SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (136484)6/14/2004 11:42:19 AM
From: Mary Cluney  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
<<<In case you haven't noticed, these countries are our rivals, not our allies.>>>

All these countries have signed on to WOT. France is part of NATO. We have a treaty with NATO and all countries belonging to NATO. We are not going to break up NATO.

Until very recently the overwhelming majority of the people in France liked the United States. I don't know what the situation is today, I still think the overwhelming majority of the French peolpe still like the United States. How they feel about GWB and his administration is something entirely different.

<<<The billions they could have gotten from Saddam would have been a pure benefit to them>>>

The few billion dollars that some French made illegally has nothing to do with France the country.

It would be the same as to say that the interests of Haliburton is the same as the interests of the United States.

I have nothing against Haliburton (I was once an investor), but Haliburton's interests are to their shareholders foremost. When I was a shareholder I would root for them to get contracts because they knew the right people in government who gave out those contracts. That is all part of business intelligence. If they did something illegal - that happens (let the judicial process take its course) but it does not have anything to do with the United States as a country - and the people of the United States should not be held accountable.

<<<Any poke in the eye that they could deliver to the US would be a benefit to them, too.>>>

That is an opinion where it would be almost impossible for you to build a logical and well constructed case to support.

<<<How else do you explain their last-ditch scramble to protect Saddam in 2002 - 2003?>>>

How many ways can I say this. Saddam Hussein had no friends in the international community. He had no friends in the Islamic world. He had no friends within the terrorist network. He had no friends within his own family. He killed his in laws. His personal doctor hated him. H couldn't trust his wife or his kids.

<<<France, Russia and China were openly opposed to the sanctions and were working to lift them. >>>

That is 3/5 of the SC. If they were that friendly with Saddam Hussein, how did we get the sanctions in place in the first place?

Just because you (that's us - the United States) is the leader, the strongest and the best, does not mean everyone will go along with you. But, you have the best chance of anyone to get everyone to go along.

WRT UNSC, the Brits are with us, the Russians can be co-opted (as Bush is doing with Putin right now), France can be put into a position to go along with us. With everyone on board, the Chinese, if they don't climb on board, will at least abstain (that is their MO).

It's not easy being the world leader. If we aren't going to do it, who is?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext