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.
Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: stockman_scott who wrote (154345)3/17/2003 10:46:13 PM
From: Victor Lazlo  Respond to of 164684
 
For WWII vets, France's stance is beyond belief

by Joe Fitzgerald
Monday, March 17, 2003

The retired general didn't have to worry about political correctness because he knew his audience was comprised of old soldiers who felt the same way he did, remembering the price Americans paid to secure the freedom France enjoys today.

``Going to war without France,'' he said, ``is like going deer hunting without your accordion.''

Contemptuous? You bet he was.

And that's how a lot of his comrades are feeling today, watching French President Jacques Chirac denigrate America's intention to remove Saddam Hussein by any means necessary.

Paul Cook was in the general's audience that day. Just before retiring as a district chief in the Boston Fire Department in 1988, Cook, whose specialty was logistics, was dispatched to Strasbourg to represent Boston at the dedication of a new fire facility there.

``Strasbourg, like Kyoto, is a sister city to Boston,'' Cook explained. ``When I got there one of our hosts asked, `Have you ever been to France before?' I said, `Yes, in 1944, at Normandy.' ''

He referred, of course, to the great Allied invasion that claimed more than 2,400 American casualties on Omaha Beach alone, leading to the liberation of Paris and the eventual conquest of the Germans who had occupied it.

``Every time I was introduced,'' Cook, now living in Westwood, recalls, ``the speaker mentioned Normandy and it would spark a tremendous ovation. Two of (late French president Francois) Mitterand's guards escorted us everywhere. We were considered distinguished visitors.''

Now, however, France has chosen to break ranks with the nation that once rescued it.

``To me, it's unbelievable they're not with us,'' Somerville's Richard Massiglia, a Purple Heart recipient, said. ``We were certainly with them when it counted.''

A Roxbury native, Massiglia was 22 when he landed at Normandy.

``All they have to do is look at the graves to remember how many of us died to save their butts.''

Gordon Crosby, 71, a kid by their standards, is a veteran of the Korean War and state adjutant of the Massachusetts VFW.

``I don't blame these World War II guys for feeling the way they do,'' he said. ``They lost a lot of buddies there. If it wasn't for them the French people would probably be speaking German today. If that sounds hateful, I'm sorry, but it isn't. I'll say one thing for the French: They do a wonderful job of maintaining American graves over there. But once that generation we liberated is gone, I don't think the younger ones will have the same feeling.''

It brings to mind a poignant scene from ``Save the Tiger'' in which Oscar-winner Jack Lemmon ruefully recalls taking a business trip to Milan:

``Then I flew to Rome and drove down to Anzio. There's a ridge there and the sand is all piled up like a dune. In 1944 that sand was muddy with blood. Last year it was covered with bikinis, sweating into the same sand that held all that blood.''

To which Jack Gilford, who plays his business partner, responds: ``Shouldn't surprise you. Battlefields have a way of turning into resorts.''

But some things should not be forgotten.

``We've had Belgium people come to our reunions,'' Walpole's Wally Songin, 78, who fought in the Battle of the Bulge, said. ``They've always appreciated what we did and I believe the French people feel the same way. But I can't understand their government. Same with the Russians; the Germans would have walked right through them, too, if it wasn't for us. How can they not back us now?''

Cook has fading photographs of himself and his buddies in the Army's 3110 Signal Battalion surrounded by jubilant residents on Liberation Day in Paris, August 1944.

``I remember how we held back, allowing Charles DeGaulle and the French armored divisions to march down the Champs-Elysees in triumph. We let them go first to get the glory, to make them look good. We weren't there for the glory. We still had a war to fight, all the way to Berlin.''

These are the sentiments Jacques Chirac stirs, and if some find them insensitive or offensive, too bad.

``I have mixed emotions,'' Cook admitted. ``I know war is an extension of politics, but as an American I also tell myself our government must know something we don't, and I trust it.''



To: stockman_scott who wrote (154345)3/18/2003 8:29:48 AM
From: Victor Lazlo  Respond to of 164684
 
Matt Towery
URL:http://www.townhall.com/columnists/matttowery/mt20030318.shtml

March 18, 2003

Inside the numbers: Iraq

President Bush is acting forcefully against Iraq in just the political nick of time. And his bold move to go ahead with a war likely will earn him soaring job approval ratings.

The seemingly endless diplomatic two-step around Saddam Hussein not only has plunged previously popular British Prime Minister Tony Blair into a black hole of public disapproval at home, it has been inching Bush lower and lower toward a 50 percent approval rating. Public support in the 40 percentiles would be disastrous for the president. Remember, it was Blair's anemic support in Britain that forced the United States to delay earlier military action against Iraq in favor of yet another "one last effort at diplomacy." A continuing treadmill of inaction could spell doom for Blair and Bush.

This was reflected in our recent poll that showed Bush leading all announced Democratic 2004 presidential challengers with 44 percent against 35 percent. The president polled 48 percent in early February.

But let there be no doubt. Our next survey of the presidential race this month will likely show monumental gains for Bush. And a quick review of some of our other recent surveys will explain why that is the case.

First, let's consider support for the president's position that military action is necessary if Hussein isn't otherwise removed from office. Our survey immediately following the tragic explosion of the Columbia space shuttle demonstrated that even such a national setback did not deter Americans from supporting the president in a war with Iraq. Over 60 percent said they would be behind the president. (The question posed didn't mention the United Nations one way or the other.)

Second came an interesting response to our recent survey asking Americans how they felt about other prominent nations generally considered friends and allies of the United States. Even a month ago, Americans were rating France and Russia among those they least admire. Given the aggressive nature of France's anti-war efforts since that poll was taken, it's probably safe to assume that the intensity of French nationalistic fervor is more than matched by equal ardor for America by Americans. And it's probable that some in the United States who might have been less supportive of Bush are now firmly in his corner because of foreign opposition to him.

What about those Americans who fear that a war with Iraq might result in a drawn-out war, a sort of Vietnam in the sand? Our survey of late January showed that most Americans who had an opinion on the matter expected an Iraqi war to last from at least six months to more than a year. Nevertheless, other recent polls show they are ready to go forward with the fighting.

Collectively, these surveys show that while Bush may have suffered a temporary drop in popularity as he played out the diplomatic game, he still has in place the various check-offs on public sentiment necessary to act authoritatively in the Middle East. The question now is how he will spend his political capital as the coming weeks unfold.

Here at home, he must avoid the appearance of bullying his war supporters on domestic issues. Such a posture could find him back in the fever of post-9-11 cockiness that plagued the White House by the summer of 2002. On the up side, there will be good will awaiting a victorious Bush, allowing his team the opportunity to push through a more meaningful economic stimulus package that can sustain the president and our nation long after Saddam is gone.

Internationally, Bush must decide how to deal with those nations that have been indifferent or obstructionist as the Iraqi crisis has unfolded. It will remain vitally important to maintain quality relations with Russia. That former Cold War enemy now plays a critical role in suppressing and eliminating weapons of mass destruction all over the world, and in helping to replace Middle East oil supplies with its own vast petroleum reserves.

And France? Well, that's a different matter. In an effort to save his own political neck and revive a virtually dead career, French President Jacques Chirac played the "Iraq Card" and created delays that might cost American lives in combat. While the French will remain important in helping fight international terrorism, it's possible their haughty self-centeredness could end up costing more lives than any single terrorist attack.

President Bush will have newfound political strength after the events of the next few weeks. Let's hope he is measured in its use. Perhaps one good move would be to capture Saddam Hussein and provide him political exile in Paris. Bon voyage, desert dictator.

©2003 Creators Syndicate