USA and France to reconcile?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Yeah, the French admin is pretty stubborn.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Patroklos
The answer is we airdropped them of course, unfortunetly they all exploded on top of French equipment upon delivery. Damn shame.

Fortunately, the Iraqis will still pay for your delivery. Such nice people

[Patroklos]

I already said I have no prolem with France selling weapons to Iraq befor 91, nor to Argentina for the Falklands war. What I do have a problem with is their breaking the sactions they themselves so vehemently supported and now hold against us. Even if you do not include weapons, which is false, it is wide spread knowledge they abused the oil for food program which gave Saddam money to buy weapons from others. And everyone knows this, and it has been noted in numerous threads. I am not going to bother digging up yet another website source.

-Pat

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Patroklos
What I do have a problem with is their breaking the sactions they themselves so vehemently supported

We were opposed ot the sanctions from the mid 90's on. The US prevented the sanctions to be lifted at the UN, despite French and Russian insistance.
Only when the war was looming did we 'support' the sanction regime, because it simply meant no war, and it simply meant our client would stay in place.

[Patroklos]

Man,

People respond here faster than CFC.

You are absolutely right, you wanted to drop the sanctions and do NOTHING about Saddam. Awesome plan, we will trade a set of sactions that accomplishes little for a plan that accomplishes nothing, except aggrandize European buisness interests of course. Awesome. That is not exactly a redeeming arguement for people involved in that initiaitve. You weren't even pretending to be unselfish.

Basically, like Bush and freinds can't get around bieng wrong about WMD, niether can the Europeans get around their true motives concernign Iraq.

-Pat

[Spiffor]

That's the whole point
Every nation in this charade acted in its own interest. I never pretended my country's stance was any more moral than yours. Even though both countries tried to get the moral high ground in their PRopaganda.

Why should I pretend my country was acting morally? I wasn't aware I was supposed to defend everything (especially wrong things) my country does when speaking with strangers

[Patroklos]

Alright, I misunderstood then and apologize for ranting. So, out of curiosity, what do you think France should do know, as I know few Frenchmen to ask?

-Pat

[Spiffor]

From a moral point of view, I think that France should stop flirting with Putin that blatantly, and that it should find a common cause with its European partners.
From the EU's experience, I say we should actively participate in the reconstruction and the peacekeeping, although I think we should wait from the storm to abate a bit. It's stil the American mess, and I don't exactly want to have my people died in this guerilla my country refused to trigger.
We're doing a good peacekeeping job in Kosovo and Afghanistan, and we have similar experience in many places in the world. If the US gives us enough bounty to cover our expenses, I'm all for helping in Iraq too.

From a realpolitical point of view, I think that Chirac's stance was wrong from the beginning, and that he should have opposed war without trying to create a great "peaceful" coalition (i.e. without any effect).
It was the right thing not to enter the war, but it was a wrong idea to try create a New Block (Chirac's wet dream of instituting Europe as one of the poles of the future multipolar world). It was way too early, and it only ended up dividing Europe instead of uniting it.
Now, I would negociate with the US, go to Iraq if there is loot for French companies, and bid my time until some future time where the US gives the world the finger, to try building the New Pole in a timely manner.
Also, I would accept legitimating the war in Iraq at the UN, to get the UN heavily involved in the reconstruction (to strip power from the Americans to our profit, obviously)
But above all, I wouldn't take any significant action before June, when the electoral season has stopped. Chirac had 80% support during the Iraq diplomacy crisis for a reason, and I wouldn't imagine he'll waste it before difficult elections.

[Patroklos]

(to strip power from the Americans to our profit, obviously) heh.

So is this a common French view? The whole thing I mean.

-Pat

[Spiffor]

I don't know.

The huge majority of Frenchmen were opposed to war and supported Chirac on this one. Pro-war people were a rare find in France during the buildup.
Before Saddam's capture, the French media (I can't tell for the French population) covered it greatly, and showed quite a relief we didn't go there. I'm sure most people were thinking "I told you so".
However, now that Saddam is captured, it is very possible there is more goodwill toward helping especially once things will have calmed down.
Now, you must know not so many Frenchmen have been interested in this war as much as I did. Many people did not think in a realpolitical manner, and went with the moral explanation that war is bad, unilateralism is bad, UN is good and legitimate etc. As for today, the realpolitical issues underlying the Iraq war aren't covered by the TV as well. And there is no political opposition to war to publicly confront Chirac with his selfishness.

I think most French people will want us to intervene only once the UN gets the lead of the reconstruction and peacekeeping. Because the belief of the UN as a good and legit organization is very widespread in France. OTOH, the US' cavalier attitude displeased us strongly.

I think only the diplomats and cynicals will want us to go under the UN's banner to get oil contracts for our companies. In the TV, Chirac will explain (with his faked bleeding heart) we do this to help the Iraqi people.

[Patroklos]

Well hell, they need to put you as a talking head on TV here in the States. If we give the UN control of the situation, will they not halt all self serving buisness deals period (including th US) or at least try. What about the debt, as far as I know the UN is all about the West writing off the debts to poorer nations. Isn't the debt thing something most French and Germans are opposed too?

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Spiffor
. The worst thing that can happen to the countries whose deals with Saddam will be unveiled (France, Germany and Russia... . What the evidence will bring is a more precise account of what has been traded. Not much of a value for a diplomat. The only real threat is to make it public, and to give a PR hit.

Such a PR hip would likely seriously undercut much of world opinion that any principals other than corruption and coverup movtivate said nations opposition to the war, and would seriously under credibility and diplomatic influence of said country for years. I think this could be a solid barganing chip, ASSUMING substantial evidence is in hand. The last thing the French of German goverments want now is addition to or broadenning of international comtempt. A blow to their diplomatic prestige durring the resumption of the (now stalled) European Union talks would be a terrible hits for them.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Well hell, they need to put you as a talking head on TV here in the States.

Unfortunately, people like Spiffor are way too clever, reasonable, and free-thinking to ever pass on an American public channel (and most TV channels everywhere). Once you realise this, you'll question how dangerous can free-market media be to democracy and public interest.

It's safe to assume that more people than you would believe are like him; unfortunately, they are confined to universities. Even now, though I don't remember the exact name, some crazy right-wingers have created an "university watch" program to make sure these people can't get heard. Scary.

[Patroklos]

Heh, I don't know what University you went too, but they are anything but reasonable. Especially civilian colleges, and thank God I avoided that minefield.

-Pat

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Heh, I don't know what University you went too, but they are anything but reasonable. Especially civilian colleges, and thank God I avoided that minefield.

-Pat

What did you study exactly?
I mean, History departments are full of well... cynical leftist historians.

Art departments? we won't even talk about them.

Ok, maybe they're not reasonable, but I guess they buy into less propaganda than the common man...

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Unfortunately, people like Spiffor are way too clever, reasonable, and free-thinking to ever pass on an American public channel (and most TV channels everywhere). Once you realise this, you'll question how dangerous can free-market media be to democracy and public interest.

It's safe to assume that more people than you would believe are like him; unfortunately, they are confined to universities. Even now, though I don't remember the exact name, some crazy right-wingers have created an "university watch" program to make sure these people can't get heard. Scary.

From what I read about it, it looked to me like those professors weren't teaching - they were preaching. In that case, they should be fired, because they aren't doing their job.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by skywalker
From what I read about it, it looked to me like those professors weren't teaching - they were preaching. In that case, they should be fired, because they aren't doing their job.

About 80% of uni teachers in soft sciences should be fired then. And you'd be surprised to see how many preaching ideologues on your side would be on the dole.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Heh, I don't know what University you went too, but they are anything but reasonable. Especially civilian colleges, and thank God I avoided that minefield.

-Pat

Oh yes, great institution of learning are so unreasonable. I guess only Martial schools can teach the truth...

[GePap]

Professors aren't teachers..slight difference in mission. Professors have every right to air their opinions- I am sure Aristotle once or twice mentioned his opinions when tutoring Alexander.

It is for the student to have the intelliegence and integroity to take the facts they do learn and make opinions. If a student in a sheep, there is nothing to be done for them.

[Patroklos]

Heh, martial schools normally have better things to do than practice mental masterbation, which is all civilian profesors seem to do period. We simply have to stay practcal, becasue besides all the political theory, which we do get as well, we are already training for an actual job.

-Pat

[GePap]

So do schools for mechanics and the DeVry institute.

"metal masturbation" gave you all those cool little toys to play with. If it where only up to "practical education" we would still be sending out the cavalry in horses.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor
But above all, I wouldn't take any significant action before June, when the electoral season has stopped. Chirac had 80% support during the Iraq diplomacy crisis for a reason, and I wouldn't imagine he'll waste it before difficult elections.

June is too late, if things go at all well for the coalition - by then the political process should be fairly far along, and there will be less chance to influence the situation in Iraq, if that is what France really wants to do. If they just to want to help Bush get reelected in exchange for dinars, thats another thing.

[germanos]

Originally posted by MrFun
I'm surprised other Americans have not demolished the Statue of Liberty yet.

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
The ones most likely to do that are the very ones least likely to know who built it.

France did

[Q Classic]

So do schools for mechanics and the DeVry institute.

"metal masturbation" gave you all those cool little toys to play with. If it where only up to "practical education" we would still be sending out the cavalry in horses.

spoken like a true grad.

[Patroklos]

heh,

It is our demand that gives you all jobs, basically all the techno engo geeks, as educated as they are, are still service jobs. Glorified house handimen. And most of the inovators (ie not the myriad of "doctorates" crunching numbers behind a cubical) in those fields either had their tuition or grants paid for by the military or are ex-military themselves. You don't think we need that many of you to design flat screen TVs do you?

whoa, way OT, so rebut if you want but I will stop trolling now

-Pat

[GePap]

The military-industrial complex is only 60 years old. back in 1920 there were no such things as "military reseach" grants worht that much.

The very fact you guys got into internal combustion driven vehicles is the result of the mental masturbators. That newton fellow..he had no military grant..neither did that Nobel fellow, or that Einstein fellow, or that heisenberg nut, or Mr. Edison or the list is endless.

The very existance of a military-industrial complex is the result of the type of thinking professors make possible.

So there

[Patroklos]

Professors back then are hardly the abominations that now inhabit thier holes in the universities of today.

-Pat

[DAVOUT]

Well said Gepap. We are the ungrateful and undeserving heirs of giants.

[GePap]

Are you kidding me? Do you think professors back in 1914 were any less adamant? I can just imagine all those profs. in germany, and France, and the UK, and Russia giving their totally impartial, measured opinions..
if anything, professors are LESS opinionated cause education is becoming more a consumer good every day.

[Bereta_Eder]

I think this will reach the point of going if there's enough loot unfortunately...


Previously in order to get others to share the loot, there were pressures to get the UN involved. This way contracts and aid would be adminitered from there.