France stands up to U.S. warmongering

[REDWAVE]

The French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, accused the U.S. today of "impatience" to go to war with Iraq, and added: "We believe that nothing today justifies envisaging military action." Ah, the subtleties of diplomatic language. Bush is not just "impatient," he's hell-bent on aggression against Iraq, and the U.S. is doing far more than simply "envisaging" military action, it's furiously preparing for war, shipping out troops and supplies right and left. The French foreign minister and everyone else know that, but in diplomatic circles you generally have to speak somewhat euphemistically and avoid blunt statements of the truth. Germany and China, two other key countries, also expressed opposition to the U.S. war drive. They want to give the UN inspectors at least two more months to do their work.

By then, it will be late March, and too late to invade Iraq until next year. It will be too hot then in the Middle East for U.S. soldiers to wear those bulky, heavy chemical suits, and without them they would face an unacceptably high level of casualties.

Of course, France can't stop the U.S. from going to war, but that's not the point. Polls indicate most Americans would support a UN sanctioned war, but not a unilateral attack. Thus, getting the support of other Security Council nations (especially the permanent ones like France and China with veto power) is essential political cover to get enough support for the war at home. That is especially critical, since the truly massive anti-war demonstrations last Saturday were too big even for the mainstream media to ignore.

 

[Problem Child]

<insert standard French surrender joke here>

 

[Spinaroonie]

They'll surrender soon.

Edit: dammit.

 

[RastaPope]

France folds faster than Superman on laundry day, who are you trying to fool?

 

[teddybear4play]

The French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, accused the U.S. today of "impatience" to go to war with Iraq, and added: "We believe that nothing today justifies envisaging military action." Ah, the subtleties of diplomatic language. Bush is not just "impatient," he's hell-bent on aggression against Iraq, and the U.S. is doing far more than simply "envisaging" military action, it's furiously preparing for war, shipping out troops and supplies right and left. The French foreign minister and everyone else know that, but in diplomatic circles you generally have to speak somewhat euphemistically and avoid blunt statements of the truth. Germany and China, two other key countries, also expressed opposition to the U.S. war drive. They want to give the UN inspectors at least two more months to do their work.

By then, it will be late March, and too late to invade Iraq until next year. It will be too hot then in the Middle East for U.S. soldiers to wear those bulky, heavy chemical suits, and without them they would face an unacceptably high level of casualties.

Of course, France can't stop the U.S. from going to war, but that's not the point. Polls indicate most Americans would support a UN sanctioned war, but not a unilateral attack. Thus, getting the support of other Security Council nations (especially the permanent ones like France and China with veto power) is essential political cover to get enough support for the war at home. That is especially critical, since the truly massive anti-war demonstrations last Saturday were too big even for the mainstream media to ignore.

Wow, the French foriegn minister is against us.

Guess we better pack our shit and go home.

TB4p

 

[Sillyman]

Look, no one is going to make the U.S. stop this okay? France doesn't matter. All of Europe doesn't matter. ISRAEL has been telling us we have better things to waste our time with, and we won't even listen to THEM (They are really more concerned about Iran right now.) Unless some horrible plague attacks Washington, we are going to war, and there isn't anything anyone can say about it.

 

[Problem Child]

Look, no one is going to make the U.S. stop this okay? France doesn't matter. All of Europe doesn't matter. ISRAEL has been telling us we have better things to waste our time with, and we won't even listen to THEM (They are really more concerned about Iran right now.) Unless some horrible plague attacks Washington, we are going to war, and there isn't anything anyone can say about it.

This is unfortunately a fairly accurate analysis.

 

[HeavyStick]

The plague may speed things up. Even GW knows that you can't shoot an Anthranx spore.

 

[Lost Cause]

They didn't complain in 1914, or 1944...

For sale: One (1) French Army combat rifle, never fired, dropped only once.



*Except for the Foreign Legion, they're some great soldiers.

 

[Sillyman]

The plague may speed things up. Even GW knows that you can't shoot an Anthranx spore.

Yeah. You just need a really, really low yield nuke.

 

[HeavyStick]

*pssst* sillyman, change "nuke" to how GW says it.

 

[Sillyman]

*pssst* sillyman, change "nuke" to how GW says it.

I can't. I scream like a little girl every time I see him and have to change the channel.

 

[Bob_Bytchin]

I would say that the fact that most of Ft Hood is gearing up for deployment in the next couple of weeks is a sign that war is around the corner.

 

[Bob_Bytchin]

*pssst* sillyman, change "nuke" to how GW says it.

You mean Newkyuler?

 

[modest mouse]

I fully support a war on France.

 

[HeavyStick]

What's up Bob?



I agree modest, by noon they'll surrender and serve us lunch.

 

[Sillyman]

Plus dirty hippies like me will be able to score with the unwashed French chicks. It's a win-win situation.

 

[Bob_Bytchin]

What's up Bob?



I agree modest, by noon they'll surrender and serve us lunch.

Not much Heavy.

Last I heard, the color white was banned in France. Of course, nothing white would last long in France anyways. So if we attacked them, how could they surrender?

 

[Eve32]

I'm sorry, I must have read this wrong. I thought it had "France" and "stands up" in the same sentence.

That can't happen in this universe. Opposites negate eachother.

 

[curious2c]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


Redwave you are quite the comedian. Funny stuff. France...stands up to the US...HAHAHAHAHAHA


What are you going to come up with next?


Saddam is a great guy? HAHAHAHA


you really crack me up man.

 

[Coolville]

Saying the French are "standing up" to America is misleading. In this diplomatic whirlwind there is just diplomacy at the moment.

But since France is speaking for 370 million EU citizens and, in effect, voicing the opinions of the rest of the world, their words weigh much more.

France is enjoying their "middle-man" position on the Security Council and if Bush pushes for war despite the fact that no evidence has been found, France will - in the words of Jacques Chirac - not hesitate to slap their veto down.

With Russia and China on one side and the US and UK on the other on the Council, one commentator said that France is between a rock and a soft place.

Now that Rumsfeld is back-pedalling like a madman the past few days, war seems less likely than it did just a couple of weeks ago.

The global solidarity displayed on last Saturday's peace protests were nothing compared to the big peace marches on Feb. 14.

 

[ullr]

[SNIP!]
...the truly massive anti-war demonstrations last Saturday were too big even for the mainstream media to ignore.

SO--what are we smoking?--or do we believe one's own propaganda?

Blogosopher Glenn Reynolds reports:
"DAVID HOGBERG points out that A.N.S.W.E.R. is now claiming a half million protesters in Washington yesterday. A German reader emails that the German media are uncritically repeating this claim.

"Do these photos [see site] show a protest with a half-million people?

"The photo on A.N.S.W.E.R.'s website is suspiciously tight in its framing. (In fact, all their crowd shots are). Note the absence of a panoramic view, and note that reports from the scene yesterday noted that a block from the mall you couldn't tell anything was going on."
http://www.instapundit.com/

On-site veterans say Washington, D.C. had somewhat more turnout than last October. But the turnout in Euorpe really sucked!

--Orson
P.S. I would like the realist reports to be quite the opposite. BUT first it would help if people advanced good and reality-driven arguments instead of "Bush=Hitler" or "Karl Rove=Goebbels." Unfortunately, REDWAVE's lunacy won't make the non-politically active types active--the opposite is more likely.

 

[ullr]

WHO in hell...

...can get all gooey about "France stands up to U.S. warmongering"--I mean what Western European nation was the Soviet Union's best friend throughout the COLD WAR?
(And we're supposed to take you!--REDWAVE--seriously???)

--Orson

 

[Don K Dyck]

Saying the French are "standing up" to America is misleading. In this diplomatic whirlwind there is just diplomacy at the moment.

But since France is speaking for 370 million EU citizens and, in effect, voicing the opinions of the rest of the world, their words weigh much more.

France is enjoying their "middle-man" position on the Security Council and if Bush pushes for war despite the fact that no evidence has been found, France will - in the words of Jacques Chirac - not hesitate to slap their veto down.

With Russia and China on one side and the US and UK on the other on the Council, one commentator said that France is between a rock and a soft place.

Now that Rumsfeld is back-pedalling like a madman the past few days, war seems less likely than it did just a couple of weeks ago.

The global solidarity displayed on last Saturday's peace protests were nothing compared to the big peace marches on Feb. 14.

Hi Redwave, Coolville . . . it seems that both the Russians and french have oil concessions in Iraq. Several weeks ago the Dubyah Shrub Administration noted that after the U$-Iraq War for Control of Undeveloped Middle East OIl Reserves, the U$ puppet government would allow the French and Russians to buy back the concessions they have already extracted from Saddam Hussein.

However, the most recent squawking by Rumsveld seems to have conceded that the French and Russian concessions will be allowed to stand by the U$ puppet government . . . an unsubtle attempt by the Dubyah Shrub Administration to buy the necessary votes on the UN Security Council to give moral authority to the U$.

Then Rumsveld comes out and says, "Resign Saddam Hussein, and we will put you in exile" . . . somewhere that owes the U$ a favour . . . like Egypt which had its foreign debt forgiven in 1991, costing U$ taxpayers about $US6 billion . . . And just as a sweetener we will give you immunity for Crimes Against Humanity committed by your regime against the Kurds and Marsh Arabs when you were doing field trials product testing anti-personnel chemical mists for U$ chemical corporations . . . and other "nice" toys like anthrax and botulism . . . I thikn at law that is called accessory after the fact, although the CIA was very active supporting Saddam HUssein before 1991 according to their report to the Reigle Senate Inquiry into the Export Administration Act in 1994 . . .

Nope, the U$ position is unsustainable on any reasonable anakysis of the situation . . . I think the best advice is buy shares in bodybag manufacturers, because like the Vietnam "victory", this second U$-Iraq War will cost a lot of innocent American college student lives to produce profits for the executives of oil corporations . . .

 

[bluespoke]

I think the best advice is buy shares in bodybag manufacturers, because like the Vietnam "victory", this second U$-Iraq War will cost a lot of innocent American college student lives to produce profits for the executives of oil corporations . . .

Why do you think this war will cost more lives than the last one?

You honestly think the Iraqis are going to stand and fight for their despot?

I suspect the Iraqi Army will crumble the same way they did in Desert Storm, except that there are less of them this time.