We did it twice, and we'll do it again.
An intriguing theory, to be sure.
For a possible alternative explanation (not necessarily mutually exclusive), see post #23 in this FreeRepublic thread.
It sounds driven by pettiness and envy.......It sounds FRENCH!
One thing to consider : As we learned at the time of the Millenium Summit in September 2000, there is an alliance between various Third World and European NGOs to "reform" the UN. They wish to turn the UN into a one nation, one vote "global Democracy". To do this, they wish to see the Security Council and the veto abolished by 2008.
The debacle at the UN is being finessed by much of the media-US and international-as proof that the SC (and not the UN itself) is cumbersome, outmoded, and incompetent.
We hear that the French presence on the SC and the veto is a source of pride in France.
Is it just possible , though, that the French government sees the abolition of the SC as a way to strengthen both the UN (thereby hobbling the US) and France? If the debacle at the UN leads to the abolition of the SC, could the Third World see France as its leader or saviour, or at least be grateful for this abolition? Would this lead to the strengthening of France not only in the UN, but in the EU, as French prestige is increased?
Whatever the French gain from an SC seat and the veto might be outweighted by what it would gain if both were abolished.
I anticipate we'll see more and more calls for the abolition of the SC and the veto in the months to come. The media will try to create the impression that abolition of the SC/veto is the 'correct' ,'enlightened' position to hold.
The article publised here at NR called "The Eurabian Alliance" might explain why the French want to destroy the SC, even though they supposedly gain prestige by being on it. The EU wishes to create an EU/Islamic alliance, and the percentage of the Muslim population in France itself is estimated at anywhere from 5-13%. And the EU as a whole is supposed to be 50% Muslim at least by no later than 2100.
By destroying the SC, France gains prestige in the Third World, hurts the US, and placates its Muslim population, all at once.
Name
Address
So . . . why are they united against us now? Are they all trying to protect Saddam? I think not. This fiasco has NEVER been about Saddam.
Ledeen makes an interesting argument but if one buys into his "theory" why would you just stop with throwing France and Germany together into some kind of conspiracy? And long-term strategies as Ledeen proposes are damn difficult to carry out where countries have an ELECTED leadership. Even if ChIRAQ and Schroeder, alone, are plotting such madness, how could they GUARANTEE that the leaders who followed them would carry on their self-defeating programs? They couldn't.
So . . . I ask again, why are France, Germany, China, and Russia feeding from the same trough over the Iraq issue?
When I think about this, after adding China and Russia into the mix, I can NOW buy into Ledeen's theory. Individually, none of them can oppose our military juggernaut and expect to win. Individually, none of them can trump our economic strength. Individually, none of their systems of government can hope to motivate the masses the way our system does where, theoretically, one reaps the rewards from ones own efforts -- France and Germany are so laden down with socialist programs and the resultant taxes that they've become impotent when competing with us and China and Russia with their wacky combination of communistic/free market programs leave their citizens wondering whether the schizophrenic pendulum will land on the totalitarian policies of times past or whether the changes will be allowed to continue regardless of short-term problems. It's this unease that'll eventually lower the maximum-achievable ceilings so much that they'll never be a threat to us -- INDIVIDUALLY.
So . . . France, Germany, Russia, and China. Hmmmmm.
The answer to me is obvious. Ledeen is right . . . but it's no complicated conspiracy and its seeds weren't planted long-ago. World events and the hubris of the back-stabbing, has-been French have given them all, in their own minds anyway, an opportunity to stymie America's power and idealistic ambitions.
Think about it. Why are they so afraid of Democracy taking root in the Middle East? Why are they so afraid of Muslim populations being empowered with the choice of deciding their own destinies? Why are they terrified of ANY kind of change in the Middle East structure?
Who do those Middle Eastern countries who're given even a limited say in their destinies emulate? What country do they emulate? France? Germany? China? Russia? Nope. The good 'ol U.S. of A. Free Arabs love our culture, our freedoms, our wealth, our open forms of expression . . . we're the standard from which Free Arabs measure all things -- even though they hate to admit it.
France, Germany, Russia, and China are terrified that, in today's world of instantaneous news and comminication, their ways of life are about to be swamped by a tsunami of pro-American imitators. They know that once the freedom-horse is out of the barn that they'll never have ABSOLUTE control of their citizenry and customs again.
Simply stated . . . they're jealous and they're terrified of American power and success and they know if they're going to stop the train they'd best do it now because they might never have this kind of chance again.
To prove my point I give you North Korea and Iran. Everyone demanded we take our Iraqi plans to the UN. Yet NO ONE wants the North Korean and Iranian issues brought up at the UN. China is North Korea's major benefactor and Russia suppied Iran with its nuclear capability.
These two situations are tests for us . . . speedbumps to see how we react. And perhaps they're even situations they hope spiral out of control so we'll get bloodied and withdraw our tentacles from around the world.
That's all any of this is. It has nothing to do with Iraq. It's the simple jealousy and fear of four upper-tier countries trying to shackle the world's ONLY 800# GORILLA. I think history has been kind to us again. Washington, Lincoln, FDR, and GW.
France is not our ally . . . they haven't been for a long, long time. Germany is not our ally. China only wants to piggy-back on our economic success until they get financially stable and then they'll be back in our faces. Clinton's Administration helped a lot by selling and/or giving our technology secrets away. Russia is . . . well . . . Russia and one had best always be aware of their habit of shifting allegiances without warning.
I can hear some of you chuckling at this idiot, red-neck, Texas conspiracist, but don't fool yourself . . . these are dangerous times and I, for one, am damn glad GW is at the helm instead of his predecessor. Appeasement got us trapped in this box . . . sheer determination will get us out.
And Great Britain and Australia are the only allies we can count on to watch our backs during good and/or bad times.
I don't think they struck a deal, but they certainly seized upon the opportunity.
I have a theory of my own. The Muslims have infiltrated, and ARE infiltrating, nearly every country in the world.
The French have problems of their own with the Muslims. If the French are having to capitulate to the Muslims, that is THEIR problem, and someday their problems will be even worse. The same with the Germans. The same with the Nordic countries. The same with many other countries.
But while these countries are capitulating to the Muslims, the Muslims are increasing their numbers in these countries. It won't be long before the Muslims have a stronghold in every country, and will have increased their power, and will be able take over from within.