Gawain 0 #1 February 10, 2003 Why is France so adamant about avoiding conflict? Peace at any cost? What do they stand to lose? Now, they stand in the face of a legal obligation to help defend Turkey, if hostile action was taken by Iraq against their NATO-member neighbor to the north. Mind you, this is a stance to block planning for the contingency. This is extremely serious to the continued cohesiveness of NATO. France better get a grip on reality fast. Many people here have voiced opinions about the US role involving oil. I submit to you that the French position has even more to do with oil than the US objective. France has significant trade ties with Iraq. Over the past 20 years, France has sold everything but the kitchen sink to Iraq's military regime (the US role not withstanding, whose role was clear) and continues to do so within the limits of UN sanctions. What is less advertised is that it was French firms that helped Iraq build the nuclear reactor that Israel took out in 1981. France has also sold fighters, missiles, radar, and other systems estimated over $25B. That's a sizable nut of revenue. This long term relationship is put at risk if France takes part in a conflict, especially considering the potential oil output (where France still get's 10% of its oil directly). As the timeline continues along the plan that most countries are following with Iraq, at the last moment, Chirac has left himself enough political room to change sides and work with the coalition (their own national interests practically require it). Though I hope that they will be asked to sit on the bench by the rest of the coalition if action is taken. If the US interests were so blind, we would be inclined to continue working with Iraq, regardless of who was in power, and what they were doing to their population. However, the US interests appear to be more far sighted than many give credit to (even us Americans). War is not necessarily just for the sake of war. Is it possible to conceive that the rules have changed?So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #2 February 10, 2003 Screw the French, Belgians and the Germans.. Screw em.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #3 February 10, 2003 Quote Screw the French, Belgians and the Germans.. Screw em.. I don't know... there's a lot of them. My ex-wife tried to do it alphabetically and only got up to Rs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faber 0 #4 February 10, 2003 Quote Why is France so adamant about avoiding conflict? The rumbel here are that the Frence goverment are afraid of the Frence peopls react.. Rhino... Quote Screw the French, Belgians and the Germans.. Screw em.. that were one srewed post Stay safe Stefan Faber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ifrinn 0 #6 February 10, 2003 If the US interests were so blind, we would be inclined to continue working with Iraq, regardless of who was in power, and what they were doing to their population. ------------ question: who is placing so many embargos on Iraq? Why do we punish the inhabitants when we have to punish the dictatorship of a country? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #7 February 10, 2003 Quotequestion: who is placing so many embargos on Iraq? Why do we punish the inhabitants when we have to punish the dictatorship of a country? The UN. The UN. The UN. If the UN was so important, then why does it take this action, and not use its influence to change the situation?So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
QuickDraw 0 #8 February 10, 2003 QuoteIf the UN was so important, then why does it take this action, and not use its influence to change the situation? It is decided by a democratic vote by all of the nations that belong to the UN, i suppose when all avenues of diplomacy fail, that's when the gloves come off. After all...we do live in a democracy...don't we ? -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faber 0 #9 February 10, 2003 QuoteIf the UN was so important, then why does it take this action, and not use its influence to change the situation? US are also a member of UN.. I hope US does the job down there whith or whith out the help they are asked about,i just hope it goes Quick and whith a minimal loss of lifes.I also hope that US will stay in Irak and help building up the cuntry,whith a new goverment.. And i REALLY hope that the rest of UN will support US so it aint done for no reason.. Stay safe Stefan Faber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #10 February 10, 2003 >Mind you, this is a stance to block planning for the contingency. And a stance to block the _need_ for the contingency i.e. the invasion of Iraq. The two are inextricably linked. France does not want to be part of the invasion. We would do the same. Do you really think we'd vote to use NATO funds to put Patriot missiles along the Pakistani border if Pakistan wanted to invade India? That's not the purpose of NATO. >I submit to you that the French position has even more to do with oil > than the US objective. I agree somewhat, although I would put it that oil plays about the same role in both cases. They are closer physically but we import far more oil than they do. >What is less advertised is that it was French firms that helped Iraq > build the nuclear reactor that Israel took out in 1981. So? We _gave_ nuclear reactor components to North Korea; we sold Iraq nuclear bomb detonators (pulse neutron sources) and anthrax, botulism and west nile virus. >War is not necessarily just for the sake of war. Is it possible to > conceive that the rules have changed? The rules may have changed; war has not. It is still, and will always be, the worst thing there is. I hope it will always be a last resort, not just what to do when we tried the easy stuff and are sick of diplomacy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fool 0 #11 February 10, 2003 Quote Quote Quote Screw the French, Belgians and the Germans.. Screw em.. I don't know... there's a lot of them. My ex-wife tried to do it alphabetically and only got up to Rs. is that the r in screw, french, or in germans? S.E.X. party #1 "Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "f*#k, what a ride". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,445 #12 February 10, 2003 While we may never have had a DZ.commer of the year, I think I'd like to nominate this for post of the week Wendy W. There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #13 February 10, 2003 QuoteWhy is France so adamant about avoiding conflict? 100 Years War 30 Years War War of Spanish Succession War of Austrian Succession Napoleonic Wars Franco-Prussian War 1914-18 1939-45 Bien Dien Phu... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #14 February 10, 2003 Quote Quote Quote Quote Screw the French, Belgians and the Germans.. Screw em.. I don't know... there's a lot of them. My ex-wife tried to do it alphabetically and only got up to Rs. is that the r in screw, french, or in germans? The Rs in the phone book. Ya gotta have a plan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fool 0 #15 February 10, 2003 at least she was organized... S.E.X. party #1 "Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "f*#k, what a ride". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #16 February 10, 2003 QuoteIf the US interests were so blind, we would be inclined to continue working with Iraq, regardless of who was in power, and what they were doing to their population. ------------ We will continue to work with Iraq once a new leader the U.N. CAN work with is in power. Quotequestion: who is placing so many embargos on Iraq? The U.N. is placing them against Iraq. All Saddam has to do is comply with the U.N. resolutions by disarming and the sanctions will be lifted. QuoteWhy do we punish the inhabitants when we have to punish the dictatorship of a country? The question is why does Saddam Hussein continue to punish his own people instead of complying with the U.N. resolution. Remember why the resolutions were put in place to begin with. He invaded Kuwait, raped and pillaged that country, set the oil wells on fire creating the largest ecological disaster in history and was allowed to stay in power ONLY because he agreed to disarm. He hasn't proven he's done that. The U.N. Inspectors are not supposed to be detectives trying to find WMD. They are there to verify Iraq has disarmed. It is up to Iraq to provide that evidence. He hasn't done so. Where is all the Anthrax and VX nerve gas he admitted to the U.N. Inspectors in the past he possesed? Do you think he just dumped it down the kitchen sink? Where is it? Thats the question Saddam has to answer. Saddam is the one hurting his own people. Why won't the Iraqi scientists talk to the U.N. Inspectors? What are they afraid of? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites QuickDraw 0 #17 February 10, 2003 Quote Why won't the Iraqi scientists talk to the U.N. Inspectors? What are they afraid of? Execution springs to mind. -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #18 February 10, 2003 QuoteIt is decided by a democratic vote by all of the nations that belong to the UN, i suppose when all avenues of diplomacy fail, that's when the gloves come off. After all...we do live in a democracy...don't we ? The UN is not a democracy, nor is it a governmental body. What avenues of diplomacy have not been attempted? The US is not a Democracy, it is a Federal Republic.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites QuickDraw 0 #19 February 10, 2003 All the nations big or small that belong to the UN have an equal vote, the UN is there to "try" and settle conflicts and disputes between countries and to create a better standard of living for us all. As for the the avenues of diplomacy, political & economic pressure still have not been exercised to the maximum.....Iraq is still selling oil... under the guise of "paying for humanitarian aid" Who is buying this oil ? who do you think ? As Billvon has suggested before, the west should be concentrating on other forms of energy. My own solution would be to starve them out of power, (i know....call me an old liberal) and offer aid through UN backed relief workers, the Red Cross & the Red Crescent. Saddams revenue has to come from oil, stop buying it and stop him. -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jceman 1 #20 February 10, 2003 QuoteAll the nations big or small that belong to the UN have an equal vote, Only in the General Assembly, the action right now is in the Security Council. Each member of this council has veto authority. This is where the US and Great Britain are on one side, with France, China and others opposing. Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money. Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ifrinn 0 #21 February 10, 2003 I said nothing against the Gulf War, opposite I agree with it. To these times the US was totally right in going to war. Why Hussein is doing so, I guess nobody knows that! The U.N. inspectors thats something else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhino 0 #22 February 10, 2003 I almost think the burden of blame is the reason the UN exists.. If 50 countries said let's bomb Iraq terrorists would be thinking about bombing 50 countries. By everyone agreeing it gets others out of THE BLAME so to speak. I don't think the UN will ever really work efficiently though.. Poor France, Poor Belgium, Poor Germany.. Can't come out and pretend to be a big dog.. LOL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jdhill 0 #23 February 10, 2003 QuoteEach member of this council has veto authority. Only the five permanent members of the SC have Veto authority. US, Russia (USSR originally), China, Great Britan, and France. The other members rotate (they may be elected by the GA, but not sure) through the remaining positions, and have no Veto, only a vote. JoshAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,445 #24 February 10, 2003 QuotePoor France, Poor Belgium, Poor Germany.. Can't come out and pretend to be a big dog. I'm wondering if being a big dog is important. Is power everything? If so, then I guess we're pretty hot stuff. But there's a lot more to it than just power. And even if you have the power, other guys can pretty much do what they want to; they just don't get to say "screw you" about it. Ask any teenager. Wendy W. (who has never really wanted to be a big dog)There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ifrinn 0 #25 February 10, 2003 I don't think the UN will ever really work efficiently though.. the UN is trying to go a way, without just bombing everything and then asking questions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
QuickDraw 0 #17 February 10, 2003 Quote Why won't the Iraqi scientists talk to the U.N. Inspectors? What are they afraid of? Execution springs to mind. -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #18 February 10, 2003 QuoteIt is decided by a democratic vote by all of the nations that belong to the UN, i suppose when all avenues of diplomacy fail, that's when the gloves come off. After all...we do live in a democracy...don't we ? The UN is not a democracy, nor is it a governmental body. What avenues of diplomacy have not been attempted? The US is not a Democracy, it is a Federal Republic.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
QuickDraw 0 #19 February 10, 2003 All the nations big or small that belong to the UN have an equal vote, the UN is there to "try" and settle conflicts and disputes between countries and to create a better standard of living for us all. As for the the avenues of diplomacy, political & economic pressure still have not been exercised to the maximum.....Iraq is still selling oil... under the guise of "paying for humanitarian aid" Who is buying this oil ? who do you think ? As Billvon has suggested before, the west should be concentrating on other forms of energy. My own solution would be to starve them out of power, (i know....call me an old liberal) and offer aid through UN backed relief workers, the Red Cross & the Red Crescent. Saddams revenue has to come from oil, stop buying it and stop him. -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jceman 1 #20 February 10, 2003 QuoteAll the nations big or small that belong to the UN have an equal vote, Only in the General Assembly, the action right now is in the Security Council. Each member of this council has veto authority. This is where the US and Great Britain are on one side, with France, China and others opposing. Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money. Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ifrinn 0 #21 February 10, 2003 I said nothing against the Gulf War, opposite I agree with it. To these times the US was totally right in going to war. Why Hussein is doing so, I guess nobody knows that! The U.N. inspectors thats something else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #22 February 10, 2003 I almost think the burden of blame is the reason the UN exists.. If 50 countries said let's bomb Iraq terrorists would be thinking about bombing 50 countries. By everyone agreeing it gets others out of THE BLAME so to speak. I don't think the UN will ever really work efficiently though.. Poor France, Poor Belgium, Poor Germany.. Can't come out and pretend to be a big dog.. LOL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdhill 0 #23 February 10, 2003 QuoteEach member of this council has veto authority. Only the five permanent members of the SC have Veto authority. US, Russia (USSR originally), China, Great Britan, and France. The other members rotate (they may be elected by the GA, but not sure) through the remaining positions, and have no Veto, only a vote. JoshAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,445 #24 February 10, 2003 QuotePoor France, Poor Belgium, Poor Germany.. Can't come out and pretend to be a big dog. I'm wondering if being a big dog is important. Is power everything? If so, then I guess we're pretty hot stuff. But there's a lot more to it than just power. And even if you have the power, other guys can pretty much do what they want to; they just don't get to say "screw you" about it. Ask any teenager. Wendy W. (who has never really wanted to be a big dog)There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ifrinn 0 #25 February 10, 2003 I don't think the UN will ever really work efficiently though.. the UN is trying to go a way, without just bombing everything and then asking questions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
