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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (78359)	2/28/2003 7:36:59 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

French lawmakers warn of veto risks By Kim Housego ASSOCIATED PRESS PARIS — Leading lawmakers from President Jacques Chirac's party have begun speaking out about the damage France's anti-war stance is having on relations with the United States and the future of the United Nations. Top Stories • Iraq agrees to destroy missiles • GOP introduces stimulus bill • Black Democrats at odds with Lieberman • Wolfowitz criticizes 'suspect' estimate of occupation force • Jordanian town defies Amman • Now how about that? Another snowstorm • Suspicious minds Herve de Charette, a former foreign minister and lawmaker with the ruling party, was the latest to add his voice to a string of warnings about the consequences of any French veto in the Security Council. Mr. de Charette said he believes war on Iraq is inevitable and told LCI television that any veto of a U.S.-backed resolution seeking authorization for war "is a decision that has great ramifications, of great gravity." He noted that France, one of five veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council, has not used one against the United States since the crisis over the Suez Canal in 1956. The ruling party's president, Alain Juppe; its parliamentary head, Jacques Barrot; and Edouard Balladur, the head of parliament's foreign affairs commission, also have all said that a veto risks a breakdown in relations with the United States and some European countries. France has "avoided committing a mistake, which some are pushing for, that would have left it isolated: wrongly brandishing its right of veto," Mr. Juppe said during a debate on the Iraq crisis in parliament Wednesday. "A veto is unimaginable," Claude Goasguen, another ruling party lawmaker, told the daily Le Monde in yesterday's edition. "We are not going to break the United Nations and Europe just to save a tyrant," he said, referring to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. "We have taken into account the concern about not uselessly breaking relations with the United States," Mr. Barrot told the same paper. "We are not going to get to the point of getting into an argument with Western democracies." He said strong trans-Atlantic ties were crucial "to build peace tomorrow." This week, the cover of Le Point, a leading newsmagazine, asks, "What's got into Chirac?" It said, "It's high time we weighed up the damage of an Atlantic rupture," adding that it would be "wiser to save the United Nations and NATO from ruin" rather than let Mr. Chirac enjoy any longer his "conviction that he's not a little mosquito biting the American elephant." The comments do not indicate dwindling support for Mr. Chirac's drive to give weapons inspectors more time and muscle to disarm Baghdad peacefully, or the belief that everything should be tried before resorting to war. But it does reflect mounting concern about the direction French foreign policy is taking and where it will lead, perhaps a sign the pendulum in France may now be slowly starting to swing toward the position of the United States. The dilemma facing the president was summed up in the ardently pro-Chirac newspaper Le Figaro, which wrote in an editorial yesterday that Mr. Chirac had already added the "missing page in his history" by reinvigorating French pride and standing up to the United States. An accompanying article described the conflicting pressures on France. "Renouncing its veto and fleeing into abstention would not only weaken positions defended by Jacques Chirac for the past six months, it would also make obsolete one of the essential levers of French foreign policy. But using it would spark a serious crisis with the United States and its allies." The risks have been clearly spelled out by Howard Leach, the American ambassador to France, who said in Le Monde yesterday that "France's position could have long-term repercussions." The French also have seen how the United States froze out Germany after Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder first criticized U.S. policy on Iraq. Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin said yesterday that France has "no affection" for Saddam and that his country might participate in a U.S.-led military coalition, something the government has not ruled out. "If Saddam Hussein does not respond to the calls of the inspectors, we do not exclude the use of force," Mr. Raffarin told the regional Paris-Normandie newspaper in an interview for publication today. Though the remarks didn't signal a shift in official position, Mr. Raffarin's tone was noticeably tougher on the Iraqi leader. The prime minister said he believes the crisis can be resolved through diplomacy and that France still hopes to persuade the United States to hold off on its war plans. "We have no affection for Saddam Hussein, but we are also mindful of the harm that can come to the Iraqi people" if a war starts, Mr. Raffarin said. Opposition Socialist and Communist leaders stridently oppose war and have repeatedly urged the government to veto any resolution paving the way for military strikes.

To: LindyBill who wrote (78359)	2/28/2003 8:54:48 AM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 281500

Sullivan's weekly "Dish." By Andrew Sullivan Some intriguing thoughts, Bill. Thanks for posting it. Couldn't resist--Done in good humor. Havent even read it yet. mike

To: LindyBill who wrote (78359)	2/28/2003 9:06:38 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Bill, I guess there was some truth in the Maine story you posted after all. (See below) Yesterday it was brought to my attention that soldier who are called up are guaranteed their jobs when they return but not their incomes while away. Sears was an example of a firm who paid the difference in salary between military pay and sears pay for a period of two years. But the vast majority of servicemen and women do not have this benefit. Their families have in most cases a hefty loss of income. Perhaps one of you retired types here at SI would want to take the lead in setting up a fund to help these families while their loved ones are away. If nothing else it should bring folks with diverse points of view together in a common cause brought on by the war. Just a thought. mike Maine teachers warned: Watch anti-war talk in classroom Friday, February 28, 2003 Posted: 4:29 AM EST (0929 GMT) Maine's Department of Education Commissioner Duke Albanese sent a memo to superintendents and principals regarding sensitivity to the families of military personnel. PORTLAND, Maine (AP) -- After complaints that the children of soldiers were upset by anti-war comments at school, Maine's top education official warned teachers to be careful of what they say in class about a possible invasion of Iraq. The Maine Army National Guard has received a dozen reports of children of guard members in elementary and middle schools who said teachers and fellow students have criticized the looming conflict. Maj. Peter Rogers quoted parents as saying their children have come home upset or depressed because of comments in class and on the playground. "They were hearing comments like, 'The pending war in Iraq is unethical' and 'Anybody who would fight that war is also unethical,"' Rogers said. "So children who are already losing family members to deployment were understandably upset." Charles Haynes of the Freedom Forum, an educational organization in Arlington, Virginia, said he has received several dozen e-mails and phone calls in recent months from parents concerned that teachers are unfair or biased in how they address the issue of Iraq in the classroom. Haynes urged schools to keep alive classroom discussions about Iraq, and present different views on the issue, even if there have been complaints about teaching methods or teacher comments. "Often it is a misunderstanding of what the teacher is trying to do," he said. "But it's also the case that some teachers have a political agenda they can't keep out of the classroom, and that they must do." In Maine, Department of Education Commissioner Duke Albanese sent a memo to superintendents and principals, writing that it had been brought to his attention some school personnel had been "less than sensitive to children of military families regarding our continued strained relations with Iraq." He said discussion should allow for questions and differences of opinion, but "be grounded in civil discourse and mutual respect." The issue has also grabbed the attention of Republican Sen. Susan Collins and Gov. John Baldacci. "Any suggestion that their parents are doing something wrong is extremely unfortunate and could have a harmful effect, particularly on young children," Collins said. Baldacci said he's "disappointed" by the actions of some educators in public school systems.