.

Bear in mind this is not an action like the previous World war, where the allies bombed Germany, Japan etc as a direct response of attacks which they themselves had carried out. That being the case I see no moral responsibility in relation to injuries.

I personally think it behoves the allies to cover these costs. Even if it's just for the PR, if you disagree that there is a moral responsibility.