Britain Furious at "Extraordinary" French Statement

This is EXACTLY what the Germans admitted to the day Powell came and presented. I don't have a direct quote, by the German ambassador said something like, "it didn't matter what Powell presented today...it would not change our minds." Who's not cooperating? What kind of approach is that? No matter what the evidence or what the alternative, we won't consider it?

I considered someone would post that response...but I really don't think that's the case. The UK and the US both have floated plans...the US has held off...it's not like we're attacking as we speak.

You don't get it. The French and the great majority of the world want inspections to continue, even for months if needed to resolve the issue.

British or US proposals that say: "ok we'll give you two days or two weeks to completely disarm and then if not we have automatic approval to start a war without any other votes" are dishonest proposals. That is what they are essentially proposing.

The British and US proposals are the type of offer you make when you know the other side is not serious about preventing war, but they just want a little "offer" to show that they didn't cave in easily. The French, Germans, the Russians, the Chinese and others are just as serious as the US. The US wants to resolve this through a war; they don't

 

On France and "Freedom Fries", first from Jane's:

http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/fr/fr030313_1_n.shtml
The French attitude has also split Europe, with Britain, Spain, Italy and the former communist countries in eastern Europe now deeply suspicious of Paris. The French leader always knew that, ultimately, he could not stop the USA from resorting to war. So why is he persisting?

Mainly because he believes that all the disadvantages pale into insignificance in comparison with the ultimate prize: a France that leads all those willing to stand up to US 'arrogance' around the world, a France that articulates Europe's distinct opinion and enjoys a good reputation in the Arab world as well.

Is the new French global policy impregnable? There are two snags. First, the USA is now determined to foil Chirac's policies; President George W Bush will do everything possible to make sure that France ultimately emerges the loser; until now the French were considered in Washington as just a nuisance, but now they are widely regarded as a real menace.

Second, Chirac assumes that Germany is now wedded to an anti-US policy. Yet Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's coalition government in Berlin is teetering, and may well collapse in a year or so.

Glenn Reynolds has a good take on the "freedom fries":

Yes, it's stupid. But it's harmless, as opposed to things like trade sanctions that are harmful. And, as I said, I don't think the French appreciate the damage that their government is doing. Something silly, and harmless, that might get their attention isn't all bad. And if people in Congress have figured that out, it isn't even stupid.

I see his point, but think he gives Congress a little too much credit.

Mr. Clutch: There's a pretty significant movement in the White House to expand the permanent Security Council to include Japan & India.

"France Rejects British-Proposed Iraq Plan"--headline, Associated Press http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...&u=/ap/20030313/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_diplomacy , March 13

"Iraq Rejects British Compromise Proposal"--headline, Associated Press http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...cid=535&u=/ap/20030313/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_un , March 13

 

The US has stated from day one that if nations do not vote their way then they're irrelevant and the US will act militarily anyway. The French has countered saying they won't vote for any resolution that triggers an automatic use of force. If the French are irrelevant then what do we care? What does the Bush administration care? Bush promotes disarmament through regime change which is not even in 1441. The Bush administration expressly wants to go beyond even what 1441 actually says which is disarmament. You're being dishonest in your presentation here.

 

RM95: from what I understand, there wasn't a bunch of time or $$$ wasted in the whole freedom fries incident, about 10 minutes of time by 2 congressmen, it wasn't debated on the floor or anything, which of course would have been ridiculous to the nth degree.

 

Well this article again seems to ignore the fact that the French gave us the most military air support of all our allies in Afghanistan, so it's not just the French against the U.S. in all things. Also the info from French intelligence on the war on terror is more valuable than their support with Iraq, so it would be stupid of Bush to try and alienate them.

I've already said that it's stupid for anyone to not consider all the facts. But it's also stupid to get mad because someone doesn't agree with you and throw out the baby with the bathwater. If this article is true, Bush's foreign diplomatic skills are worse than previously estimated.

 

I know it's been said before, but France has a significant Muslim population. This is not a trivial factor.

But I'll say I disagree absolutely with any absolutist stand.

...

 

Am I having a deja vu experience, or did you write this exact same post in another thread.

 

Iraq has had twelve years to completely disarm...........is it possible that they aren't interested in doing it?

In regards to France, Germany etc wanting inspections to continue (<i>even for months if needed to resolve the issue</i>) ..............then they should offer to muster up a division each to rotate out with the US & British forces that are <b>making the current inspections possible</b>. Ah......but they are against having their forces take that step of being in a combat position. OK..........then they should offer to help defray the costs of moving the US and British forces to the ME and paid for the chartered shipping that moved military equipment to the ME. I have yet to read of that offer being made.

 

Another thread? I thought it was this same one, but now that I look I think your right. It wasn't the exact same, but this thread gave me a clear example with which to make my contrary point.

Sorry for the redundancy pg, I always assume nobody's reading anything I write anyway.

 

I would be more than happy to let the inspections go on forever if the French, Germans, Russians or Chinese would comply with this. Talk is cheap, do something for once.

 

Buck, even so, it reeks of pettiness, and whether or not we think other countries are being petty, our leader's should be above that.

 

In regards to France, Germany etc wanting inspections to continue (even for months if needed to resolve the issue) ..............then they should offer to muster up a division each to rotate out with the US & British forces that are making the current inspections possible. Ah......but they are against having their forces take that step of being in a combat position. OK..........then they should offer to help defray the costs of moving the US and British forces to the ME and paid for the chartered shipping that moved military equipment to the ME. I have yet to read of that offer being made.

Oh, so this is about the cost of maintaining the soldiers over there, so let's start a war that will almost certainly will kill several thousand Iraqis and a few hundred Americans (and perhaps have this figure increased 10 fold) just because it will cost some extra money to see if it could be avoided..

Tell that to the relatives of the dead US soldiers.

For tactical reasons it might have been wise for the Germans and French to offer that. Don't tell me you actually believe that Bush would immediately say: " sure thing, let's put it off for a few months."

 

What?

 

Thanks...just making sure.

 

You are missing the point that the current limited inspections that France, Germany etc favor are only possible because of the sizable military forces in adjoining countries. France, Germany etc also avoid that point. The thread about Will's article also made a similar point and your response there was along the same lines as your response in this thread.

<a HREF="http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53433">The French- German Iraq con game</a>

 

How many does saddam torture and kill each year?

 

The problem Glynch is that WE are footing the bill right now for all those troops in the region, which is WHY Saddam is even partially cooperating.

I would agree to this if the French and Germans ponied up sent some troops and helped split the cost.

But they aren't...they are AGAIN, going to let the good ole USA & Britain, and Australia go it alone...just like Kosavo and numerous other times.

DD