Chirac, Schroeder tell Kerry to F*** Off

[Tigerman]

@Rascal

[quote]Bremer’s own interpretation of his own comments differs from the media reports… Bremer claimed the coalition was shorthanded when it arrived in Baghdad. He subsequently stated the following:

I don’t see how the media got it wrong or how I (or anyone else) has been duped when it’s an actual quote? Neither I nor the media related the quote I posted to the situation [n]now[/b] (see further below, too).
Thus, assuming he has been quoted correctly, he does admit that a) there was “horrid” looting and that he claims the troops at the time (when he arrived in Baghdad in May 2003) were not sufficient.

Bremer has stated now that all references in recent speeches to troop levels related to the situation when he arrived in Baghdad in May 2003 – and when he believed we needed either more coalition troops or Iraqi security forces to address the looting.

That he was referring to his arrival in May 2003 should be obvious from the first paragraph in the quote I posted where Bremer states the same.

The reason why I posted the above was to show that looting did indeed happen, something fred constantly denies or at least downplays by citing the inaccuracy of the reports about the museum only while ignoring all the other cases of looting.[/quote]

Rascal is wrong again.

The fact is there was looting. But, the press reported primarily on the looting of the museum (and that is what you were talking about also). However, it is also a fact that the reports re the looting of the museum were wildly overexaggerated… although the press reports didn’t make nearly as much noise in voicing these corrections.

Whatever, Rascal… nobody knows what point you are trying to make.

And anyway, who cares?

[Tigerman]

[quote=“Tigerman”]How convenient.

Tell us then, what excuse do Germany and France have for sitting on their collective thumbs while the messes were created in Rwanda and in the Sudan? Your analogy doesn’t apply in those places, yet, your behavior is the same.[/quote]

[quote=“bob_honest”]just let me add this one, as France is always accused of cooperation with Iraq:

“The U.S., having decided that an Iranian victory would not serve its interests, began supporting Iraq: measures already underway to upgrade U.S.-Iraq relations were accelerated, high-level officials exchanged visits, and in February 1982 the State Department removed Iraq from its list of states supporting international terrorism.”

from
gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

showing the Saddam / Rumsfeld picture:

Shaking Hands: Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.

Regarding Sudan, all western governements share the same opinion.
France had send troups several times to african countries to stop slaughtering.[/quote]

Blah blah blah.

Please just answer MY question (not the issue you are throwing in for whatever reason). Don’t be like Rascal and go off on unrelated tangents.

All western governments do NOT share the same opinion re Sudan. France opposed sanctions against Sudan.

[fred_smith]

Oh yes, the famous photo of Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam during a year when we were trying desperately to influence him and also ensure that Iran did not sweep through Iraq and down the Saudi peninsula. What were we thinking? Perhaps, the same thing as we did when Roosevelt and Churchill and others met with Stalin? That desperate measures were required for desperate circumstances. Yawn.

NO. You are wrong. The US tried to get Germany and France and others NOT to sell such equipment to Iraq just as we are trying to prevent the Russians from selling nuclear equipment to Iran and once again trying to stop France and Germany from selling to China. Detect the pattern here? When it comes to consulting allies, it is a one-way street. Whenever France and Germany want to do something, they are daring and being independent. When the US wants to do something despite desperate efforts to get corrupt and shameless allies governments on board, we are breaking international law, setting dangerous precedents and disrupting the whole international system. Remember all the hue and cry over our ending the antiballistic missile treaty with Russia? Well the Russians agreed and was there any negative fall out? No. So what the hell is your point? Want to see how many times the French met with Saddam. I am sure that we could find hundreds and thousands of photos there. What do you think?

[bob_honest]

… I think I rather try to convince the Falun Gong lady in the other threat

You made your picture of France and Germany as treacherous opposing america’s heroic war, and I will not be able to convice you.

So I let people like you have their business in Iraq and go back to my french wine and german sausage in the fridge …

and gulp it down with a tasty american Coke … [to let my posts here end somehow friendly]

[bob_honest]

… I think I rather try to convince the Falun Gong lady in the other threat

You made your picture of France and Germany as treacherous opposing america’s heroic war, and I will not be able to convice you.

So I let people like you have their business in Iraq and go back to my french wine and german sausage in the fridge …

and gulp it down with a tasty american Coke … [to let my posts here end somehow friendly]

EDIT:… I do not know why it is a double post now … sorry

[Tigerman]

@bob_honest

… You made your picture of France and Germany as treacherous opposing America’s heroic war, and I will not be able to convice you.

Not without facts and a good argument.

[bob_honest]

… well one last thing. I googled on the subject, but did not find a single article that France is opposing Sudan-sanctions. It is not true what you say.

Around 19th Sept., UN threatened Sudan with Oil sanctions, only the following countries opposed this: China, Russia, Pakistan, Algeria. (source: german magazine spiegel.de, news of 19th september)

Germany even took part in the writing of the sanction threat.

France was not mentioned, but it means France said “yes” to it and usually Germany and France are doing such important things together.

I agree the slaugthering in Sudan must be put to an end. Even with weapons.

[fred_smith]

While I do not personally approve of Germany’s course of action, I believe that its leaders (misguided by leftist claptrap philosophy) were genuinely motivated by their principles.

I do, however, believe that both France and Russia were no so high-minded and that corruption and betrayal were the name of the game. We are not dealing with high-minded moral actors here. I think that when the UN corruption is revealed, it will also show an organization that was hopelessly inept and unable to deal with such a matter in a fair and just matter because the top level officers had been coopted by Saddam’s money machine. History will prove this. We already know what the French are capable of and I as an American now consider that nation’s government an enemy.

Naturally, I will not be so extreme as to quit visiting the country, stop liking the people or refusing to eat or drink French products. But I like other Americans know where the French government stands and it is not on our side nor even neutral. They will pay. That said, I think that the citizens of France would also be much happier and healthier under a more transparent government but that is not for me to side. Chirac was already set to be tried for corruption. He will have his day in court when he steps down and with Balladur out of the way, there is a very good chance the next government of France will not protect him. Good riddance. Just desserts.

[Tigerman]

@bob_honest

… well one last thing. I googled on the subject, but did not find a single article that France is opposing Sudan-sanctions. It is not true what you say.

France opposes UN Sudan sanctions

And why in the world does Kerry put his faith in action by the UN:

The time has not yet come to impose international sanctions against the government of Sudan, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s envoy Jan Pronk said during a visit to Oslo (6 September 2004)

[bob_honest]

@Tigerman

[quote=“bob_honest”]… well one last thing. I googled on the subject, but did not find a single article that France is opposing Sudan-sanctions. It is not true what you say.

France opposes UN Sudan sanctions
[/url][/quote]

… I found in german news that on 19th of Sept France supported a warning of UN against Sudan to make an Oil ban against them (sanctions).

Your BBC news is quoting the “junior foreign minister” opposing sanctions on the radio. Until now, this does not seem to be offical french policy. I certainly oppose this junior foreign minister. Also the german governement does not share his opinion. Sanctions are necessary.
France even got their troups in Tschad (german name for this country, sorry) ready to bring in help I found somewhere else.

Okay, if France changes their opinion you made your point.

Sanctions are necessary because Sudan has slavery and now is slaughtering the african / christian south. This must be stopped.

[Tigerman]

@bob_honest

[quote=“Tigerman”][quote=“bob_honest”]… well one last thing. I googled on the subject, but did not find a single article that France is opposing Sudan-sanctions. It is not true what you say.

France opposes UN Sudan sanctions
[/url][/quote]

… I found in German news that on 19th of Sept France supported a warning of UN against Sudan to make an Oil ban against them (sanctions).[/quote]

Only a warning. This is a watered-down version of the original draft resolution pushed by the US.

The European Union and advocacy groups, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have shied away from using the term [genocide]. The European Union said its fact-finding mission in August had not turned up adequate evidence for a declaration of genocide.

Oooh… I bet the bad guys are real scared now. The UN has issued a “warning”…

[almas_john]

I’ve always thought that European males were rather erm … er… metrosexual!!! They need to harden up!!! Soft bastards!!
The only hardcore Euros I’ve met were French foreign legionaires (and most of them were foreigner misfits from Anglo-Saxon Countries).

[bob_honest]

[quote=“almas john”]I’ve always thought that European males were rather erm … er… metrosexual!!! They need to harden up!!! Soft bastards!!
The only hardcore Euros I’ve met were French foreign legionaires (and most of them were foreigner misfits from Anglo-Saxon Countries).[/quote]

Euro sterotype of American: brainless, cultureless, wants to invade any country “whose food he does not like”, hardly able to find their own country on a map.

American stereotype of Europeans: your post

Of course I disagree with both stereotypes

[fred_smith]

Bob Honest:

What do you think of French foreign policy? What do you think of the UN’s track record? Given that the US went back to the UN for the 18th resolution on Iraq even after getting a 17th, how do you feel about France’s remarks that it would not support war under any circumstances? Do you think that Saddam was trying to develop wmds? Do you think that he could have been left alone? After Saddam, his sons or one of them would have most likely taken over. Would this have led to an even worse regime?

[Traveller]

@Tigerman

[quote=“bob_honest”]… You made your picture of France and Germany as treacherous opposing America’s heroic war, and I will not be able to convice you.

Not without facts and a good argument.[/quote]

Even with provable facts and excellent argument, Fred at least, would remain unconvinced by such debate.

[bob_honest]

[quote=“fred smith”]Bob Honest:

What do you think of French foreign policy? What do you think of the UN’s track record? Given that the US went back to the UN for the 18th resolution on Iraq even after getting a 17th, how do you feel about France’s remarks that it would not support war under any circumstances? Do you think that Saddam was trying to develop wmds? Do you think that he could have been left alone? After Saddam, his sons or one of them would have most likely taken over. Would this have led to an even worse regime?[/quote]

okay, first the world is not so simple, blaming everything on France, one of the most civilized country and a western democracy, is too crazy for me. But now your questions:

French foreign policy is now a part of EU foreign policy, which is a bit too much talking and little action for my taste. But Bush policy is too much brainless action and too little thinking for my taste. I like the middle.
France is also doing some EU-independet exterior policy to keep close in touch (and influence) in Africa. This brings out a natural competition with USA, as USA as a super-power does not like others trying to influence part of the world as well…

UN policy is endless talking, as bloody countries like China must agree to everything. But countries should try to get UN cooperation before they start wars to increase civilization on this planet.

Irak war was the wrong war at the wrong time. Bush simply did everything Bin Laden wanted. And now all arabs hate the west. Well, too late now, we are in the middle of a West-MiddleEast war and so now USA should get Europe’s support sooner or later. But I fear a US-president doing everything what Bin Laden provokes him to do is a bit dangerous for the western world.

Yes, Saddam was a dangerous man, he probably developed some weapans of mass destruction but did not cooperate with BinLaden. Attacking Irak lead to a situation of Chaos which brings the danger that Irak may fall to the BinLaden radicals now. Wrong war at wrong time. Until now a big point for BinLaden not for the West.

But I am glad the bastard is gone, but the price may be too high now.

War on Afghanistan was justified (they supported BinLaden), war on Sudan would be justified also.

I am usally in the middle of opinions, so I am not UN or French ambassador.

[fred_smith]

Bob Honest:

Fair enough. I disagree but you are certainly entitled to your opinions. I do believe that the tough US action against Saddam resulted in Libya and Syria and Sudan sitting up and taking notice. That is a benefit. We are out of Saudi Arabia. That is a benefit. We have freed up two aircraft carriers, that is a benefit (no more enforcing the no fly zones nor fearing an Iraqi invasion of Saudi). Those are benefits.

The Arab World already hated the West or at least those elements that were willing to fight. Worrying about that now is like worrying about German public opinion of America or Britain in 1944. Sorry, when we win this war on terrorism, we will worry about whether our “enemies” dislike us or not. Who cares?

Finally, France deliberately sandbagged the US in the UN to set itself up as an alternative pole. It was a move that ultimately failed but the US will remember this for a long time.

France is now currying favor with China. Does this benefit Europe? The Chinese people? regional stability? It wants to sell arms. Does this benefit the EU? the Chinese people? Regional stability? Yet, it is a direct threat to the US which underpins the entire security of the whole region. When has the US ever sold weapons or engaged in policies that deliberately targeted France or to directly harm France? Name one example.

France once sold Mirage jets and Lafayette frigates to Taiwan. Where is the relationship between Taiwan and France now? Where did the French go? Straight to the enemy to sell more to the highest bidder. These kinds of actions leave a bad taste in people’s mouths. French foreign policy is without principle unless that means enriching top French government officials.

How exactly is the US threatening French interests in Africa? Look at what France has done to Africa. Nary a word about the regimes they have propped up, overthrown at a whim or exploited with corrupt deals. Yet, we as Americans still hear about overthrowing Allende in Chile in 1973 even though there is absolutely no proof that we were involved. France talks about helping Africa, but its agricultural policies do far more to impoverish the region than even its corrupt deals with local thugs which loot the treasuries of these nations.

I like France. I like the French people. I admire the French culture. The French government, however, is corrupt and as such it is the enemy of the United States. Its actions have proved this. We can work together with the French when it is to our mutual advantage but we must always keep our eye on preventing them from exploiting this to hurt the US or our interests. They really are shameless.

That is why while I disagree with German foreign policy in recent years, I put it down to a four-year mistake along the lines of the US election of Jimmy Carter. That idiot shocked Germany and many of our other allies during his administration. These things happen. I can accept Germany’s passive opposition to the Iraq war. I cannot however accept France’s active opposition. That was the act of an enemy.

[Tigerman]

@bob_honest

… You made your picture of France and Germany as treacherous opposing America’s heroic war, and I will not be able to convice you.

@Tigerman

Not without facts and a good argument.

@Traveller

Even with provable facts and excellent argument, Fred at least, would remain unconvinced by such debate.

That, of course, is a moot point.

[Tigerman]

@bob_honest

French foreign policy is now a part of EU foreign policy, which is a bit too much talking and little action for my taste. But Bush policy is too much brainless action and too little thinking for my taste. I like the middle.

The virtues of moderation are wildly exaggerated, IMO.

[bob_honest]

… I just want to add an explanation, because maybe in USA you did not get to know it.

The Bush governement raised a big discussion in Germany and France about our place in the world, as both countries feel now to be something like the leading nations in continental Europe. UK is always much farer from us than the small channel sea in between, as it is closer to US.

The Bush gov. and this leading Wolwowitz group is actually something like a club of neo-conservatives, who have made strange papers in many years ago. But nobody took them very serious. Papers like how USA can be the one and only relevant power in the world, because it is the strongest democracy, God is on their side etc. This paper involves three stages of measures against anyone who can be a real competition in USA’s target to be the only superpower:

a) press (blame them)
b) diplomatic measures / sanctions
c) millitary measures

In France and Germany we strongly noticed, those paper include “all competition” and not only dictatorships like China. As the EU is growing together we were starting to think, also we could be such a target of a) and b) at least. The Wolwowitz papers also include gathering the global resources for USA, so all oil and the lovely african treasures in the earth.

Now, as Bush has put those guys to power, we suddendly thought this may become reality soon. Bush’s way of not talking to EU and just doing millitary measures by himself, raised fear even more. So France tries to get its hand on Africa too, to keep access to natural ressources. And Germany and France moved a bit closer to China in the same level as US moved away from us.
Then the thing about the international court in Den Haag / Netherlands. Because the UN wants to have the ability to bring every nation’s citizen to this court, if they violate human rights, also US-citizens were included. Bush’s reaction was to let his millitary make a plan to rescue american citizens and their allies from this court in Netherland. There is some plan to send american soldiers to Netherland to attack!
This gave us the idea we may be in danger in the future and brought France and Germany closer together and opposing USA quite often. We felt being pushed away.

Acutally I think Europe should unite, so a little kick in the ass was just good for us to grow together faster. But in the end, our friend and partner should be USA, not China of course.
And now, the Bush administration is seeking Europe’s cooperation again, so I think the problem is getting less now.

Okay, a lot of european bla-bla, but maybe it helps to understand some things.