Reply
Wed 7 Jul, 2004 06:53 am
Yes McGentrix those French sure are wacky aren't they? I mean, what kind of zany country would oppose the war in Iraq and the horror and bloodshed it has created? Yep! France is going to crash headlong into the US and we will probably start a war with them too - oh wait a minute! France has no oil! No reason to attack except the wine and cheese! Never mind!
Hmmm.... apparently the point of the article went over your head NickFun.
dunno. I believe the anti-French rampade is just not even funny anymore either. Just tiring.
Chirac is playing a dangerous game and I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it ends up biting him and all of france right in the keister.
I can easily imagine a 'more important mission for NATO'. Sudan. But that's another topic. Krauthamer's article(s) are chronically spitefull and exaggerated, written in a black and white vision. Nothing wrong with criticizing France. But, for chrissake, with some reason, otherwise you'll just look plain silly. It is quite funny to see how he accuses France of stubbornness in anti-American sentiments when the whole article is stubbornly anti-French. That's all. There are more valid articles out there to discuss, this one is just worthless.
Feh, the French deserve what they get.
Chirac is the elected head of state. The French people have opposed the actions of the Bush administrations, which they justifiably see as the unilateral acts of an imperialist hegemon. In expressing opposition to this administration, Chirac displays his faith to his democratic role. Too bad that's offensive to neo-conservatives, who want everyone to roll over for them as they create their thousand year reich. Yes, too bad . . . i cry bitter tears at the thought that the French and their elected head of state might think for themselves and publicly express their thoughts . . . too, too bad . . .
Setanta is right. It's fashionable for the war monger right to bash the French 'cause they refused to join the dubious "coalition" (another interesting Bush & Co. twisted semantics definition). There is no blind faith amongst the European countries (as Rumsfeld put it, old Europe) -- not isn't that too bad.
Yes, yes, Setanta, everyone who agrees with Bush is a nazi and the US is only interested in taking over the world. That's been played to death already.
I have not equated the Shrub with Nazis, nor those who agree with him. I have not suggested that the US wants to take over the world--only certain parts of the politically influential population who want hegemony over strategic resources.
None of which has anything to do with what i posted, which is that France is a democracy, the majority of the population of which opposed the war. As the democratically chosen head of state, Chirac has expressed that oppostion. So, McG, alleged democracy for Iraq, but none for France?
Setanta wrote:I have not equated the Shrub with Nazis, nor those who agree with him. I have not suggested that the US wants to take over the world--only certain parts of the politically influential population who want hegemony over strategic resources.
None of which has anything to do with what i posted, which is that France is a democracy, the majority of the population of which opposed the war. As the democratically chosen head of state, Chirac has expressed that oppostion. So, McG, alleged democracy for Iraq, but none for France?
What was this:
Quote:Too bad that's offensive to neo-conservatives, who want everyone to roll over for them as they create their thousand year reich. Yes, too bad
referring to then? The Roman empire?
To the neo-conservative policy, very publicly stated, of gaining hegemony over those parts of the world which they consider to be in our strategic interest. A hegemon, McG, is one who does not care to conquer a nation, but rather to be content with controlling that nation. That is why i referred to the unilateral acts of an imperialist hegemon.
If you want to contend that i am playing a game of semantics, note that the reference was to neo-conservatives, and not to the Shrub. But you introduced the term Nazi, probably from your overdeveloped sense of political paranoia . . .
Your use of "thousand year reich" implies a relation to the third reich, Nazi Germany. Otherwise, I am sure that someone with the vast vocabulary that you have would have chosen a better phrase to make their meaning clear. By choosing that particular phrase you equated being a neo-conservative to being a nazi, something that is quite familiar on A2K.
Neo-coservatism has been quite tightly bound to Bush as well on A2K. If you are referencing some other reich, I would be glad to hear about it.
Otherwise, you have merely Godwinned another thread.
The Project for a New American Century has cleared laid out plans to project American military power to "protect strategic interests." The rest of the world keeps itself informed about such ideas, and are well aware of the origin of many of the Shrubs policies. I am happy to equate the PNAC with the Nazis, mainly because there are no Nazis where i live to protest the slur against them.
Who cares about the french? Of course they opposed the war, they were getting oil from saddam at a good price, but too bad, they don't have the power or authority to stop the US from liberating Iraq.
Right. U.S. will liberate Iraq, whether Iraq likes it or not! Hooray.
You mean whether Saddam likes it or not as most Iraqi's remain quite grateful for being liberated.
McGentrix wrote:You mean whether Saddam likes it or not as most Iraqi's remain quite grateful for being liberated.
Another assertion of belief thats
not backed up much by reality ...
Quote:the main findings of the poll, which was commissioned by the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) last month and which was leaked yesterday, reveal that only 2 per cent of the Iraqis polled in mid-May see coalition troops as liberators, while 92 per cent said they were occupiers. [..] The coalition's confidence rating in May stood at 11 per cent, down from 47 per cent in November, while the troops themselves had the support of only 10 per cent.
I didn't say they were happy about American troops being there, now did I?
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace