It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

French President Sarkozy lashes out at small US role in Libya and says mission will last until Gadda

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Sarkozy is not going to get 30,000 American soldiers to protect French interests but he's welcome to send 30,000 French soldiers


American soldiers are sent to protect American interests!




posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   
DUPLICATE REPLY


edit on 24-6-2011 by hp1229 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Paulioetc15
 

Awwwwww..the French President is upset
Boo Hoo.

All I can say about the French is in the list of jokes posted in the link below


American to Frenchman: "Do you speak German?" Frenchman: "No." American: "You're Welcome!

FRENCH_JOKES



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by hp1229
 


You could have just edited your first post to fix that "E" you know..

P.S. don't buy into the whole anti-french attitude the French actually have it nicer than us for a reason.
edit on 24-6-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by hp1229
 


The french president is upset?? Wow, I didn't even hear about that! You got some links or something that show that?

A site which has for theme denying ignorance and not buying the propaganda , being discerning instead, why do you come here if you don't agree with that intent.....?
Of course you are not obligated to answer, it is just a question out of curiosity.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Wonder why Sarkozy is so insistent..

oh wait..
Now I remember..


I bet he was responding..... not initiating, so not the insistant one.

Also this accusation could not be determined as true, but even if it was, I bet Qadaffi's son didn't know that the french would still defend the people against oppression and abuse, despite money. They have a fixation on the socialistic principle of defending the people against abusive tyrants.... go figure!
leftover from their own revolution.....



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Paulioetc15
 


Im not sure whats worse.. The lack of Us resolve to do the right thing, or being shown up by the french.

Either way both are a wake up call.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by coquine
 


Do a little research.. the French have been big on this one from the beginning. I don't buy that the rebels are doing much better for the people honestly.
Wouldn't be a place I'd want a live, but I'm not so sure I'd want the alternative option either.
Think of how politicians and cops act here in America. Now imagine you live in a country where they can get away with much more and they are in charge.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Was gonna say I thought the French spearheded the entire push for involvement in Libya.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Yep. They definitely did.
I read right from the start that Sarkozy may have had a little personal stake in it.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by coquine
 


Do a little research.. the French have been big on this one from the beginning. I don't buy that the rebels are doing much better for the people honestly.
Wouldn't be a place I'd want a live, but I'm not so sure I'd want the alternative option either.
Think of how politicians and cops act here in America. Now imagine you live in a country where they can get away with much more and they are in charge.


Isn't that why the french were supportive ("big on") a revolution there?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


"That" referring to what?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by coquine
 


I never said that America did most of bulk of the work. It's true that Britain and France did most of the works in Libya by air-power but some still require Uncle Sams help. France and our European Allies even still had to relied our Intel, refuelling, and drones to track down Gadhafi forces. Plus we had to shoulder by paying for their bombs for everything we provide for them - making us shoulder the burden even more. Doesn't look shoulder burden to me though. Never forget that most of the France hardware, equipment, funding, and military hardware comes from for NATO(75% of USA taxpayers expense).
edit on 24-6-2011 by Paulioetc15 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


I love it!!!

Wine sippin', cheese eatin' surrender monkeys!



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

"What Sarkozy is doing is kicking the fledgling out
of the nest, which is sort of the way he approaches a lot of
problems. A heavy dose of what you might call 'tough love,'
not always dispensed lovingly. "

Strange way of describing France/Africa agenda?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paulioetc15

I guess this French president is mad because he cannot believe what Gates said is right. Who pay most for NATO? It's the USA. We always do the dirty work than other nations don't want to do(Kosovo war, Vietnam, Gulf war) then ended up getting loads of abuse by the same countries they refuse to take the lead. How many missions would the French fly if it wasn't for US in flight refueling, command and control, munitions and the US destruction of Libya's air defenses? Go ahead, Sarkozy and tell me again how France is doing the heavy lifting.

And now he lashed us for playing a small role in Libya? No wonder why NATO is falling apart so badly. And no way we are going to take a lead again.

This war in Libya is so poorly planned to being with. Not to mention that NATO offcials admit that air-power alone wasn't going to help.

i agree USA should leave NATO once and for all and fix our country before helping out. We sacrificed long enough already.

english.libya.tv
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 24-6-2011 by Paulioetc15 because: (no reason given)


I concur. The Cold War is over, and it's long past time to disband NATO, which is a Cold War relic (much like myself
) whose time is long over. NATO has no place in a post Soviet world, since "the red menace" was their entire reason for being to begin with, and an abject fear of Soviet tanks pouring through the Fulda Gap.

Now, the US, even in a support role for the fighting in Libya, is just as guilty as the rest. In legalese, they call that "accesory", and you'll go to jail same as the primary. By acting in a support role, we are faciltating meddling in internal Libyan affairs, and unless and until Libya decides to attack outside their own border, it will CONTINUE to be Libya's own internal business. No difference to my mind between what we are doing there, and the hypothetical "what if..." Libya had decided to start bombing the US because they didn't like the outcome of the "hanging chads" election of 2000. That was OUR internal business, and current events in Libya is THEIRS.

Of course, I didn't agree with getting NATO involved in the US Afghan War, either, and I REALLY didn't agree with inviting them to the Iraq War, since I don't think the US should have been there, either. Afghanistan was a different matter. That is the US's war, and unless other NATO countries came under the gun (which UK and Spain did, and possibly France, depending on how one views things) they have no business fighting in other folk's wars. I'll be the first to admit that I spent a chunk of my mis-spent youth fighting in other folk's wars, but that's how I come by that opinion - experience. I never fought in one that I thought was wrong, and I always felt I had some sort of stake in the ones I did attend to, however tenuous, but in toto I learned a hard lesson about involving one's self in the affairs of others.

These days, if some one wants to pick a fight, I'm perfectly content to let them fight their own damn wars - unless the fight they pick is with me. I'm not a pacifist by any stretch of the imagination, but application is everything.

And yeah, I think without the US in a support role - and footing the bulk of the bill for this action - then France, et al would be dead in the water. The operative word there is "dead" at this stage in the game. So, if they want to whine about what a small role the US is taking, I vote that we stop ALL support for the effort, and completely END our role, and see how well they like going it in the rough.

In all honesty, I still think we should never have jumped into it to begin with, and said so before the jump, when everyone else was clamoring to "help those poor Libyan Freedom Fighters".

Pfft. They don't seem to realize what a can of worms they've opened with that, but they're STILL backpedalling as hard as they can go to distance themselves from it.

Just my 2 francs.



edit on 2011/6/24 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 03:26 AM
link   

edit on 25-6-2011 by Paulioetc15 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Paulioetc15
 




We always do the dirty work than other nations don't want to do(Kosovo war, Vietnam, Gulf war)


Sick..
In the kosovo war many people died on the ground because the USA only wanted to drop bombs from the air not put troops on the ground. Other NATO countries did. America messed that up big time...
The gulf war was Americas idea, and was an illegal war not ratified by the United Nations. It was the illegal occupation of a sovereign state. Afganistan the same.Vietnam wasa russian and american playground with dire consequences..

So go and stick your war rhetoric deep and hard were the sun dont shine and stop playing the sacrafical us card.... The sooner Europe gets its own amry and scraps NATO the better, really you lads dont have a clue...



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Dude, make sure you correct your grammar before i talk to you. I cannot argue with an awful grammar to yours. And didn't European criticized us for not doing something about Kosovo war? As sooner USA kicked NATO out of our country to Europe or anywhere, the better we spend on our social welfare while others had to shoulder. Afghanistan we were there because of 9/11 at least one nation is an attack on all. Libya did not meet the criteria. No the UN asked the US to do something about Iraq due to our military might(i disagree with it). Plus this war is poorly filled in the 1st place and since you're not appreciating us then we should not be in Libya in the 1st place anyhow. You're just mad because you cannot take that Robert Gates said is justified. Get your own defense weapons instead of relying us to do the dirty work. I have proof, you have not.
edit on 25-6-2011 by Paulioetc15 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 05:18 AM
link   
It is testing water being set up by the Zionists and the US.

We are talking about the (ex colonial European might like Frenchies, Brits, Spaniard, Italian, Portuguese, Dutch, German, Belgian) and the US/Zionist want to see that IF they can ever co operating with each other for the future alliances.

Nothing has been changed here... same old story.

To prove it, read Iranian history from Qajar to Pahalavi and you’ll see clearly what I mean. These things happened 90 years ago and it is right in front of us all together.

Jew Sarkozy has a big mouth and way out of line… (biting the hand who feed him).
edit on 25-6-2011 by amkia because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join