France's Chirac, Bush Speak by Telephone

The Washington Post ^ | 4/15/03 | Associated Press

[freedombrigade]

PARIS - French President Jacques Chirac and President Bush spoke by telephone for the first time in more than two months Tuesday, in a possible sign of warming ties after their bitter dispute over war in Iraq.

[azhenfud]

President Bush attempted to speak with french President Jacques Chirac, but there was nobody home....

[weegee]

Chirac likes to talk on the phone...

Jerry Rigged: A Jerry Lewis hoax fools French President Chirac.

[beckett]

Really good poem. Who is the author?

[DannyTN]

I thought about that too. But it doesn't make sense. France could have sided with us and voted to remove Saddam by force. Then the war would have had the blessing of the UN.

That would have had the same effect, the only difference is that France and the UN would have had to shoulder some of the cost of the war.

I have to believe that France's economic interests, Total ELF, the debt and ongoing contracts as well as French violations of UN sanctions that are being discovered prompted Chirac to try his best to block the war.

The only way that possibly makes sense is if France cooperated in a concerted effort to undermine the UN. Even more sinister would be if by undermining the UN now, they hope to make it stronger in the future. But I don't see it either way.

I think France just backed themselves in a corner and now Chirac is calling Bush wanting to know what he has to do to get the wine and cheese flowing again.

[browardchad]

If Saddam had gone into exile it would have been impossible for us to justify a war with Iraq.

 

Given his advanced stage of paranoia, the likelihood was slim to none.  I was going to say "delusional paranoia," but considering the atrocities committed by him and his lackeys, the man is not realistically safe from retribution anywhere in the world. Even if he had abandoned ship, it's likely an equally corrupt croney (or his son) would have filled the void, which would not have invalidated a war based on the stated goals.

 

The French like the U.S. wanted a demonstration of military power in the middle east as a deterrent against Islamic terrorists and they played their part to insure that Saddam would hold out and allow a war.

 

Not likely. In addition to vast profits earned through oil and other contracts with the Iraqi regime, the French political elite are committed to a policy of appeasement due to the large, violent and vocal Muslim minority which has settled within their own borders. Witness the weak response to anti-Semitic violence committed by Muslims within France, the French government's  animosity toward Israel and their support of Arab dictatorships. France is in the final moments of its twilight as a world power, and the United Nations was the perfect vehicle to inflate their importance, not to mention the benefits reaped by French banks in the corrupt UN  "Oil for Food" program. Further proof of France's deep opposition to the war exists in their obstructionism in NATO, their lobbying of the Turks to deny us access through Turkey, and their berating of potential eastern European EU members for their support of the war.

 

France had much to lose in this war, and they acted accordingly.

[witnesstothefall]

in a possible sign of warming...

More likely a sign that France should tread carefully vis a vis Syria. But Chirac is stubborn. He always picks the loser.

[Henchman]

The BOYCOTT is working! The little frogg pigs are oui ouiing! Let's not quit until they go belly up - no concessions - no quarter

[Henchman]

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?

[Stefan Stackhouse]

A thought that has now occurred to me:

What if the British had stayed home and the Americans never gotten involved in saving France during WWI?

1. The lives of millions of British, French, American, and German soldiers would have been saved.

2. There never would have been a Treaty of Versailles, never would have been a Weimar Republic, never would have been a NSDAP, and Hitler would have never amounted to anything more than an utterly obscure, failed artist.

3. Thus, the lives of tens of millions more people would have been saved, as WWII would have never happened.

4. The rapid defeat of France in 1914-15 would have surely been followed by the rapid defeat of Russia in 1915-16. Would Lenin and the Bolsheviks still succeeded? Or might the victorious, non-desperate Germans taken a more conservative approach in dealing with its Eastern front? Most likely, Lenin would have never been given his German-enabled ride in the sealed train from Zurich to St. Petersburg, the Bolshevik revolution would never have happened, Stalin would never have happened, the famines and purges and Gulags would never have happened, and many tens of millions of Russians and other former Soviet peoples would be alive today.

5. Which means that Mao wouldn't have happened either. Maybe another hundred million Chinese lives spared.

6. Which also means that N. Korea wouldn't have happened, the Korean War wouldn't have happened, and whatever nuclear nightmares we still face in the future would not have happened.

7. And it also means that there would not have been a FRENCH Indochina, and thus unlikely a Ho Chi Minh, and certainly not a Dien Bien Phu, and thus not a Vietnam conflict, and thus 50+ thousand young Americans would be alive today instead of having their names inscribed on a wall.

8. And it also means that there never would have been a Khemer Rouge and a 3 million + killing field in Cambodia.

9. And who can even begin to speculate how very different the history of the Middle East would have been. The great irony is that the one thing that would most likely have been different is that there never would have been an IRAQ! And thus there never would have been a Saddam Hussein. And thus there never would have been wars in 1991 and 2003. Yet more lives.

The entire world has paid a very, VERY high price for the preservation of French sovereignty, nationhood, and pride. Much too high a price, in retrospect. Why anyone should feel the least obligation to pay them even a moment's attention, let alone anything that costs money or blood, is beyond me. They are owed nothing, absolutely nothing whatsoever.

[swheats]

Let's see, Chirac calls Bush, Shroeder meets with Blair today, is it safe to say that Putin has a date with Spain's president Jose Maria Aznar trying to make nice?

[Bonaparte]

...that France is prepared to adopt a "pragmatic approach" to the postwar situation in Iraq.

IOW, Chirac wants to bribe us into letting him come on board the Iraq reconstuction, in spite of his being a sworn enemy of both the US and the people of Iraq. Failing that, he wants to make hollow threats with the same end in mind.

[Bonaparte]

"Let's not quit until they go belly up - no concessions - no quarter."

I'm saddled up. Count me in.

[rudypoot]

Uh oh. I think we got him mad. LOL

[shaggy eel]

,,, Dubya probably hit the wrong speed dial button.

[El Sordo]

It's pretty lame that they didn't even get the swastika right.

[apackof2]

LOL, OMG so true!

[Happy2BMe]

"The entire world has paid a very, VERY high price for the preservation of French sovereignty, nationhood, and pride. Much too high a price, in retrospect. Why anyone should feel the least obligation to pay them even a moment's attention, let alone anything that costs money or blood, is beyond me. They are owed nothing, absolutely nothing whatsoever."

Stefan . .

I find your "what-ifs" regarding the exhoneration, liberation(s), and wars fought over the preservation(s) of France to be utterly fascinating - remarkable! You are gifted at History (have you thought about writing?).

France continues it's whorehouse-slut legacy of the past several hundred years by managing to suck the world into coming to her miserable rescue at great expense and peril (as you have so very accurately have reflected on).

Tell me then - what do you suppose France is after (or trying desparately to hide) in the wake and fall of Saddam's beastial regime?

Also, how do you see the chips falling for Syria? As you are aware, prior to WWI, Iraq and Syria were a single nation (Assyria).

Best -

[jagrmeister]

I find Chirac's use of words amusing. Now that his furious bid to rally opposition to America's intervention in Iraq has failed miserably, and Iraq has been liberated, he's aiming for a "pragmatic" approach? Yes, France's behavior has all along been pragmatic in the sense that it falls neatly into the category of 'balance of power' politics where France has been attempting to balance what it sees as America's projection of force throughout the world. If "pragmatism" is in order, than by the same international relations standard of realism, America ought to forbid France from having any role in rebuilding post-war Iraq for the purpose of dissuading such an anti-American bloc from forming in the future. After all, that would simply be "pragmatic".

[mass55th]

"Who is the author?"

Couldn't tell you. It was sent to me by a friend.

[mass55th]

"Did you write it?"

Unfortunately no. It was emailed to me by a friend, so I'm sure it's already making the email round.