1
   

Is Chirac to be believed?

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
au1929
 
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 08:02 am
"I want you to understand that I'm not saying `white' because the Americans say `black.'"
- PRESIDENT JACQUES CHIRAC of France.
Do you believe that Chirac is being truthful or it just a bold faced lie?

I was especially struck by this statement:Without Iraqi self-rule, he said, there is the dangerous situation of a "governor who is Christian and foreign" administering an Arab and Muslim country, and that is "a very difficult situation for any people to accept in the 21st century."
Note he is talking about almost immediate self rule. Ready or Not.
When did the french ever give a damn about anyone but the French?
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/22/international/22CHIR.html?th
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 7,141 • Replies: 147
No top replies

 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 08:39 am
When they watched their North African empire collapse very messily in the 1960s. Sad
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 08:58 am
hobitbob
The entire French empire collapsed, but what has that to do with the question? I could also note Frances collaboration with the Germans in WW2 {Vichy Government} however that too has nothing to do with the post.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:16 am
Well, Chirac (and Schröder) said so two days ago in Berlin as well.
(And they didn't say something new, actually.)

Blair, btw, said after the summit: "Whatever the differences there have been about the conflict, we all want to see a stable Iraq. We all want to see Iraq make a transition to democratic government and know there must be a key role for the UN." (source: heard it myself, reuters, BBC, et. al.)
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:22 am
AU:

Are you asking about the new item that Chirac would not veto the resolution? This to me is the important backpedling item. Who cares about a few French troops anyway. His demand for rapid transfer of control is not realistic and he knows it but if he really means he won't use the veto----this is significant. Can we trust him ---Hell no----but I think he also knows that if he lies again( He gave Powell assurance of French support on a second resolution before the war) he will be declared an enemy of the US and we will treat them like a pariah state. (I hope)
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:26 am
perception wrote:
He gave Powell assurance of French support on a second resolution before the war


Could you please tell, from where you know this?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:43 am
Perception
I would love to see Bush put the wood to France. Unfortunately at the moment we do not have the card to play. As for Chirac he is just being a typical frenchman, talking out of both sides of his mouth.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:46 am
How do you know that Perception?

Even if it was true, (which I very much doubt) the French were never given a chance to honour or dishonour their "promise" because the motion was withdrawn by the Brits before it even came to the vote, remember?

I see your hatred of the French has not diminished, even though you are now pleading for their (and German) help.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:57 am
Pleading for French and German help. I seem to remember the American soldiers in France in WW 1, WW2, The Normandy beachhead, Liberation of France, the Marshall plan, Ich bin a Berliner, Protection from the Russian bear and etc. Who supplied the help than.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:59 am
You don't seem to understand who's in the driving seat now. (hint: note GWB)
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:08 am
Protection from the Russian bear? Try telling that to the Hungarians.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:10 am
Steve (as 41oo)
Meaning what? When the chips were down the US always responded. The US helped France even though they collaborated with the Germans and they helped the German's despite the atrocities they had committed. It's time for a little payback regardless of who is in the White House.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:11 am
The answer to your question Au is America, same place - different country.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:12 am
I am telling that to the French and Germans.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:14 am
Steve
America is America and it needs assistance.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:17 am
Bush has realised that the only way out of the mess in Iraq is to internationalise it. For this he's going to need the help of the French and the Germans. Having warned against the Iraq adventure in the first place do you thing the French are going to rush troops in there because you're losing it?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:21 am
Are France and Germany the only countries that can help? Seems that Spain, Russia, India, and other countries could help as well. If the UN agrees with a new resolution, I would like the US to still be able to tell Jacques to stick it up his croissant.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:25 am
What I meant by different country is exactly that. The America of the 1940's was a force for good in the world. You were widely respected. The America of 2003 is seen as a hegemon. The respect might be there but its born out of fear, not love.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:28 am
McGentrix

Thats exactly my point, its Chirac who is now in a position to tell Bush where to stick his spurs.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:29 am
Chirac should stick the French troops up his--. He should just get out of the way and stop being an obstacle in the UN.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is Chirac to be believed?
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 03/04/2025 at 02:18:53
▲ ▼