1. Last week at the UN, De Villepin stated that all the progress on inspections was the result of "diplomancy." The gall! Britain's Jack Straw justly rebuked him for neglecting to credit the 200,000 allied soldier presence. 2. Tuesday, a Frenchman explained to FOX NEWS John Gibson why the French were so anti-American--so opposed to the US stance on Iraq. Saddam, he informed the audience (as Gibson seethed), was just another "tinpot dictator." HUH? Genocide against (at least) two peoples (Kurds, Marsh Arabs)--invasions of two countries--attacks on five neighboring nations--repeated attempts at bio-chemical and nuclear weapons--this defines a common tinpot dictator!?! AS IF! ADD your favorite example of the FROGS OF WAR (inain beliefs by the French) below!
I was listening to books-on-tape version of David McCullough's biography of John Adams, and I was struck by the similarities between the current French mess and the XYZ Affair. I can't enumerate them all, but if anybody is a real US history expert, I'd be interested in your take on that.
The only similarity that I see has to do with the demand for bribes. Seems to me that we are now happily paying bribes. To Turkey, Spain, hell, to anyone who will vote with us in the Security Council... $100,000,000,000.00 to fight this war, not counting the bribes.... Wes
Hey Wes, I think you forgot to add another 3 zeros to that total. Don't forget to include the hand outs that are required in order to rebuild Iraq's social and political systems. regards,
And who are allthe contracts going to...? If the media is to beloeved here in Britain, the US has already virtually promised most reconstruction contracts to US firms! Big deal! Lets just hope the war doesn't happen and Bush's UK poodle doesn't follow his master-are they BOTH mad? I didnlt think Balir was....as for the other person...well?!? He was, seemingly, neither good at mathematics, history or diplomacy and who is this guy Rumpole?!? 'telax'
Certainly the US proffered "aid " to Turkey was unseemly. But It wasn't without a solid rationale: the Gulf War sent their economy into recession from which they are still recovering; the US never came through with promised aid thereafter. As for telfax "Lets just hope the war doesn't happen," that hope died when, to the shock and dismay of the French, Iraq would not politely rollover and disarm! (Apparently that's the best guess as to why UNSC res 1441 went down in October--and now the French protest their own doing too much.) That was two or three months ago. I see war as inevitable: the growing "Peace" movement provided too much aid and comfort to Saddam, always seeking division for his opponents, for him to get real and exit without war. Now the diplomatic disarray increases that Little Hitler's survivalist glee. So, the war's a fait accomplis [someone care to assist me with my filmgoer's francais?] This April Fool's Day will be for Saddam. --Orson PS telfax further avers "are they [Bush and Blair] both mad?" Sometimes war is necessary for a just and lasting peace. One of my huge difficulties with the peace movement--most infamously of late, former US President Jimmy Carter's--has been it's failure to explain when a war is ever just!! What is the tipping point? Carter's piece in the NYTimes, for example, would rule out ALL war (in the name of "Just War," which is only to miss the point of Just War theory in the first place!) There is a book of note out on the subject of when peacefull revolution can be achieved, e.g., Bulgaria in the 90s--but Saddam's Iraq is no such instance, unfortunately. Finally, telfax observes "If the media is to beloeved here in Britain, the US has already virtually promised most reconstruction contracts to US firms!" I've only heard of Haliburton (which owns the famed Red Adar oil well fire-fighting outfit)--Cheney's old firm. Others I've not kept track of. NO doubt it will be political, and to some degee heinous. But I suspect--ala the Beeb's by now infamous (at least to my sources, ie, Andrew Sullivan) bias--this is likely overstated in England.
