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.

 

Backing Bush has won you nothing, Chirac tells Britain

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Loki
edsinger, you're fired.

That's all. You're just fired.

I'd love to see some hard info, and an intelligent formalized opinion from you one day. It may provoke stimulating thought.
.


I have you just choose not to look and see, I ahve had many a post with information...you just dont like me.....snif snif...




posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 12:41 AM
link   


Yet, it has also been justified by many also over the years....

and as i recall even democratic politicians, including Clinton, were saying that a war was justifiable before the latest reports that no stockpiles of wmd were found....


Yawn, how " Argumentum ad verecundiam "


Clinton also let Osama Bin Laden go 3 times over..

Just becuase 'Clinton' deemed it ligitimate does not 'EQUATE' it to being ligitimate, now does it ?

Deep



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Backing Bush makes you a target for future islamic fundmentalism.

Marching armies and tanks do little to stop the fundentalists... wouldn't of done any good on 9-11.

What does stop the fundementlists .. is when you shut your mouth and become a member of the world community rather than pretend that you have the ability to dictate what the people of the world can and cannot do... and then use military force and kill a ton of innocents to "ensure" your position remains so.

Be prepared for a violent backlash as you saw on 9-11.. we had it coming.

Or call anyone who uses militant force in Iraq to oppose US troops a "terrorist" Or label anyone who opposes US policy in general as a"terrorist"



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 03:16 AM
link   
So Chirac sees things differently to Blair, so what?
It is an honest disagreement and Chirac is entitled to express his view is he not?
Just a Blair is?

I mean really, what of it?

Within the EU there are lots of different views, big deal?

We don't have an EU-wide 'foreign policy' so what is the big surprise that France's gov calls this as she sees it, Germany's gov as she sees it, Holland's gov as she sees it, the UK's gov as we see it etc etc (there are 25 countries all with a view on this).

.....and what?

We don't expect unanimity on this and just cos it isn't there does not mean there are suddenly huge damaging 'splits' within the EU......no matter what that Murdock paper 'The Times' attempts with it's spin.

This is merely yet another prime example of the 'wanting to have it both ways' anti-EU 'camp'.

On the one hand we are expected to believe the EU is some sort of monolithic proto-fascist (or hard-left socialist/commie/marxist) bureaucracy incapable of tolerating a difference of opinion and ordering the (nation) states into what to think, say and do.....

.....and yet when the composing Nations express their actual free individuality as has happened here it is then derided, condemed and sniped at as 'weak'.

As I have been saying, expect more of this foolishness.

(.....and, if this is anything like last time, naturally anyone attempting to set things straight with an accurate comment on what is actually going on is going to get accussed of 'being in love' with the EU.
- I know, I know the level of 'debate' can get a little...er, um....(he says with 2 warnings recently!
)
-

Heads up; I'm not but I just find this crassly stupid ignorant garbage dressed up as reasoned comment intolerable.

The EU has enough wrong with it without having to invent this kind of emotive stupidity.....although clearly not enough to condemn the entire 'project' - which is why we do end up suffering this lame and pathetic nonsense so much.)







[edit on 16-11-2004 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroDeep
There WAS serious oposition to the war, the biggest being morality and ligitimacy felt by many of the worlds intellects, not these faux pas idiots on CNN.

Deep

Sorry, Deep, but I have to challenge your initial premise here. Tell me, who are these "worlds intellects" that opposed the war on moral grounds? Not Chirac. Not Schroeder. Not Putin. And certainly not Annan and his band of thieves at the UN. I offer as proof:

WASHINGTON Saddam Hussein's (search) regime made more than $21.3 billion in illegal revenue by subverting the U.N. Oil-for-Food program and other sanctions more than double previous estimates, according to congressional investigators.

from this link
You can buy a lot of morality for $21 Billion

Admit it - the French were sucking the Iraqi people dry with their plundering and looting participation in the Oil For Food program.

This is the basis of Chirac's question to Blair. Chirac wants to know how much he can get PAID. Blair knows the power of strong alliances.




posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 03:21 AM
link   
Its ok, Chiroc can ask for help again when any country comes knocking on his door. Its no problem, really, keep speaking in French when you know who stopped you from speaking German.



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedOctober90
Backing Bush makes you a target for future islamic fundmentalism.

What does stop the fundementlists .. is when you shut your mouth and become a member of the world community rather than pretend that you have the ability to dictate what the people of the world can and cannot do...

So, all we have to do is "shut our mouths" and listen to the terrorists (YOU can call them fundementlists (sp), but there's not enough lipstick to put on that pig to make them anything other than what they are - terrorists), and everything will be just fine, eh?

We don't negotiate with terrorists. Period with a dot.

Be prepared for a violent backlash as you saw on 9-11.. we had it coming.

Would another attack on our soil make you happy? Saying that we had it coming makes you sound like a sympathizer. But that is your right, in our country. Try sayiing the same thing to the terrorists. We'd be watching you on Al Jazeera video if you did.

You want to either condone and "understand" their flying planes into the Towers, or live your life in fear of upsetting the terrorists. You really should consider going over there and being one of Zarqawi's "boys". You could achieve your goals so much quicker that way.




posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 09:49 AM
link   
A mention of France, a bunch of Grunts & BOOM! They're off telling people how unimportant France is &that they should just keep the "whine" with their cheese! Why must you always prove that "conservative Intellect" is an oxymoron?


For the record: " "When the divergence of views between France and Britain was at its height, when the English wanted to follow the Americans and we didn't ... I said to Tony Blair, your position should at least serve another purpose," Mr Chirac said.

"You should obtain in exchange for it a new start for the peace process in the Middle East. Because that is vital. Well, Britain gave its support (on Iraq) - but I have not been impressed by the payback."


Lucid, cogent and completely on the topic of what diplomacy is ..... quid pro quo.

Maybe some more could give us insights:

Asked if he would tell the prime minister that he had made a mistake in supporting the US, Mr Chirac said he would not, "firstly because I am polite, and secondly because I do not think he did".

He added in an interview with British correspondents at the Elysee palace: "Mr Blair took the position he thought he had to take in the interest of his country and his convictions."


WOW! A Frenchie stating that a Leader of his country must follow what's best for his own country as per his convictions!?!?
Can you Freepers say "BUSH"?

Keep bashing Europe .......if you don't keep up on things, the EU is the worlds 1st Economic Super power, US is 2nd. Given our staggeringly huge allocation to Pentagon initiatives, we are closing in on 3rd the more China adopts capitalist mechanism. BMW's in Bejing is not a good sign, kiddies!!



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by LostSailor
Down with the UN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




amen to that. and who cares of what the leader of france has to say.

listining to what france has to say is almost if ot as bad as listining to what michale more has to say.



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
The French are concerned about well......the French.


Just as the Americans are concerned about... the Americans.

I'm beginning to think some Americans want the rest of the world to worry about them first and themselves second.



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yarnos
Chirac shold just shut the hell up. He only offers critisisms and absolutely no solutions. I think the French have far too much self importance.


Solution? Explain to me exactly why should France and about 90% of Europe offer a solution to war they have classified unjustified since the beginning? Even Canada stood by the UN and demanded proof and further diplomatic solutions on Iraq before invading Saddam, remember Bush's America walked away gunhoe on their own. Iraq is a huge mess and 80% of the world's nations are taking a step back and letting America deal with mess we've created.

Even the Gulf war during the early 90's was slightly unjustified, conspired by Daddy Bush and the Kuwaiti government.



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Well Chirac is right, Britain didn't get jack in return for the Iraq service, from the US.

What's the point of questioning this?

Blair just showed himself as a lapdog of Bush's.



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Question for Mr. Chirac, since, according to you sir, Britain seemingly didn't gain "nothing" from the US in going into Iraq, just how much did you get, gain, and benefit from your relationship with Saddam and the Oil For Food Program that also undoubtedly affected your nation's decision to back the war on Iraq, sir?
Lapdog is a relative term, isn't it? I mean, if Blair is Bush's "lapdog", would that be liking saying that Chirac is Saddam's "lapdog"? Wouldn't that make Germany and Russia Saddam's "lapdog's," also?


Nuff' said.




seekerof

[edit on 16-11-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 01:15 PM
link   
You will not get an answer to that question, Seekerof, not from Chirac, certainly not from any of his supporters on this board. They refuse to answer it because there is no defense for it.


EDIT to get name straight

[edit on 16-11-2004 by jsobecky]



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
You will not get an answer to that question, Seekerof, not from Chirac, certainly not from any of his supporters on this board. They refuse to answer it because there is no defense for it.





Chirac just don't want to make profits over poor innocent irakis people who are just born in the wrong place in the wrong time...just like all the rest of the world except US and UK

Ameliaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PEACE!!!!



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Have you not been following the OIL for Food scandal at the UN. France may have gotten billions off the poor Iraqi's. France was the "bankers" for all the money stollen.



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Have you not been following the OIL for Food scandal at the UN. France may have gotten billions off the poor Iraqi's. France was the "bankers" for all the money stollen.


Funny how no one defends France in this, Saddam gets 21 Billion is cash, and yet his people starve.....



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Have you not been following the OIL for Food scandal at the UN. France may have gotten billions off the poor Iraqi's. France was the "bankers" for all the money stollen.


OH...I don't follow that
...
But sometimes, I'm wrong...I admit it

Every government is crap!!!!!!! makes me sick!!!!
I want to know a government who is really honest and don't take advantage of any one...does it exist? I don't think so
That's why I dislike politics! They laugh at us

Ameliaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 01:53 PM
link   
IMHO, I think that the fact that we liberated his country during his lifetime, and helped Blairs country to not speak German, that the favor was actually owed us. I think that Chirac and his whole country "Cheese eating surrender monkies" should just keep quiet.



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   
As much as i hate Blair and Bush i do mistrust the EU even more. The only reason the French was against the war on terror is that they had signed deals and contracts with firms in Iraq just prior to the invasion. So they cant get on their high horse and say the war was illegal simply because they only wanted Iraq for its wealth.

This is a nation that rushed through a deal to sell Argentina the Exocet Missile during the Falklands War when we asked the French to postpone the sale and they agreed but turned and sold the weapon anyway. A weapon that killed scores of British sailors.

The French are so two faced and i hope TB tells them where to get off.

IOf i had a choice between the US and EU i vote US everytime even over Bush's debacle of Iraq.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join