Skip to comments.
Blair turns fury on French for wrecking Iraqi compromise
The Daily Telegraph ^
| March 14, 2003
| Toby Helm
Posted on 03/13/2003 6:16:56 PM PST by MadIvan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-72 last
Comment #61 Removed by Moderator
To: MadIvan
While the anti-French offensive was applauded by many MPs, its long-term implications were not lost on British diplomats who feared that permanent harm could be done to the Prime Minister's efforts to place Britain alongside France and Germany as a lead player in the EU.Obviously these diplomats fail to realize that this is a battle that would have been fought at some time in the future, if the Iraq issue hadn't come along to force it now. Your diplomatic corps in many ways reminds me of our State Department, which proves, I guess, that diplomats are pretty much the same the world over.
M. Chirac may have unwittingly done the British people an enormous favor by making them take a good hard look at what life as a full EU member would be like, before they join up and find it that much harder to extricate themselves once they find out they've been sold the sow's ear.
62
posted on
03/13/2003 8:19:14 PM PST
by
CFC__VRWC
("Diplomats! The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank!")
To: VeniVidiVici
I think the deal was the permanent five were to consist of those nations which actively opposed the Axis powers in WWII.
To: Kviteseid
Canada has been historically a place of refuge for Americans.
However, it is now a bastion of Socialists and Liberals.
The cheese-eating surrender monkey syndrome has struck the Canucks.
From CNN to Hollyfake to 'Rats to Carter to Clinton, is there any wonder why the propaganda is working?
To: VeniVidiVici
Sorry if this is slightly off-topic but does anybody know the history of how the French even managed to get on the Security Council?
Basically, it was a pity-party.
France, having lost its colonial empire, was wailing it would go communist if national pride and some wealth wasn't restored.
So everyone pretended they did something meaningful in their own liberation and that of Europe in general and so they were a victorious "ally" instead of a pack of weaklings who collaborated with Hitler and helped him to destroy France's Jews. After the war, they got a main seat in NATO from which they tried to destroy NATO in less than 20 years. To rebuild them and Germany, we instituted the Marshall plan and we even gave them a Security Council veto and pretended they were still a Great Power. Then, since they still felt puny and neglected, we paid 85% of their costs and transported nearly their entire army to Indochina to wage their Vietnam war. They came to beg us to use nuclear weapons to save their sorry frog-butts at Dien Bien Phu but Eisenhower said no because we couldn't use nukes on Asians twice in less than 15 years (to put it briefly).
In short, lots of the French behaving like fallen and neglected women who feel entitled to a throne. The French can't feel good about themselves unless they find someone to look down upon and scorn. They've nominated Blair and Bush for this role but it's not going to work this time. They're going to instead learn they've been nothing but a charity case for the last 65 years and we're going to hit them in the oil revenues and freeze them out diplomatically. After we use New Europe to split off Germany, they'll be much quieter for quite a while.
To: CharacterCounts
Both Bush and Blair will make token efforts to include France in the policing of Iraq after the war.
I don't think so. They've gone too far. It's like Helen Thomas calling Bush the worst president in American history. Her and the WashPost and Slimes and libmedia outlets aren't going to get any White House favors.
W. is very tolerant but will hold a grudge after enough nastiness. Like a wicked child, France demands discipline. Besides, we cannot be seen to reward such active enmity to our policies. Not in the opening phase of the Bush Doctrine era.
To: VeniVidiVici
Sorry if this is slightly off-topic but does anybody know the history of how the French even managed to get on the Security Council? In a nutshell...
The core of the UN security council consists of the victors of WWII: the US, the UK and the USSR.
At the 1945 Yalta conference, possibly as part of the compensation given to the French for German aggression, Churchill and Roosevelt pushed for the French to be given a piece of occupied Germany -- a so-called zone.
Since the nascent UN was tasked with temporarily overseeing occupied Germany, it was thought that France should have a say in the governance of its German zone. Therefore, France was given a seat on the Security Council.
As I understand it, Churchill was a major supporter of the French and was critical in fighting for its post-war influence. I believe Churchill felt that France could somehow be restored to its "great power" status and would help to counterbalance the Soviet Union, which had just swallowed up a large chunk of Europe.
Anyone else?
To: George W. Bush
The only thing we disagree on is wether there will be some type of diplomatic tokenism. Chiraq stupidly put all his eggs in one basket on this gambit he could no have won.
My theory is that Bush will move to isolate France but provide the tokenism to avoid providing an election topic for the Dems.
To: CharacterCounts
My theory is that Bush will move to isolate France but provide the tokenism to avoid providing an election topic for the Dems.
I don't see it. The entire aircraft and agriculture sectors already hate France's protectionism and the trade unions don't like them either. Or the vets organizations. Or, well, just about anybody.
I don't think that even the Dims are dumb enough to champion the French cause.
I think Dubya will quietly put the boots to them. They had their chance and decided to play the enemy. They've demanded a public flogging.
To: George W. Bush
I hope you are correct. Your scenario would be more fun to watch than mine.
To: MadIvan
WATCH CLOSELY TO SEE WHY CHIRAQ LOVES SODDOMITE!
71
posted on
03/13/2003 11:39:11 PM PST
by
Grampa Dave
(Stamp out Freepathons! Stop being a Freep Loader! Become a monthly donor!)
To: MadIvan
Well as General Patton once said:
" I would rather have a German Division in front of me than a French one behind me."
72
posted on
03/14/2003 7:00:49 AM PST
by
AxelPaulsenJr
(Get High on Life, Not Drugs)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-72 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson