I'm not sure if you guys have seen this one before, but in case you haven't here it is...I found it really hilarious :

"Bitter after being snubbed for membership in the "Axis of Evil", Libya, China, and Syria today announced that they had formed the "Axis of Just as Evil", which they said would be more evil than that stupid Iran-Iraq-North Korea axis President Bush warned of in his State of the Union address.

Axis of Evil members, however, immediately dismissed the new Axis as having, for starters, a really dumb name. "Right. They are just as evil, in their dreams!" declared North Korean leader Kim Jong-il. "Everybody knows we're the best evils . . . best at being evil . ..we're the best." Diplomats from Syria denied they were jealous over being excluded, although they conceded they did ask if they could join the Axis of Evil. "They told us it was full," said Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. "An axis can't have more than three countries", explained Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. "This is not my rule, it's tradition. In World War II you had Germany, Italy, and Japan in the evil Axis. So, you can only have three, and a secret handshake. Ours is wickedly cool."

International reaction to Bush's Axis of Evil declaration was swift, as within minutes, France surrendered. Elsewhere, peer-conscious nations rushed to gain triumvirate status in what has become a game of geopolitical chairs. Cuba, Sudan and Serbia announced that they had formed the "Axis of Somewhat Evil", forcing Somalia to join with Uganda and Myanmar in the "Axis of Occasionally Evil", while Bulgaria, Indonesia and Russia established the "Axis of Not So Much Evil Really as Just Generally Disagreeable". With the criteria suddenly expanded and all the desirable clubs filling up, Sierra Leone, El Salvador, and Rwanda applied to be called the "Axis of Countries That Aren't the Worst But Certainly Won't Be Asked to Host the Olympics". Canada, Mexico and Australia formed the "Axis of Nations That Are Actually Quite Nice But Secretly Have Some Nasty Thoughts About America", while Scotland, New Zealand and Spain established the "Axis of Countries That Want Sheep to Wear Lipstick". "That's not a threat, really, just something we like to do", said Scottish Executive First Minister Jack McConnell.

While wondering if the other nations of the world weren't perhaps making fun of him, a cautious Bush granted approval for most axis, although he rejected the establishment of the "Axis of Countries Whose Names End in 'guay", accusing one of its members of filing a false application. Officials from Paraguay, Uruguay, and Chadguay denied the charges. Israel, meanwhile, insisted it didn't want to join any Axis, but privately world leaders said that's only because no one asked them. "

Btw...it's an article by John Cleese from a british newspaper.

Perhaps starting worthless threads about personal websites just to show how stupid Americans are?

I'm sure that it was noone's intention to show how stupid Americans are, but how stupid *some* Americans (or Greeks, Iraqis, Norwegian, British and so on) can be under certain circumstances...hope we don't end up again in the same usual conclusion: burn in flames you mean US basher

Well, when you have a Canadian MP saying "Damn Americans: Hate those bastards" maybe Americans can take it the wrong way or is that supposed to be a complement coming from a Canadian? Or when Americans get booed at hockey matches like they were recently? That being said I haven't heard of anyone wanting to boycott Canada, that's just retarded.

Just to show for ONCE here that Americans aren't the only stupid people in the world and as impossible as it seems even Europeans can be dopey as well:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=2453835

Surprised that nobody made a thread of that story even though I think it's similar but a bit more extreme, but then again the hate-on-america value isn't there.



Nice try.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=2446673
http://www.consumers-against-war.de/caw.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82120,00.html

Dedicated to Neo Neko, who can't keep the debate on a non-personal level...

This is a test written by Daniel Quinn, one of the most respected thinkers. I hope you don't also disregard him as "not informed enough". And I wonder how you know you have looked enough into the issue, and I haven't.

Oh, and I just need to comment that Saddam was not exactly left alone to do whatever he wanted... But read on, and see some clear facts (and you can bet your ass that they HAVE been double-checked):

Take the War on Iraq IQ Test

Do you know enough to justify going to war with Iraq?

1. Q: What percentage of the world's population does the U.S. have?

A: 6%

2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does the U.S. have?

A: 50%

3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?

A: Saudi Arabia

4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil reserves?
A: Iraq

5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year worldwide?

A: $900+ billion

6. Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.?

A: 50%

7. Q: What percent of US military spending would ensure the essentials of life to everyone in the world, according the UN?

A: 10% (that's about $40 billion, the amount of funding initially requested to fund our retaliatory attack on Afghanistan).

8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World War II?

A: 86 million

9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological weapons?

A: Since the early 1980's.

10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical & biological weapons on their own?

A: No, the materials and technology were supplied by the US government, along with Britain and private corporations.

11. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use of gas warfare against Iran?

A: No

12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using gas in the Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988?

A: 5,000

13. Q: How many western countries condemned this action at the time?

A: 0

14. Q: How many gallons of agent Orange did America use in Vietnam?

A: 17 million.

15. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and September 11th terrorist attack?

A: No

16. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian casualties in the Gulf War?

A: 35,000

17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military inflict on the western forces during the Gulf War ?

A: 0

18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by U.S. tanks with ploughs mounted on the front?

A: 6,000

19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and Kuwait after the Gulf War?

A: 40 tons

20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in cancer rates in Iraq between 1991 and 1994?

A: 700%

21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did America claim it had destroyed in 1991?

A: 80%

22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use its weapons for anything other than deterrence and self defense?

A: No

23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world peace now than 10 years ago?

A: No

24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon predicted in the event of an attack on Iraq in 2002/3?

A: 10,000

25. Q: What percentage of these will be children?

A: Over 50%

26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air strikes on Iraq?

A: 11 years

27. Q: Was the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999?

A: No

28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999?

A: 20 million

29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661 introduced, imposing strict sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports?

A: 12 years

30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in 1989 (per 1,000 births)?

A: 38

31. Q: What was the estimated child death rate in Iraq in 1999 (per 1,000 births)?

A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)

32. Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died by October 1999 as a result of UN sanctions?

A: 1.5 million

33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to have died due to sanctions since 1997?

A: 750,000

34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq?

A: No

35. Q: How many inspections were there in November and December 1998?

A: 300

36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems?

A: 5

37. Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to the Ba'ath Party HQ?

A: Yes

38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, "Iraq had in fact, been disarmed to a level unprecedented in modern history."

A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief.

39. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post 1991 capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors claim to have discovered and dismantled?

A: 90%

40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons inspectors back in?

A: Yes

41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by 1992?

A: Over 65

42. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America veto between 1972 and 1990?

A: 30+

44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear weapons?

A: 8

45. Q: How many nuclear warheads has Iraq got?

A: 0

46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US got?

A: over 10,000

47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear weapons?

A: the US

48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have?

A: Over 400

50. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter"?

A: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr

And before I go to sleep, this certainly deserves another post: an open letter to Bush by Paulo Coelho. Since my words can't be taken seriously, perhaps some people with a bigger name have more luck here

Thanks, by Paulo Coelho

Thank you, George Bush, the Great Leader.

First of all, may I thank you for showing all of us the danger which Saddam Hussein represents. Perhaps many of us might have forgotten that he used chemical weapons against his own people as well as against the people of Iran. Hussein is a blood-thirsty dictator, and certainly an embodiment of evil in the world today.

However, that is not the only reason why I am thanking you. In the early months of 2003, you helped show us, sir, many important things about the world, and it is for this that you have my gratitude. I was taught as child to always say "thank you" to someone who has done me a favor, and it is in that spirit that I write these words.

Thank you for showing us all that the people of Turkey and their Parliament are not for sale, not even for $26 billion dollars.

Thank you for showing us clearly the enormous abyss which exists between the decisions taken by leaders of nations and the true desires of their people. Thank you for helping us see with painful clarity that whether it is José Aznar of Spain or Tony Blair of the UK, that our so called elected leaders don't have the slightest regard or respect for the fact that over 90% of their population are against war. Thank you for allowing us to witness the ease with whichTony Blair was able to blithely ignore the largest public protest held in England in the last 30 years.

Thank you, because your insistence on war forced Blair to go to Parliament with a plagiarized dossier which consisted of notes written ten years ago by an arab graduate student. As a result we were able to witness the unbelievable farce of Blair insisting that these notes represented "proof" gathered by the British secret service.

Thank you for for making Colin Powell descend to the ridiculous by showing the UN Security Council photographs, which a week later were publicly denounced by Hans Blix, the weapons inspector responsible for verifying the disarmament of Iraq

Thank you, because your position on war resulted in the French Foreign Minister, Mr. Dominique de Villepin, in his speech against war on Iraq, being honored by a standing ovation. This is an honor which, if I am correct, has only happened once before in the history of the U.N., and that was during a presentation by Nelson Mandela.

Thank you, because due to your strenuous push for war, for the first time the Arab nations of the Gulf, usually so divided, have found a reason to unite and have recently issued a joint resolution in Cairo condemning your proposed invasion. You have brought about a unity of opinion amongst the arab nations, that they had not achieved on their own.

Thank you, because as a result of your administration's rhetoric blasting the United Nations as "irrelevant", even the most undecided and reluctant nations have been inspired to take a position against your country's attack on Iraq.

Thank you for your extraordinary foreign policy. Attempts to defend your ambitions have caused British Foreign Minister Jack Straw, to attempt to argue a case for a "moral war", and with each attempt lose more international credibility.

Thank you for attempting to divide Europe, which after a century of war and upheaval has been fighting for unity. This was a warning clearly seen by all of us, and it will not be forgotten.

Thank you for finally managing to achieve what few have managed in the past century: to unite millions of people, across the continents and give them a common cause to fight for, even if that cause is the exact opposite from yours.

Thank you for letting us feel that even if our words are not being heard, they are at least being repeated. This will give us strength in the future.

Thank you, because without your esteemed help, we wouldn't have known the extent to which we were capable of mobilizing. Perhaps this appears useless today..but it will serve us in the future.

Thank you.

So, now that the drums of war seem to beat with unstoppable ferocity, I want to add an insight, words uttered by an ancient European King to a would-be invader:

"May your morning be glorious and May the sun shine brightly on the armor of your soldiers, because in the afternoon I will defeat you."

Mr. Bush, thank you as well for visibly trying to stop a movement which has already begun. We will pay attention to the feelings of impotence, and the sensations it arouses within us. We will learn to deal with those emotions, and we will transform them.

In the meantime, may you enjoy your beautiful morning, and all the glory that it may bring you.

Thank you, because I know you will not listen to us, nor take us seriously. Know, however, that we have listened to you and heard you clearly, and we will not soon forget your words.

Thank you, George W. Bush, the great leader!

Many thanks to you.

Paulo Coelho

The writer, Paulo Coelho, is the author of "The Alchemist", amongst other works, and is a member of the Brazilian Academy of Arts & Letters.

These are very limited boycotts. Not like the stories i heard about the U.S. boycotts... for instance, there was a story about www.fromages.com on TV, they received hundreds of mails from U.S. buyers saying they won't order there anymore. And this is only one online store. I don't see such widespread rejection of U.S. products over here. But it's also not that easy the other way around, our culture is highly influenced by the USA, while the USA itself stands largely on it's own.

Someone says there are "NO" boycotts in Germany, I prove him there are, no need to make excuses of why the German boycotts aren't real boycotts. And there's no way to guage how "limited" either is at this time and really there aren't many overtly German products to boycott except cars and parts. But I can assume that far fewer americans (#1 turists in numbers?) will travel to Germany or France do to the real and perceived hostile attitudes (even more-so than before) there so if you want to call that a boycott (it's really not, Amercans don't want to be berated on vacation or read writing on the ground saying how evil America is like what I'm hearing about in Erlangen), you can as well.

@Kblood
I don't care who published them. But pretty much every one of those numbers that you had posted could easily be contested. And for every thing against the US there there is a thing against the UN to be said as well. I don't think there is a bit of truly unbiased reporting on this situation and many others. You can report all the unsubstantiated numbers or oppinions you like. But in the end it comes down to who is/was doing anything to resolve the problem. Not the UN.

Nothing personal. I just find it verry off to critique someone elses plan when you do not have one of your own; especially a better one to suggest. Beyond that you claim that everything that every inteligence agent world wide and not just American ones have been telling us is wrong. It would be like denying the reports of Iraqi soldiers dressing in coalition and US uniforms and killing Iraqi citizens as they try to surrender. They have killed several Iraqi soldiers in these uniforms. And if Iraq has no chemical weapons then what do they need all the encounter suits they have and that the US and GB have been finding?

I am not saying that oil is not a factor. I have never said that. Just as I have never said that Bush was a great man or an inspiring leader. He is quite wanting in that role. But I think that you and many others are being blinded by oil and Bush. I am not trying to pick on you here. But I find this attitude in general about being so aghast at the resumption of the gulf war a double standard since the UN was more than willing to accept Saddam's blatant non compliance and thinly veiled lies. No one will talk about that. But everyone is more than willing to critique the US on their actions. But God forbid someone bring up what the UN did or did not do. Why is the international community trying so hard to hide their failures in the UN and trying to place the blame 100% on us? I am not saying we are blameless. I say that because I am sure someone here would take it the wrong way as is the case with the larger issue here. Know what I mean? I hope so.

Don't you find it a bit hypocritical to be screaming stop the war etc. But then not have a better solution? Lets say you managed to stop the war. Then what? What would the international community do? I doubt they have thought that far ahead. Something does need to be done. If not war then what?

Anyhow this is OT for the thread. The thread for this discussion was locked by Dibrom for a reason. And I respect that. So as I can see where this is going I am gonna cut it off here. I will say however that I found the last post of yours amusing. Kind of a one step forewards two steps back kinda thing. I shows as many problems with international perception as it does with US action.

If you want to talk about how ignorant the boycotts on both sides are that's fine. I am all for that because they all are. But lets keep it to that and respect the mods wishes.

That's strange?!? I consider myself as a German customer who is free to buy products of every country, no matter what kind of stuff it is. btw. I do not pay special attention to the country of origin of any product. All these stupid boycott summons have totally passed me by. Neither my family nor my friends have heard of these.

CONCLUSION:

As these boycott measures do NOT reach the *entire* German society, they cannot be taken as a severe threat to the US-American economy.


BUT:

A neighbour of mine recently was quitted his three month old project by an US firm, which quitted all economical connections to Germany or German firms. This does not make a good impression of *some* Americans. But these some are those who control the economy. I hope brave and honest American will punish Bush for this sh** by not reelecting (if I can talk or "re-") him.

someone has a nickname: fragtal

According to my brave Diercke Atlas, in 1985 (yeah, it's a bit old, but I cannot have changed so much concerning US Americans, since then. The dissolvement of Germanys division in 1989 might just cause some more German tourists in France or other countries) there had been 15 Millions tourists from Germany and the Benelux states in France. The number of American tourists is about 1,5 Million. That's a relation of 10:1. Let the facts speek for themselves.

I'm sad that you think so about Europeans. Just because they are against the US government this doesn't mean they are against the people behind it. AFAIK there are 50% (!, the bush-propaganda doesn't reach everyone (I already wrote something about censorship in this thread)) of the US Americans against this war. Well, what I'd like to express is, that I think that it is wrong to think that anger would be focussed on American citizens in Europe. Even though I can't denie the worldwide omnipresent minority of stupid men or women who easily can ruin the reputation of a country. As I alread wrote, it is a *minority*.