Looks like France might be backing off the "no war no matter what" position. This is from CNN.com: France's ambassador to the United States, Jean-David Levitte, said Tuesday that his country might re-think its position on war with Iraq if Saddam were to use biological or chemical weapons against coalition forces. "If Saddam Hussein were to use chemical and biological weapons, this would change the situation completely and immediately for the French government," Jean-David Levitte said.
So after Saddam used chem or bio weapons, they might agree to possibly consider participating in a vote to decide whether Saddam may or may not have chemical or biological weapons?
Or maybe they'd provide backup support like they did in the war in Afghanistan (which so many people ignore).
to be relevant. The US has shown the world in plain view that the Security Council could not hinder its actions. After Monday, French opinions don't matter much at all.
It sounds to me like certain countries are realizing that they are the minority and don't want to be left out in the cold. Speaking of this, wasn't Turkey supposed to have an emergeny meeting to see if they would let our troops in?
this is classic....so i thought these guys always really thought that saddam was lying to us...that they knew he really had chemical weapons, but that it just wasn't worth war to take them out. now, this statement implies that they legitimately believed Saddam when he said he didn't have chemical weapons. unbelievable. they see the writing on the wall now...and they want to be part of the effort to rebuild iraq in the aftermath...this is their first effort in that regard, but i'd bet it's not their last.
Little too late to show us that you support the desicion to remove Saddam regime and rebuild. America knows were France stands. It was all about oil ties with Iraq anyway.
Why does it mean that. It could simply mean that they don't believe Saddam was a threat enough to use them for France to vote for a preemptive strike. This is the stance of many, many of the anti-war congressmen and protestors. They don't believe this war is justified in a preemptive strike scenario, chemical weapons or not. What do you think the anti-war stance is?
After Monday, the UN charter is also no longer relevant. The Bush Admin is essentially talking out of both sides of its mouth. "To make the UN Security Council relevant, we must first make the UN charter irrelevant."
wait...it seems to me they're saying that if saddam uses chemical weapons, then we'd know for sure he has them and that would change their position on this whole thing. it seems to me, that presumes that they believe he does NOT have chemical weapons right now, or else there would be no need for a changed mind on the matter. maybe i'm reading that wrong...but that's how it seems to me.
I honestly don't see what the problem is. France didn't think military force was needed at this time. They do feel that Iraq using chem or biological weapons, that would warrant use of military force. It may not be the same stance others believe in, but I don't see it as anything worthy of soliciting the venemous reaction it's gotten from so many.
that is not what the original quote in this thread says, imo. please add more quotes or links to support what your interpretation is. The above quote makes it clear that the French diplomat said "if they use [them]." And that is the most common anti-war stance, that no one thinks Saddam is a threat to use weapons on the US.
RM95 is always posting these French-sympathizing posts. Blah blah air support in Afghanistan, blah blah. Let's paint something nasty on his garage door! Who's with me!
I think France did vote to send the UN inspectors back to Iraq, right? They must have thought there were weapons to disarm.
From the shredder thread: The Problem with UN is that it has NEVER been taken too seriously by dictators of all stripes without the "guns of the American fleet", to borrow from Orwell. It is pretty clear that the UN is incapable of fulfilling its mission after Rwanda and Srebrenica. It is time to fix the UN charter and the Security council. The US didn't make them irrelevant, they were never too relevant in the first place.
I vote for "RM95's a Frog Loving Commie Who Seems Obsessed with Making Homsexual References". Too long?
MadMax, I think it's more France not thinking that Saddam will actually use the weapons, which is pretty silly too, IMO.
