Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : America Under Siege: The End of Innocence -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: calgal who wrote (21215)	1/22/2003 11:05:04 PM
From: calgal	Respond to of 27720

January 22, 2003 France motivated by its own oil argument Jonah Goldberg URL:http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/commentary-2003122152014.htm When it comes to "Well, duh" headlines, "France Is Being a Pain in the Keester" has to rank just behind "Bears Use Woods as Bathroom." The latest evidence came this week when French diplomats at the United Nations orchestrated what The Washington Post called "a diplomatic version of an ambush." At a meeting on international terrorism, the French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin declared that France intends to launch a major offensive to block any U.N. Security Council vote authorizing war with Iraq, including the use of its Security Council veto. Now, I understand that everyone from honest opponents of the war to the Bush-is-a-war-criminal-crowd are cheering the French. That's to be expected, especially when you consider that the French have always been heroes to those who see America as a problem rather than a solution. For some reason, many people think that anything said with a French accent or served with a slice of stinky cheese must be superior to anything on this side of the Atlantic. But the truth is that, according to the anti-war crowd's own standards, the French are worse than America. Villepin declared Monday, "Already we know for a fact that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs are being largely blocked, even frozen. We must do everything possible to strengthen this process." That's a funny choice of words. As the White House was quick to point out, this diagnosis concedes that Iraq has "weapons of mass destruction programs." In other words, the French understand that the Iraqis are lying when they swear that they have no such programs. After all, you can't block or freeze something that doesn't exist. Ever since President Bush has demonstrated that he takes the Iraqi threat seriously, the French and others have argued that "containing Saddam" is a preferable alternative to war. Why risk bloodshed and the lives of innocent Iraqis if he's unable to develop weapons of mass destruction? Containment worked in the Cold War, let it work here, they say. Well, this is not an intellectually bankrupt position on its face, but there are two problems. First, the French are liars. They don't believe in containment, and they shame themselves when they say they do. The truth is France has been the chief Western advocate of normalizing relations with Iraq - one of its largest trading partners - for years, partly because France holds billions in IOUs from Iraq that wouldn't be redeemable by a new regime. In 1996, the French stopped helping to enforce the no-fly zones in the Kurdish north of Iraq, and in 1998 they withdrew from the Shiite south Iraq. France, a nation that bloviates about human rights deprivations in the United States every chance it gets, simply gave up doing its part to protect millions of people from Saddam's wrath. Indeed it's a hilarious irony that the anti-war types who denounce American "hypocrisy" for having "created" Saddam Hussein have nary a harsh word for the French, who not only sold Saddam a nuclear reactor but are wholly unapologetic about their desire to continue trading with him. French officials, including Villepin and Prime Minister Jacques Chirac, have decried the "pain and suffering of the Iraqi people" for years as a way to undermine sanctions against Iraq. That would be a fine moral position, except that the French know that lifting sanctions wouldn't help pay for childcare, it would go toward more weapons of mass destruction and presidential palaces. And that points to the second problem with the French position. Sanctions haven't been working, thanks in large part to French efforts to undermine them. Where Saddam rules, oil money goes to palaces and weapons. The French know this. As Kenneth Pollack details in his masterful book "The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq," France has been rewarded time and again for its feckless lapdoggism. "As a result of (France's) shameless pandering, the French have been the largest or second largest recipient of Iraqi oil-for-food contracts in every phase of the program." There may be good anti-war arguments out there. But none of them involve the French example. If the United States is wrong for having created the monster that is Saddam Hussein, France is doubly so. At least America wants to correct its mistakes. France doesn't even think it was a mistake to create Saddam and is doing everything it can to let Saddam out of his box It's a brainless slander to say America wants a war for oil. It is a plain fact that France wants "peace" for oil. Goldberg is the editor-at-large of National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com).

To: calgal who wrote (21215)	1/22/2003 11:11:06 PM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27720

France, Germany Resist Calls for Iraq War 32 minutes ago By JOHN LEICESTER, Associated Press Writer URL:http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=518&ncid=716&e=1&u=/ap/20030123/ap_on_re_eu/europe_iraq PARIS - Countering blunt talk of war by the Bush administration, France and Germany on Wednesday insisted that they are committed to a peaceful solution to the Iraq crisis. "War is not inevitable," French President Jacques Chirac told a historic joint session of the French and German parliaments. "The only framework for a legitimate solution is the United Nations (news - web sites)." The statement — made during a ceremony marking 40 years of reconciliation between the once-hostile nations — came as the top U.S. military commander declared American forces could remain in a high state of readiness for months if necessary. But Gen. Richard Myers, U.S. chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned that American troops were nevertheless poised for action. "We're ready now. The Iraqi regime should have no doubt," he said in Washington. After a joint meeting of the French and German Cabinets, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said the two countries "are entirely in agreement to harmonize our positions more closely in favor of a peaceful solution of the Iraqi crisis." Chirac said both nations agreed that any decision to attack Iraq should be made only by the U.N. Security Council, after U.N. weapons inspectors have reported their findings. "For us, war is always the proof of failure and the worst of solutions, so everything must be done to avoid it," Chirac said. France, one of the five permanent members of the Security Council, hinted this week that it could use its veto power on the issue, while Schroeder has made plain that Germany will refuse to back an Iraq war resolution in the council. Britain — the closest U.S. ally on Iraq — has said it would prefer Security Council support. But Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) said Wednesday his country would back a U.S.-led war without United Nations support if any countries imposed "unreasonable blockage" of a Security Council resolution. Chirac said France, which holds the current Security Council leadership, and Germany were working closely in the council "to give peace the utmost chance." Though Germany has no veto power, the country will assume a key role in Iraq war diplomacy when it takes over the council leadership in February. In that position, Germany plans on asking chief weapons inspectors to provide the council with an additional report on Iraq's cooperation, diplomats at the United Nations told The Associated Press. The move is likely to deepen divisions among the council since the United States is trying to block inspectors from issuing further reports after one scheduled Monday, which the Bush administration sees as a crucial benchmark after two months of inspections. France and Germany are also key members of NATO (news - web sites), which is currently discussing a request from the United States to provide backup should war break out in Iraq. Meanwhile, U.N. arms inspectors ran into protests at Basra University in Iraq with dozens of students gathering to demonstrate against the inspections. "No war for oil," read one sign in English, reflecting a common Iraqi view that U.S. threats to attack Iraq have more to do with American designs on Iraqi oil than with concern over its weapons. Also Wednesday, the White House denied an Iraqi claim that its air defenses shot down an unmanned American spy plane. In New York, chief inspector Hans Blix complained that Iraq was balking at allowing the United Nations reconnaissance overflights. The French-German push for a peaceful disarming of Iraq came as their nations marked the 1963 signing of a treaty that sealed their friendship after fighting three wars in just 70 years. Chirac and Schroeder announced a series of initiatives to bring the former enemies even closer, including a plan to grant French and Germans shared nationality. Schroeder said he and Chirac agreed dual nationality would be offered "in the long term" to Germans and French who live in the other country. They did not provide other details. As the buildup of forces near Iraq went on, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said in Washington that a war against Iraq could last "four days, four weeks or four months." He also said it seemed reasonable to expect that large numbers of Iraqi troops would surrender early as they did in the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites), reducing the number of battlefield casualties. The Pentagon (news - web sites) reported that more than 20,000 additional members of the National Guard and Reserve were called to active duty over the past week, pushing the total mobilized to 78,906 as of Wednesday. It was the largest one-week total since the buildup began in December. President Bush (news - web sites) said in St. Louis that if the United States has to go to war, not only Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) would face "serious consequences" but also "any Iraqi general or soldiers who were to use weapons on our troops or on innocent lives." In Australia, the government announced it was dispatching air, land and naval forces to the Gulf region.