I have no words.

Except to say that I hate the French.

Yeh, the French have proven themselves to be as shitty as the Palestinians. Look for them to become the first European Islamic state.

First?! If so, let me reiterate. I hate the French. Hate.

so what?

Merde. They can bite my yellow squeaking butt.

We need to replace those towers with the Eiffel! Hahaha! But the French are so stupid they wouldn't "get it".

With the way things are going in that country, they'll get theirs via Sharia law! Ooo la la - the prostitutes will be dead or destitute.

Andrew Sullivan provides a link to MerdeinFrance with this other French beauty:

[Link: merdeinfrance.blogspot.com...]

What about the 15,000 dead due to their incompetence?

Some people are saying that the French are basically decent people. How do basically decent people let a national newspaper print something like this? Would the French accept a US paper running a cartoon making fun of SS Troopers forcing French civilians into a church, and then setting fire to it? I suspect not.

I think the decent Frenchman are the tiny minority, if they have not all left France already.

I'm missing the point of the "chili 1973", please fill me in.

I don't know what to say. I am appalled.

Let's give credit where credit is due. At least they could spare a moment from their mourning from their own 15000 dead to spare a thought about the US. It's amazing that they could do that much. We couldn't expect them to get the sentiment right as well.

The French are slime.

Just as in WWII, the French start the war with surrender.

#8, that's socialized medicine "letting them die".

If Balzac were alive today he would be writing aobut this. And about the 15,000 dead.

Pinochet overthrew the democratic government of Chile on Sept 11 1973. I think they're saying that the US has overtaken their tragedy, which is amazingly offensive. The US did not choose to have terrorists fly planes into the WTC on that date so they could offend the Chileans

Remember that Le Monde is a socialist newspaper. Only 92% of the French agree with it.

#10 Joe 9/11/2003 04:47PM PST

I'm missing the point of the "chili 1973", please fill me in.

The CIA helped General Pinochet overthrow the socialist government of Salvador Allende in a military coup.

what's the deal with the AK-47? I'don't get it.

isnt France just a shitty little country, with that lout chirac as prime weasel?

Screw them. Won't they be surprised what happens to their crappy lives when all their muslim appeasement and ass kissing results in Sharia law.

#19 Mie 9/11/2003 04:53PM PST

what's the deal with the AK-47? I'don't get it.

Commies and socialists like the AK. Allende was a socialist. The guy with the glasses is Allende.

[Link: www.boycottfrenchproducts.org...]

nuff said!

ve

Let their hotels be covered in dust and cobwebs.

Let their grapes rot on the vine.

Let not one American dollar fall into their banks' coffers.

Let their economy crumble.

If that's supposed to be Allende in the lower left corner, at least they were honest enough to put a gun in his hand, which kind of captures his style of governing. If the gun is to symbolize him as fighting to the end, well, yeah, cornered rats are like that. Ask the SS.

The bestselling book in France for months was one which theorized that 9-11 was done by Americans in order to find a pretext for world domination.

France defended Saddam and his persuit of WMD assets, for its share of Iraq's oil with TotalELF.

France wanted NATO control over the attack in Afghanistan in oder to hamper efforts at finding Bin Laden.

France prosecutes people for writing books about the truth of radical Islam.

French people desecrate British and American graves of soldiers who died to protect France from tyranny.

The French are scum, and I hope they wither and die in the hellfire of Islamic extremism that they think they can reason with. After the Islamists have finished killing everyone in France who doesn't submit to shaira, we can nuke that God-forsaken country and blow it back to the stone age. Maybe then, countries won't collectively lose their minds over an extreme hatrid of America - the last, great hope for mankind.

Joe: The Chile connection

Feeling schadenfreude that there was so much loss of life and so much loss of innocence on 9/11 is very French.

Last year, the big pop song was Manhattan Kaboul that compared an imaginary Puerto Rican victim and a little girl in Afghanistan....it basically inferred that the US had what was coming to it. The song was sung by a loser named Renaud. I have the lyrics somewhere and if anyone wants, I can translate.

Sadly and uselessly I am completely fluent in French.

Mr Pol #17 - LOL!

At first, I didn't even know what to think about this. At the very least, we should withdraw our ambassador from France.

zee peeegggggssss

The CIA helped General Pinochet overthrow the socialist government of Salvador Allende in a military coup.

Actually, the CIA was barely involved. The Chilean military did it all on its own.

Hard to believe, I know. After all, Chile is just a Third World nation, and those people are incapable of driving their own destinies, right?

We did wrong in Chile by enabling the overthrow of the Allende government. But it was the height of the Cold War, the stakes were high, and a socialist govt in our hemisphere simply could not be allowed to exist.

Regardless, to compare our role in the coup against Allende to 911 is pure America-hatred, plain and simple.

#19 Mie

what's the deal with the AK-47? I'don't get it.

Allende and an aide were armed with AK47s when finally cornered and shot down by Pinochet forces.

why pay so much attention to such a "shitty little country?"

Actually, the CIA was barely involved. The Chilean military did it all on its own.

We were involved enough. Our signature is all over that one.

What a sick joke.
The same people who let 10,000 of their own die from the heat, sure have the nerve! Selfish, self serving bastards-

I remember the French

They have to live with the government they have. When the barracks in Beirut were bombed, the Third Parachute Regiment helped us "try" to rescue who we could. I know. I came from the airport. We might be pissed at the current leader, but there are still a lot of french men who support our cause. They just don't have a voice.

I doubt that a large percentage of the French people will understand that cartoon. They cannot seem to learn from history, so they probably don't have a clue in this case as in everything else.

#17 Mr Pol

Only 92% of the French agree with it.

well said.

thanks for the info

#12 RonG

Let's give credit where credit is due. At least they could spare a moment from their mourning from their own 15000 dead to spare a thought about the US.

The French political class is not, in fact, mourning the thousands killed in the heatwave. Doing so would be some kind of admission of guilt. The plan is to keep mum, change nothing, and hope next summer won't be so hot.

#32 Yura Dhimmi

Don't shed too many tears for Allende. He was an acolyte of Castro's and he was ruining the country. He was nationalizing industries, inducing capital flight, running 600% inflation, and trashing the rule of law. Opposition to him and his policies was fervent and widespread. Good riddance.

Salvador Allende died while engaged in combat with the coup forces. He died firing an AK47.

Allende governed Chile after being elected with something like 37% of the vote. Not a resounding vote for Allende style socialism/communism/Castroism.

Despicable.

Wow.

The French must be getting a head start on their 2004 "Woo American Tourists Back to Paris" advertising campaign.

.Mylroie at NRO

Lopez: Why hasn't the administration been able to do a better job of tying Saddam Hussein to 9/11? It's a laughable contention to many.

Mylroie: Yes, for many it is laughable. Indeed, over the weekend the Washington Post ran a story that nearly 70 percent of the American public believes Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks, but there is "no evidence" to prove that. NBC's Tom Brokaw reported on that story, with the exact same tone, a few days later.

But, of course, there is evidence. There is lots of evidence, which I, and others, have put into the public record.

Still, this is how the bureaucracies, or elements within them, carry out their side of the argument. They refuse to recognize what is before their eyes and the media just repeats the cry, "no evidence."

That happened when I was testifying before the 9/11 Commission. Another person on the panel — from the CIA — kept saying there is "no evidence," even as I was presenting evidence.

It's a word game. Evidence, according to Webster's, is "something that indicates." For example, your smile is evidence of your feelings toward me. "Proof" is conclusive demonstration.

After the 9/11 Commission panel, former Navy Secretary John Lehman, one of the commissioners, told the press that he thought Iraq was involved in the attacks, citing the terrorist training camp at Salman Pak. That's evidence.

I don't really know why the administration doesn't make this case. Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz, explained that the administration had two reasons for war: Iraq's weapons and its terrorism. There was so much dispute about the latter (read bureaucratic opposition), however, that they focused their public case on the weapons alone.

Perhaps, now that the weapons are in dispute, they will make this case.

Mylroie: What has been the State Department/CIA problem with the Iraqi National Congress, especially given the Baath alternative? Did the State Department like the Baathists? Do they now? In Syria, and elsewhere?

Lopez: Whether at State or in the CIA, the Middle East experts are, largely, oriented toward Arab governments. No Arab government is elected, and they are overwhelmingly Sunni. The population of Iraq is majority Shia. None of the Arab rulers really wants to see an Iraqi government that reflects the Iraqi population, if only because a successful Arab democracy would challenge their rule. Hence, State and the CIA liked the Baathists and disliked the INC.

Even now, their hostility to the INC has not abated. In fact, the State Department has cut off funding to the INC that the U.S. Congress had mandated, even as various Arab countries, as well as Iran, are pouring funds into Iraq to promote the kind of (undemocratic) regime they want to see.

Lopez: What's your take on Iran and Saudi Arabia re: 9/11?

Mylroie: Iran was not involved in 9/11. If it were, we would have gone to war with Iran. The same with Saudi Arabia. This is not to say that there are not serious problems with those countries. Iran's nuclear program has to be stopped, and the Saudi export of Wahhabism and funding of Islamic militancy should be stopped too.

That said, many people, I realize, believe the Saudis had more to do with the 9/11 attacks than Iraq. Indeed, that is the preferred explanation of the Beltway, including the Democrats, who vehemently oppose the notion that Iraq was involved.

Some of those who promote the idea that the Saudis were involved do so, because they don't want to acknowledge their mistake regarding Iraq. Some do so, because it is popular. It makes for best-selling books, time on television, etc. And some genuinely don't understand the background to 9/11; the complexity of the operation; or, perhaps, how intelligence agencies, particularly Soviet-style intelligence agencies, practice deception.

Lopez: We still don't know who planted the anthrax in 2001. How can that be?

Mylroie: The same problem that exists with the CIA exists in the FBI, at least at headquarters in Washington.

The extraordinarily lethal form of anthrax sent to the two senators — more lethal than the anthrax produced by the Soviet or U.S. biological weapons programs in their days — could not have been made by a lone individual, even though that has been the operating investigative theory of the FBI from the start.

A state had to have made that anthrax in a laboratory. Of all the suspect states, Iraq tops the list, for me, as well as a number of others, including senior administration officials, as explained in Bush vs. the Beltway.

Lopez: Why aren't more Iraq experts and people in the administration asking the questions you're asking?

Mylroie: There are people in the administration pursuing these issues, although the administration is silent publicly.

As for the Iraq experts, part of the problem, I think, is that they do not represent the country's best and brightest (I include myself). People of talent and ambition were much more likely to study a country like the Soviet Union or China, or to be a general strategist, than to become a Middle East expert.

And in their overwhelming majority, Washington's Iraq experts represent a disgrace. In August 1995, Saddam's son-in-law defected and it became known — from the Iraqi regime — that Baghdad retained large amounts of proscribed weapons material, including a large biological-weapons program.

The Clinton administration did nothing to address this problem and the Iraq experts went along with that. In late 1998, I pressed one such expert on this, and was told, "The times are very cynical and everyone must do what he must do for his career."

Lopez: Given the current state of affairs, if 9/11/01 were tomorrow, would we see it coming? Would we be able to stop it?

Mylroie: It is very difficult to detect and stop a major terrorist attack, before it happens. That is why Bush has taken the offensive. There is significantly less risk than before, although remnants of al Qaeda and Iraqi intelligence remain at large, and until this war is won completely, serious dangers continue to exist.

Lopez: What must the president do that he is not? Is there any chance he will?

Mylroie: There is a disconnect between the president's courageous decision for war and the White House's cautious dealings with the bureaucracies. It has avoided the inside-the-beltway conflicts it believed it could avoid and still accomplish the goal of ousting Saddam.

The president has not made the clear, indisputable case for war that should — and could — be made. Indeed, Bush probably does not understand how easy it would be to demonstrate Iraq's role in the 9/11 attacks

Luckily there is still one good Frenchman :

[Link: www.thedissidentfrogman.com...]

#32 Yura Dhimmi 9/11/2003

We did wrong in Chile by enabling the overthrow of the Allende government.

Get real. We should do it more often. Fuck communism. I would love it if the CIA helped Venezuela get rid of the Castro butt buddy who runs it, Hugo Chavez. That nation is crucial to our oil supply and a monkey runs it now.

I get it now, Sept 11 is also the anniversary of the 1973 coup in Chile.

The French Foreign Minister, de Villepin, showed his usual tact by using 11 September for another critique of the US :

Times September 12, 2003

France defies US with attack on policy for Iraq

FRANCE set the scene yesterday for continuing antagonism with the US, accusing Washington of living in the past and failing to grasp the urgency of the “tragic” situation in the world.
In a review of French thinking four months after the Iraq war, Dominique de Villepin, the Foreign Minister, demanded a radical change in the US approach to Iraq before France would approve a UN force to stabilise the country. His impassioned defence of the French world view left no doubt that Paris is maintaining its opposition to Washington on a variety of fronts, including terrorism and the Middle East.

As a friend and ally of the US, the minister said, France had a duty to press the case for joint international action over the multitude of crises facing the world. “Too often ... there is a certain way of thinking in the US, notably among the neo-conservatives, that thinks in a framework of yesterday’s world, especially on the issue of power,” he said.

Backed by Germany, Paris has proposed amendments to a US resolution at the UN Security Council which would send an international force into Iraq. The main idea is that the US should rapidly relinquish overall control and transfer sovereignty to a provisional government under UN supervision.

Colin Powell, the Secretary of State, has dismissed the French proposal as unacceptable. He is to meet M de Villepin and their British, Russian and Chinese colleagues, all the veto-holding permanent members of the council, in Geneva tomorrow.

Addressing British and American media for the first time since what he calls “the Iraq episode”, M de Villepin said the US must realise that more troops were not a solution to the chaotic state of Iraq. “You can double the size of the international force but it will not change the situation,” he said. The proposed UN resolution had to be radically changed it it was to be effective.

“The reconstruction of Iraq requires national sovereignty. As soon as possible we must show the Iraqi people that it is they who will be reponsible for controlling their country. If we send the wrong message to the Iraqis now, US and British soldiers will be dying. The risk is that in two months, if we do nothing, the situation will be even worse.”

While M de Villepin insisted that France shared identical goals with Washington, his vehement language underlined the determination in Paris to play what it deems to be a strong hand over the US quandary in Iraq.

President Chirac has ordered his team to avoid any gloating, and diplomatic contacts have revived between Washington and Paris after the crisis of the spring. The mood has also improved with Britain despite friction this week over French opposition to a UN vote to lift sanctions against Libya.

French officials are quick to argue, however, that their warnings before the Iraq war about the dangers of a unilateral US invasion have been proved accurate. Preaching the multilateral doctrine that President Chirac adopted as his mantra over Iraq, M de Villepin said the US had to stop believing that it had the power to do everything alone.

“Conceiving of today’s world with the tools of yesterday is archaic. We are in a totally different world. Everything is interdependent, everything is fluid, everything is mobile ... all the new problems are problems to be faced not by states but by the world.”

The startling impact of the latest video tape from Osama bin Laden on Wednesday was an illustration of the new-style threat, he said.

“Look at the emotion over a cassette. He sows fear in the world with a cassette. That is a cause for new thinking.” In a swipe at President Bush over his quarrel with France, M de Villepin said: “The situation in the world is tragic and now is not the time to be distracted by throwing around accusations ... It is not a question of who is going to be elected in some country or another.”

M de Villepin said France was not trying to give lessons to Washington. “I do not want to be proved right over the US Administration ... Friendship does not consist in accompanying a friend to the edge of the precipice and seeing him fall in. It is trying to explain to him that there is perhaps a way of getting round the obstacle.”

M de Villepin’s September 11 foray, couched in the brilliant rhetoric that earns him admiration in France, was given a cool reception by US and British diplomats in Paris. “I don’t know who he’s trying to convince, but this hardly helps the reconciliation that we’re trying to work for,” said one.

Others pointed out that the Foreign Minister’s passionate pleading of the French case contrasted with the quieter efforts of his team at the UN and in the capitals to patch up the winter quarrel that so damaged the French image in the US.

I, for one will never again set foot in the land of froggistan. That goes for West froggistan also. (quebec)

Bastards, cheese eating surrender monkeys.

They may bare their feelings, but the French always cover their faces and asses when REAL soldiers come marching through.

Lazy Tart writes:

I have no words. Except to say that I hate the French.

My sentiments exactly. They can all go to hell, including those supposed decent few who refuse to do or say anything while their country goes down the sinkhole of history.

Death to France.

#4, bite me.

There's at least one decent person there. Very moving tribute.

adnan, #27

The article you linked to, The Chile Connection, gives one representation of events.

Here is another: The Allende Myth

Allende had 36.2% of the vote, the second candidate had 34.9%, and a third had 27.8%. He did not control the legislative branch, but by executive orders was rapidly implementing a policy which contavened the agreements he made when the election was resolved.

A truer cartoon would also have a Soviet plane and a Cuban plane flying into buildings. But their archives are not open to journalists backed by the Freedom of Information Act. And to the French these days, everything is black and white.

At my son's high school (private school, 200 students) only 3 students signed up to take French this year. The school eliminated the French language class. The students want to study ...guess what...Italian!

I saved something about the Allende affair because I knew this thread would pop up

# 27 gives a grim picture of American involvement claiming 3000 dead from American bombings. It's all lies .

Here is the real Allende story.

Oh and before I leave screw you France.

I despise the French and the French looking John Kerry and the French acting Howard Dean

These are the same folks that the Liberals wanted us to get permission from for us to go into Iraq?

bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa -

#33 CC Señor:

Allende and an aide were armed with AK47s when finally cornered and shot down by Pinochet forces.

Or Allende shot himself before the golpistas could get to him, nobody's quite sure. And he wasn't armed with just any ol' AK-47. It had been a personal gift to him from... [drum roll]... Fidel Castro!

Personally, I think we (the US) should have kept our hands clean of the Allende coup. The Chilean military were quite prepared to do it even without the modest help offered by the CIA. And the excesses following the coup were real--even Pinochet eventually felt compelled to fire Manuel Contreras, the head of the DINA (secret police), because of his brutality.

But leave it to Le Monde to make this fatuous non-point. See, the similarity between the Allende coup and the WTC/Pentagon/Pennsylvania terrorist murders is... um... the date! Yeah, that's it! What an utterly stupid point. Or is it that bin Laden was avenging the death of Allende? Funny, not even bin Laden claims that. Nope, it's just a random lashing-out at America for real or imagined past sins. Yet, if and when the Tour Monparnasse is destroyed by an al Quaeda-hijacked Air France flight, we'll step up and help them get the people who did it. We won't say, "ah, but what about the Dreyfus Affair?".

A Jackson (#56)

That is simple and beautiful. Of all the things I've read today, that gave me the shivers. Thanks for linking it.

hey, papertiger (#60), I beat you by two minutes.

How big is Le Monde in France?

This.Cant.Be.For.Real. I knew the French were craven, but I had not thought this badly. Damn them. How effen dare they on this day.

Ya Us felines think alike Montaigne.

btw On The Frogmans site yesterday was a story of a dissident in Vietnam who is in Jail right now for downloading an American statedept. post on the meaning of Democracy. It is a must read for anybody who has had Vietnam tossed in their face in a chatroom.
I think it will be on the Dissidentfrogmans weblog tomorrow. He has this tribute thing up right now and it prevents you from reading his usual stuff.

Le Monde is the French = NYTimes

Never again should American blood to be spilled in defense of France.

I do not doubt that there are decent French. I know that there are decent Muslims, I know one. I do not say America is faultless, but a line is being drawn.

Think hard about which side you are on.

There will be years yet before the reckoning. The wheels grind slow, but fine.

The frogs will get theirs. Patience.

Sorry yanks, but your dollars made pinochet, enemy of your economical interests on minerals and gas in chile, your dollars made chemical weapons for iraq against iran, your dollars and stingers helped al-qaeda against soviets in afghanistan, your dollars made anything.
And if you hope that we bow our europeans head, your' wrong.
DEAD WRONG.
Remember, you have nukes.
WE HAVE NUKES, you just provided to us, when you had problems with the russkies...
so don't worry about france, because isn't only france.
IT's EUROPE !!!!

And just check about halliburton and carlisle group to find evidence of who is really making money in iraq (and that money is your money !!!!!)

Europe stand defiant against USA.

Could someone do me a favor and visit [Link: WWW.Pavefrance.com...] and ask Papafrench how appalled he was by this cartoon in Le Monde today?
You see he tells me he was appalled BUT, always with him theres a BUT.

#71 eurowimp
Piss off, you spineless little twirp.

Le Monde is the French = NYTimes

So hopefully there are those that hold it in similar contempt and disregard.

Having said that, this cartoon is f*#ked up.

Although strangely, I am now hungry for a bowl of "chili."

Why don't these things get any airplay on the mainstream news? I'm not talking about Jennings and Rather, hell they probably laugh and agree with it. But what about FOX and MSNBC? The mainstream media is failing this country.

zulubaby

I had posted the Dissident Frogman's quiet but vivid illustration a little earlier - he often comes up with some excellent graphic art.

And his weblog - along with merdeinfrance - give a good running tally of France's blunders and iniquities.

Meanwhile - here in London a memorial garden was opened today, near the American Embassy :

[Link: news.bbc.co.uk...]

eurofighter
you mean it wasn't French missles and Russian tanks our guys were fighting against in Iraq?
And how could American dollars possibly be used to make chemical weapons that you claim don't exist?
You remember the where are the WMD protestors right?

French aircraft never made it off the ground in Iraq so dont push out your chest too far.

#73 reaganite: not only a spineless twerp, but he/she/it's named after a European white elephant defense project... fitting, really.

Amazing how "our dollars made Pinochet"... I suppose Mama and Papa Pinochet would be very surprised to learn that.

sorry reaganite, i'm not a spineless little twirp as you... reagan what a nice actor he was !! take a look at his masterpiece "bozo the talkin' monkey"...
an actor as president ... what a nice money oriented country you are..
Remember WE HAVE NUKES....
And US is asking for UN (read french, german and russian) help now...
Olalà !
How it's possible ?
You have some problems with ragged stragglers ?
And where is all this marvellous might ?
GI's are using AK47 in iraq because they are better than the weapons issued by US ARMY.
And the cooks of the US army, did you know they are civillians, Halliburton employees ?
Nice army... mercenaries...
IRAQ MONTHLY COST: 3.6 Million dollars.
Nice move for who can reap profits payed by US citizens..
Nice, nice....

Europe stand defiant against USA.

This is the funniest thing I've read all day. Thanks, "eurofighter"! We'll award you two extra Big Macs for that.

How about a cartoon with an airplane labeled "French Incompetence" crashing into an old folk's home.

10,000 people. The whole country deserves a Darwin award.

And what's with this 30 year old Pinochet crap? Every frog I know throws this old chestnut out as a reason against the war on Iraq. How the two are related I don't know. Even Pinochet was better than communist sponsored socialism in the Americas. (Nice job in the Ivory Coast BTW. Hypocrites.)

They also bring up Vietnam, convieniently forgetting they were there first and ran away like little girls.

There are so few decent Frenchmen left, because the best of them died lonely resisting the Germans. Most of what was left was the collaborators and their half German offspring.

#12 RonG

We missed a great opportunity last month with the French!

We should have offered to evacuate their "wounded" and liberate their sick and dying to US hospitals.

Ayatrollah

au revoir a tous les americains ici.
Farewell to all the yankees here.
And remember to pay taxes, so you can be proud to help your national effort to waste life in the sands of iraq and in the mountains of afghanistan, pretending to restore democracy and instead defending your president's mafiamen interests..

but the better part of it is that YOU SINCERELY BELIEVE in all the incredible lies they tello to all of you !!!

A kudo to "fourth bypass" cheney for all his lovely efforts to strip Microsoft from the first place and replace it with Hallyburton...

And hey, i'm from texas......

#79 eurofighter:

sorry reaganite, i'm not a spineless little twirp as you

Reaganite disarms bombs for a living. Tell me, what non-spineless job do you do?

#80 Occasional Reader

This is the funniest thing I've read all day. Thanks, "eurofighter"! We'll award you two extra Big Macs for that.

Nah, why be so generous? A cheeseburger, he is TADA! Eurofightermuffin!

71 ef:

Are you really European? Are you gonna honestly sit there and hurl accusations like that without mentioning Europe's history of colonization and mass murder? Your recent history of arming Saddam? Your present reality of nuking up the Mullahs in Iran. Europe raped the world, for G-d's sake. And you sit in judgment on others?

Please. You self-righteous, ignorant, hypocritical twit.

Go ahead. Pick the wrong side of history and see where it leads you.

#79 eurofighter

You Tard. The only reason Europe even stands is because we put those nukes in to keep Russia out. You think it would have been fun to be part of the Soviet empire? I personally know a lot of East Germans who would dissagree with you. If we had left you idiots to your own devices you would be sipping borscht right now. So all you europaeon ingrates can bite our hyperpowered ass.

You better watch your backs as well, cause right now mohammed is behind it with a knife, and we aren't feeling overly friendly with you whiners right now. Enjoy that Sharia law buddy.

Dumbass.

eurofighter, isn't that an oxymoron? Shouldn't it be euro-capitulator?

Still think we need to get some help from the French and other eurofighters in Iraq...........
.........so they can show Al Qaeda and the Baathists how to surrender.

eurofighter,

texas my ass. the only place a fuckwit like you wouldn't have been shot by now is in austin, and i'm sure that everyone in that town is out smokin a bowl right now.

#89 paul

.........so they can show Al Qaeda and the Baathists how to surrender.

Think about it, who better to teach...

#88 Lurch

priceless! LOL

Euro"fighter" -

Please stay in France Mr. Depp and stop making movies you sucked in Pirates of the Carrib!

Once again the French Foreign Ministry staff drinks too much inferior Frog-juice for lunch:

WE HAVE NUKES, you just provided to us, when you had problems with the russkies...

Yeah, you guys are really up to a game of nuclear brinkmanship. Your legendary resolve, your nerves of steel ....

I may be late posting this but to the French Government, 15,000 dead means 15,000 less pensions to pay.

JG

Eurotard,

If you are in Europe-a-dope, I promise you pay nearly double the taxes I do. And your taxes go to scheming unemployed muslims. You won't be so smug when the terrorism is happening in your backyard.

Even the worst American corporation is more honest that the average Europaeon corp. We just scrutinize ours more. Enjoying that $4.00/gallon gas? numbnuts.

"Eurofighter" (an oxymoron if ever I've read one) is in Italy.

#94 Glen Wishard

Yeah, you guys are really up to a game of nuclear brinkmanship. Your legendary resolve, your nerves of steel ....

LOL, dude, warn me next time!

EUnuchfighter is fairly amusing for a troll. I think we need to keep it and play with it for a while.

#91 Reaganite

Bingo. They don't call em cheese eatin surrender monkeys for nothing.

Eoroweenir- ARE YOU THREATENING ME. Typycal little bitch. Throw around insults and threats and then run away. You must REALY be French.

the only decent euros are the eastern euros, the brits, the spanish, the italians.. hell everyone but the Germans, the Surrender Monkeys and the pusillanimous Belgians..

The best Europeans braved the atlantic and came to the United States to help build the best country the world has ever seen.... The ones that stayed help build the mediocrity that is Europe now. (Specifically, the germans, the Surrender Monkeys and the Pusillanimous Belgians)

#97 Charles

"Eurofighter" (an oxymoron if ever I've read one) is in Italy.

Everybody's got their moonbats. It must drive Euromuffin insane that his country supports the USA.

Just remember what Mark Twain said: "So now we can place man properly - he is between the angels and the French." The French, of course, are somewhere between man and the apes - or is that too disrespectful of apes???

What I find INCREDIBLY funny is little twits like "Eurofighter," who out of one side of their mouths berate the U.S. for having/placing/maintaining/testing nuclear weapons, and out of the other side of their mouths (when taunting us) yell, "We have nukes, too!"

Tell you what, Eurofighter, you little French pussy, why don't you just BRING IT!?!?! You big, bad "Europeans" are "standing strong against the U.S."??? My son's Cub Scout troop could whip the French army over a weekend. The only thing the Europeans "stand strong" against is morality. I'm sure you'll be REALLY proud of your EU when shari'a law comes to Paris.

I love you guys.... LMAO!

why did the french plant trees on the champs d'el-whatever?

so the germans could march in the shade.

#93 Glen Wishard

Yeah, you guys are really up to a game of nuclear brinkmanship. Your legendary resolve, your nerves of steel

It was almost worth staying at the office this late just to read that...

Anyway, you forget that surrender is a kind of brinkmanship, isn't it?

I have spent time on [Link: www.pavefrance.com...]
They have had close to a million visiters on the blog since july. And yet so few people post there.
I had a hunch so I played it.
A couple weeks back I posted
" Wouldn't it be just deserts if instead of our boys in Iraq destroying all these French weapons the collect in Iraq, we gave them to the people of Cote D'Ivoire. The People there must be tired of the French troops by now."

Sure enough their blog was flooded with posts the next day. All in french language. SO many the hosts had to institute new policies to control the flood.

The French obsess over America. We rule their minds in a way they could never rule ours. 850,000 scared little frenchmen scan that blog to see the way American wind blows. Check me and see if I'm lieing.

#100 paul

Bingo. They don't call em cheese eatin surrender monkeys for nothing.

*giggling*

Brownfinger, #81

You're right to note that the cartoon is dredging up 30 year old politics.

This is because the cartoonist and the editorial board cannot bear to face squarely their own horror: Algeria. They must prevent their powers of critique from looking at what THEY did, and look instead at the U.S. and Israel. They know there have been bad actions (their own bad actions), they try to forget but they feel it inside, and to feel better they must take their guilt feelings and move them onto Others. Voila. The Americans are guilty, and the Israelis are guilty. And we French are now the justice-makers and the defenders of the wretched of the earth.

Caption should have been

Chili Today, Hot Tamale

But seriously, the bastards can't even spell the name of the country correctly.

Is Le Monde owned by the French government?

Will we once again have to liberate France from the French, er, Nazis as we did 60 years ago?

Over 100,00 dead in the civil war in Algeria.

And then there's Rwanda and Burundi.

The French sure do a good job of stabilizing their own backyard, don't they?

The famous Eurofighters, aka the french.

italy?? as i remember italy, they couldn't even be bothered to work a 6 hour day, let alone get thier trains within an hour slot of the arrival/departure times. we have nothing to fear from this prick and his ilk.

cheese eating surrender monkeys g-d bless grounds keeper willy

"eurofighter" is posting from Italy? He must be from the Italian Riviera. I think "au revoir a tous les americains ici" is Euro-trash lingo for "I'll give you a blow-job and wax your yacht if you'll buy me lunch, Mister American."

#78 OR

...named after a European white elephant defense project... fitting, really.

LMAO! I'm sure the irony flies right over his head.

#84 OR

what non-spineless job do you do?

I'll guaran-god-damn-tee you he has none.

Good job, you're on a roll.

BTW, as my accented friend, former French citizen, now proud American, says: Zee French ruling class are fucking useless.

The French have never been much of anything. Their greatest Warrior was a corsican, The English used to mop the floor with them back in the middle ages, the germans abused them regularily. Back when they were Gaul, Caesar whooped them with inferior (numbers) forces... Hell the Algerians kicked their ass. The only good french fighters were the underground, but to hear them talk about it, every male back them was in the underground, makes you wonder why there were so many collaberators?
What do the french produce? Good food? Hell italian food is better. Wine? california wine is superior. Politics? Well they are good backstabbers. Military? See above. Hey how are things going in the Ivory Coast? Unilateralism, isn't that a french word? Alas, Lafayette, where are ye?

The Allende inflation rate was more like 3% a day. Allende all but painted a bulleyes on his chest. Good Riddence to Bad Rubish.

Oh yeah, Boo F***ing Hoo, Allende didn't get a villa in France or Saudi Arabia. Most Chilians were/are glad he is dead.

thought I'd share that with you

#71 Eurotwit

Guess what? Our dollars make everything except Brie...and we're working on that. When America sneezes, Europe catches a cold.

That's the beauty of being a superpower. Hell, that's why we're a superpower.

Incidentally, we have a lot more nukes than you do, and they're parked all over Europe along with the means to deliver them.
Got ICBM's? We do, but we don't need them. Deterrence is parked in your backyard, so don't try anything stupid.

Speaking of stupid, Islam is parked in your backyard too, and you're inviting it to be your landlord. Good luck with that. Remember to not call us when you realize that you're in over your head.

Europe will figure it out, or you'll be pointing your silly ass toward Mecca 5 x a day...or else.

#115 Glen Wishard

I think "au revoir a tous les americains ici" is Euro-trash lingo for "I'll give you a blow-job and wax your yacht if you'll buy me lunch, Mister American."

that was the funniest thing i have read all day

i need to add that a texan saved their wine industry as well.
a blight was attacking the french plants and a texan produced a hybrid with a local native vine and voila, another reason the french resent us....

#52 Johninlondon,

GWB set himself up for that pompous lecture by capitulating to the Dems and the lefty media here and by running tail 'tween his legs back the UN. Villepin is a prick to be sure, but GWB brought this one on himself so he will at least have to endure it.

These cartoons don't bother me that much. I expected no less. My personal boycott of France remains in place and likely will for a very very long time to come.

Eurofighter is a pathetic joke. I hope he saves some of that stuff for his impending fight with the Jihadis who figure France is a light touch and will be the first to fall. When the time is right they will push.

When France falls under the Islamic reign of terror. I hope our country has the good sense to let the Jihadis slaughter the lot of them.

Slight nitpick, but with a point (I hope)...

And then there's Rwanda

The French sure do a good job of stabilizing their own backyard, don't they?

Rwanda was a Belgian colony.

Belguim. That country that allows you to sue non-Belgian world leaders for war crimes. Yeah, that Belgium. The same Belgium that tried to repeal that very law when someone tried to sue their foreign minister for a shady arms deal. Ahh, Belgium. Almost, but not quite, as French as the French.

#119 minuscule
Thanks, some pictures didn't belong but it was good.

#119

Very nice but am I missing something? The only French pic is just Jacque whining....

eurofighter.

Do not piss of an excellent fighter aircraft by using it's name.

It is called the Eurofighter Typhoon.

The same name as an excellent British ground attack fighter in WW2.

The Germans were really pissed off at the choice of name.

HaHa!.

On which Simpsons episode did Groundskeeper Willy say "cheese-eating surrender monkeys"?

eurofighter,

J'espère que vous aimiez le goût de cul d'Arabe, eurofighter, parce que c'est ça que vous auriez pour le reste de votre vie grâce au fait que vous ne cessez pas de lécher le cul des Arabes.

Connaissez le blague:
Pourquoi les Français ont plantez des arbres aux Champs Elysées en 1941?
Parce que les Allemands aiment marcher dans l'ombre.
Pourquoi les Français sont en train de couper les arbres aux Champs Elysées maintenant?
Parce que les Arabes aiment marcher au soleil.

***

For those who are wondering:
I hope you like the taste of Arab ass, eurofighter, since that's the taste you'll have for the rest of your file thanks to not stopping kissing the asses of Arabs.

Do you know the joke:
Why did the French plant trees on the Champs Elysees in 1941?
Because the Germans like to march in the sun.
Why are the French planting trees now?
Because the Arabs like to march in the sun.

The Indymediots are going gaga! Enter at your own risk...

[Link: www.indymedia.org.nz...]

[Link: www.indymedia.org.nz...]

Simple cowardice...

how convenient to 'forget' about the legacy of French imperialism that let to WWI

how convenient to 'forget' about the tyrannical 'peace' of WWI that led to the rise of Hitler and WWII

how convenient to 'forget' about the Vichy French complicity in the holocaust with the Nazi's

how convenient to 'forget' about the post war re-imposition of French exploitive colonialism in Algeria, Vietnam and the other wars of the post-war

how convenient to 'forget' about Suez in '56

how convenient to 'forget' about the Saddamized colonialization of Iraq that perpetuated a fascist regime for French Oil profits.

Glen Wishard (#115)

LOL!

it was when the teacher went on strike i think. Willy was substitute teaching the french class and he starts off

bbbooonnnggggooouuurrrrr cheese eating surrender monkeys in that great accent of his.

minuscule #119,

Well, minus the pictures of the palestinians, that was pretty moving.

Oh.... and by the way.... I'll never buy another bottle of French beaujolais or bordeaux again.

#25

The gun Allende had in his hand at the end was a small, nickle-plated revolver. He wore a leather Sam Browne belt over his suit jacket and looked for all the world a "B" film actor playing Charlie Chaplin playing a tinpot Marxist-Leninist dictator.
Life imitates film.
Sometimes the CIA gets it right.

Don't forget that the French were the worst and most destructive of all European colonialists. Can you name one country that speaks French (as a result of being a French colony granted independence) that is a success? Here's a list off the top of my head:

Haiti, Chad, Niger, Ivory Coast, Mali, Djibouti, Cameroon, French Guiana, Gabon, Sao Tome and Principe, Laos, Cambodia...

and, worst of all -- Vietnam.

Not one has a literacy rate higher than 50%. Not one has a GNP larger than $10 Billion. The French are a cancer in the history of mankind.

Why buy French wine when Californian is superior, hell, Oregon, Washington and Chile make some good wines also. Why buy french?

I'm wondering, just what do the French do that makes them feel superior to anyone?

Do they produce great cars? The Germans do it better.
Great food? Italian food is better and more interesting.
Literature? Nothing recent worthy of note.
Medicine? Nothing comes to mind.
Helping others? The french? please.

They managed to stand by and allow 15,000 of their elderly pass away without doing anything to help.
Cinema? Their Movies are dull, but Gerard Depardieu is a good actor.

They never were much of a power, The British and the Spaniards were more efficient.
Revolutionaries? They managed to turn a good idea into a blood bath

just wondering.

#138 Hell Thunderbird is better than French WHine.

Lurch237,

The French are good for:
* awesome pastries
* great movies (Les Visiteurs, Nikita, Le Grand Bleu)
* Sophie Marceau
* Laetitia Casta
* Jean Reno (he's a damn good actor)
* Beautiful Cote D'azur scenery
* Some nice artwork from a while ago
* fashion
* good bread
* jokes - who else would we laugh at?

The French have betrayed a 200 year old alliance for petty political gain. They seek to balance the power of America by tying our hands and strengthening the new fascist enemy in the MidEast. This makes me sick, and I hope the French see justice. Our fathers die defending them and they stab us in the back. As long as I live I will never set foot in France again, and I suggest all Americans wake up to the fact that our European friends (beside Britain), are only those countries who know tyrrany as we do, those in East Europe. I am proud to be decended from the Czechs, I love the poles and the Bulgarians, but France can KMA.

#141 Ariel

* Sophie Marceau

Damn, she's fine!

#141 Ariel

Hmm, they do put a great bike race.

And...

And...

And...

Well, ah, it was a great Tour this year...

[Link: www.bbc.co.uk...]

CHILE: THE OTHER 9/11
On the morning of Tuesday 11 September 1973, two jets launched a deadly attack on the Presidential Palace of La Moneda in the heart of Santiago, Chile. A military coup led by Augusto Pinochet ousted the presidency of Salvador Allende, the world's first democratically-elected Marxist head of state.

Using archive footage and interviews with supporters of both Allende and Pinochet, this gripping documentary pieces together the dramatic events of the day that ultimately resulted in the death or disappearance of over three thousand people.

Director Interview: Nicholas White

BBC Four: But there's no mention in the film of broader issues like the CIA's involvement in the coup...

NW: I couldn't come out and say the Americans were heavily involved in 11 September in Chile because there's very little evidence that they were. The CIA involvement in Chile famously took place in the three months after Allende was elected but before he officially became president. Kissinger and Nixon banged their heads together thinking, "How can we stop this guy taking over?" The hope was that the CIA and their local operatives in Chile would bring about some kind of military coup. But the opposite happened, people rallied around Allende and the Americans got their fingers burnt. During the three years of Allende's administration the American involvement was on a much more economic level - preventing Chile from getting international loans, getting Americans to withdraw their investment - which all had a huge impact. With 11 September itself, it's clear the Americans knew something was going to happen but they didn't know what it was and they didn't know who was going to be in charge. They had no real idea who Pinochet was. So tying them to events on the actual day is very difficult although it's certainly legitimate to say they helped destabilise the country in the previous three years.

I've seen several article describing the event as "The Other September 11". They never referred to it as September 11 before 2001. They want to give the impression that America deserved what happened to it? Surely not!

Soon I fear 2001 will become the other September 11, and then that 1973 will be the only September 11 in the minds of the hate-America set.

#62 "See, the similarity between the Allende coup and the WTC/Pentagon/Pennsylvania terrorist murders is... um... the date! Yeah, that's it! What an utterly stupid point"

---------------------

Another similarity (in addition to the date) is the final body count - pretty close

September 11, 1973: In a violent coup, the presidential palace is bombed. Allende is among the first of 1,213 people who die or disappear between September 11 and the end of 1973. Pinochet dissolves Congress, suspends the constitution, bans opposition, arrests trade unionists and imposes controls on the media. Thousands are forced into exile. Four hundred US CIA experts assist Pinochet. The regime embarks on a radical programme of denationalisation, closely assisted by economists from the University of Chicago.

1991
Chile's National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation publishes a lengthy indictment of Pinochet's dictatorship, officially counting 2,279 deaths (later revised to 3,172) in "political violence".

The methods employed by the Pinochet regime to suppress opposition (read:leftist) parties and their sympathizers included imprisonment in specially built camps, torture by drowing, electric shock, beatings, etc - not a cheerful guy! Around 1000 people were "disappeared" by the regime and their fate is still unknown.

#58 Montaigne's Cat
#60 papertiger

Thanks for both posting that link on Chile, it has a lot of the information needed henceforth to swat trolls that come flurrying in here like one did a few days ago, dropping entirely the context of the Cold War, and ignoring the protagonist/backstop role of the Chile military itself. Many LLL racists no doubt assume all south of the border countries are incompetent banana republics at the bidding of the CIA, and ignore that Chile is an advanced industrialized country.

If Le Monde is the NYT of France, it lacks the latter's pickiness about things like spelling the names of countries correctly. Chili is a food and Chile is a country. Also, as relentlessly biased as it is, the Old Gray Plagiarizing Lady would never run a cartoon or editorial that tasteless, offensive and tacky.

Lastly, as I said on the thread this came up on, not today, Le Monde and France. Give it a rest for one day, is that too much to ask?

"The French have never been much of anything. Their greatest Warrior was a corsican, The English used to mop the floor with them back in the middle ages, the germans abused them regularily. Back when they were Gaul, Caesar whooped them with inferior (numbers) forces... Hell the Algerians kicked their ass."

Don't forget our friends (and often relatives), the Mexicans, whose national holiday, Cinco de Mayo, commemorates a victory over the invading French army in on May 5, 1862.
Napoleon III eventually did occupy the country, after a fashion, and installed an inbred bungler named Maximilian as "emperor".
Then the American Civil War ended.
President Andews Johnson said "boo" and the Frog legions hightailed it back to their pond, leaving their puppet Maximilian to face a firing squad. Viva Mexico!

#147 Don't Cry For Me Argentina,
Pinochet was brutal, but even if true, your "body count" extends over the seventeen year dictatorship. And it was done by the Chilean military not by U.S. forces.

The U.S. involvement in Chile was not nice, but we didn't go down there and indiscriminately kill 3,000 civilians in one day. We helped the local military toss out a Marxist president at the height of the Cold War. Wars are ugly, but Communism needed to be fought. When it came time for Pinochet to step aside, the U.S. was there to help the pro-democracy forces, so I'd say we made amends for something that was not nearly as atrocious.

Read the linked article at #58 and #60, that puts the events in context without whitewashing the truly bad.

#21 Angela, that is perfect.

#148 Rebmiami:

spelling the names of countries correctly

Maybe that's the French spelling. For example, Iraq is spelt Irak.

Did the oddly named "Eurofighter" of Italy claim to be from Texas? He wishes. Probably some 14 year old all pissed off he wasn't born early enough to join the Red Brigades and torture Aldo Moro.

Has le Monde run any cartoons about 10k dead people, who died because the French people don't care enough about their seniors to check in on their own parents during the vacation/heat wave.

My first thought, there are one or two people who always mention how Israel should nuke Europe as part of the "Samson Option" if she is ever about to be wiped out.

I totally disagree, but maybe they should save a nuke for Paris, and we can all hope the fallout blows to the east/southeast towards Germany. Hell, nuke Brussels too while they are at it.

OK, this is tacky, maybe Israel should develop the neutron bomb to use on Paris, so we can be rid of the French but still have Notre Dame and the museums.

Let us also remember the pride of French Naval supremacy, the nuclear powered carrier Charles deGaulle.
This tub's shakedown period took about 7 years, assuming that it is operational even now, and it cost more than American carriers of twice its size and power.
To add insult to injury, the ship it replaced, le Foch, is still running fine, though not in France. They sold it for pocket change, about $20 million, and it now serves as flagship of the Brazilian Navy under the name Sao Paulo.
Another example of French military prowess: Much is made of the infamous Maginot Line's failure to halt the German blitzkrieg in 1940. As every student of military history knows, the Germans outflanked it and crushed the French in 6 weeks.
What is not so well known is that the French army had both more and better tanks than the Germans, but deployed them with amazing incompetence.

What are the French good for? Well, when I was in Paris on one of those 'see 12 European countries in a week' tours, I had the best latte of my life! Unfortunatly, after the first cup the waiter refused to get me another, the bastard.

I don't know if the first cup was a fluke or not. But it was really good!

As revenge, I took several photo flash pictures of the Mona Lisa.

Another eerie similarity:

4000 Jewish employees at La Moneda in Santiago didn't show up for work on September 11, 1973.

/LLL Moonbatness

Ed Moran -

Wow, we've gone from a "Nuke Mecca" site to a "Nuke Paris" site in the wink of an eye! The moonbats won't be able to keep up with us! :)

Oh, FUCK the French.

Fuck 'em all.

Nation of trolls.

D. Edgren

If the French are so lame, how the heck did Italy end up losing Nice, Savoy, and Corsica to them?

Why bother looking any furthur than New York for socalism?

"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society." [Hillary Clinton, 1993]

"Comrades! We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all." [Nikita Khrushchev , February 25, 1956 20th Congress of the Communist Party.]

"It is thus necessary that the individual should come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole ... that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual. .... This state of mind, which subordinates the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the first premise for every truly human culture .... we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow man." [Adolph Hitler, 1933]

KNOW YOUR ENEMY. KNOW HER WELL.

#128 Yossarian - Episode 2F32, 'Round Springfield - the one in which Bart swallows a jagged metal Krusty-O, and (coincidentally) Bleeding Gums Murphy dies. (audio)

Also notable is Episode DABF08, Tales from the Public Domain: "Victory? We're French! We don't even have a word for it."

#160 Frank IBC

Umm, probably because Italy was broken up into 3 or 4 seperate countries at the time and were too busy arguing with each other...

#161 Scott

I imagine Sen. Hillary is well aware of those quotes, but was hoping no-one would remember them. Probably hoping to invoke John F. "Ask not what your country..." Kennedy who, in fact, was quoting Zorro. The 50's TV show.

/pendant

This is nothing more than the result of the presuppositions of the french enlightment or revolution. ideas have consequences. the french are quickly headed for the ashpiles of bankrupt ideas. the sewage of post modernism is floating throughout the french landscape.

#162 kps

damn. i was wrong on a simpson quote (#133.) if my friends heard that i would be buried alive by them.

#153 ed moran

i called his bluff, but that s.o.b. didn't stick around long enough. that dog won't hunt.

I don't remember any Soviet armor reaching Paris. Could it be that simple cowboy Americans had anything to do with that?

Not that I didn't believe everyone about the cartoon, but it's not on the main page of Le Monde and it's pretty obscure. Also, the main page as all kinds of September 11 Tribute stuff. Now I'm not saying the french don't deserve a good ass kicking, but I don't think this cartoon says much about the overall viewpoints of the French.

And another thing, it's not only the french who oppose US involvement in Iraq, it's Germany and Russia and many other countries. I never understood why everyone goes after the french. I mean the Germans have done some pretty fu

This was the general continental European line this year. On state television in the Netherlands and Belgium the WTC commemorations were drowned out by long documentaries about Chili in 1973, giving the usual one-sided socialist side of the story of course, putting the blame entirely on the USA. Le Monde shamelessly reflects how sick Europe is.

Don't believe all that crap about the outpouring of sympathy and support America supposedly received from Europe and the world after 9-11-2001 and that Bush squandered. Europeans were confused more than everything else, but soon enough found ways to turn 9-11 into new reasons to hate America. This Chili-connection is one of them.

Courtesy of #58 and #60 read here what really happened in Chili 1973.

There was something... ah yes I remember now. I love you frogbashers.

The jury is still out in Corsica by the way. Terrorists I mean Corsican freedom fighters are blowing up French government buildiings with regularity. Frankly I can't see us asking a country like france to help govern the post war Iraq when they cant even govern Corsica.

#168 and other LGF posters

I know someone who was a young officer in 73' serving in the Chiliean army (Heuy pilot) and asked him about a year ago about Pinochet and the coup. He said, and still believes, it was neccessary as the elected government was going Marxist and a solid portion of the population did not want to become the next Cuba of S.A. Chile would be in worse shape today than if the army stood by and did nothing, in his opinion.

He did not had much to say about Pinochet (and I did not push the issue), but he resigned his commission in the late 70's and ended up working in NYC for his brother's business and became a naturalized US citizen in 1980.

Sorry if the above was OT, I always like sharing, and receiving, the eye-witness accounts I here along with docmented facts.

Why do I get the feeling that chirac and Dominique de Villepin are closet Muslims???

(BTW - Don't f**k the French. You'll get VD, or worse, AIDS.)

Don't believe all that crap about the outpouring of sympathy and support America supposedly received from Europe and the world after 9-11-2001 and that Bush squandered. Europeans were confused more than everything else, but soon enough found ways to turn 9-11 into new reasons to hate America. This Chili-connection is one of them.

This is so true. They are filth, 95% of them anyway... and don't think for a moment that it's just France.

Deep down inside, 95% of Ureopeons were happy about 9/11. I've verified this by talking to several Euros... when you start by condemning the barbarians who did it but then carefully turn it around by saying something like "but well, it's not as if America hadn't brought it onto itself", they usually buy your little LLL act with hook, line and sinker and start telling you their honest opinions about America... very revealing. I have to admit that for a while after 9/11 I thought their shock, horror and support was genuine, but I'm glad I know better now.

The one thing you've got to remember when dealing with either muslims or Europeans is that they're not like Americans... they will lie to you like there's no tomorrow, there's no respect for honesty left in those cultures.

If you want to get their TRUE opinions, you've got to play along with them and pretend you think like them for a while... only then you'll ever get them to say what they really think.

Same here in Norway; main item the stabbing of the Swedish foreign minister, of course, but the national news yesterday did find time to run a report on protests outside the U.S embassy against the Allende coupe of '73.
Protesting the U.S under Nixon's involvement in this coup might be a bit late by now, especially since, as far as I know, things are normalizing in Chile and Nixon is pushing up the daisies.
Interesting to know if the date September 11 has ever previously been used before as a protest date against the Allende coup. I've certainly never heard of protests outside the US embassy on September 11, but I suppose we'll be getting 'em now every year; complete will full national news coverage, naturellement.
(Please pardon French)

#166:

I don't remember any Soviet armor reaching Paris. Could it be that simple cowboy Americans had anything to do with that?

Yep. I doubt the French will ever forgive us for that.

#173 Blankpage:

Interesting to know if the date September 11 has ever previously been used before as a protest date against the Allende coup.

Well, in 2001 there was some work being done by Christopher Hitchens and others, and a lawsuit against Kissinger was filed on September 11 2001 according to this (fairly partisan) website. Needless to say, the lawsuit was somewhat overshadowed by other events. But apart from that, by and large I'm not aware of it being used as a protest date.

From this week's Spectator, a reminder that Schroder is still playing on a deep vein of anti-US feeling :

[Link: www.spectator.co.uk...]

including

".......The Germans are becoming more receptive to all forms of anti-Americanism. A year ago 68 per cent of them still regarded a leading role for the Americans in foreign affairs as desirable, with only 27 per cent against: now 50 per cent of them reject such a role for the Americans, with only 45 per cent in favour. A venomous stream of anti-American and anti-Semitic resentment has burst forth in Germany during the Iraq crisis. A recent survey in Die Zeit showed that no fewer than 19 per cent of Germans are prepared to believe that the American government could be behind 9/11. Dr Jeffrey Gedmin, an American foreign policy expert who has often appeared on German television to argue the case for the invasion of Iraq, was amazed by the volume and bitterness of the hate mail he has received. ‘You Jew son of a whore, you are not welcome in this country, you and that n***** hyena Condoleezza Rice,’ was the sort of message sent to him by many of his correspondents. Dr Gedmin happens, incidentally, to be a Roman Catholic.

It is quite possible to be a severe critic of the policies pursued by George Bush and Ariel Sharon without being either anti-American or anti-Semitic, and many Germans have achieved that feat. It would also be grotesquely unfair to imply that just because someone is anti-American, he or she must be anti-Semitic. A growing majority of Germans are anti-American in some shape or form, but no more than a minority of that majority are anti-Semitic too. Yet in a certain kind of semi-educated person who feels somehow under threat, and who finds the conventional explanations for his predicament unconvincing, the leap from anti-Americanism to anti-Semitism is dangerously easy.

......

Another American who works in an office full of educated Germans said, ‘With every American soldier that dies the schadenfreude is immense. Every day people come by my desk and say, “Isn’t it great, Bush is coming crawling to Schröder now. Schröder won’t get an invitation to the ranch at Crawford — George Bush is going to beg him to go there.”’

With every reverse, or seeming reverse, that the Americans suffer in Iraq, the schadenfreude in Germany reaches new heights, or depths. The Germans hope the Americans will fail in Iraq. They expected them to lose the war, and now they expect them to lose the peace. Such views are not, of course, unknown in Britain, but are far more widespread in Germany. They are accompanied by an astonishingly low estimate of the Americans’ abilities, lower even than the BBC sometimes conveys.

Also, that meme about European (well, Irish anyway) sympathy for the US after 9-11 was apparently bullcrap.

Also, someone brought up the Eurofighter Typhoon as a great aircraft. Within the defense community, its widely regarded as a piece of crap.... markedly inferior to competing American and Russian fighter aircraft.

A growing majority of Germans are anti-American in some shape or form, but no more than a minority of that majority are anti-Semitic too

Bullshit.

There's again the comments of someone who takes what Ureopeons say to an American at face value.

But when you make a little experiment with strangers at bars and other places, pretend to be one of the anti-semitic LLLs, go along with their antisemitism for a while, make careful, slightly antisemitic comments yourself, let them know between the lines that you're a little afraid to say what you really think of them jooos... then you'll start getting the the real deal from the Euros. And it ain't pretty. Not all are anti-semitic at heart... but it's no minority that are. Not in France, not in Belgium, not in Nordic countries and not in Eastern Europe. Granted... I don't know for sure about Germany ... but it'd be the first European country I've come across that ISN'T anti-semitic if that were true... and I forgive me for being a little sceptical about that.

Also, someone brought up the Eurofighter Typhoon as a great aircraft. Within the defense community, its widely regarded as a piece of crap.... markedly inferior to competing American and Russian fighter aircraft.

American aircraft are a full generation ahead of anything else out there. To compare Eurofighter to F-22 or even JSF is like comparing a Spitfire or Messerchmitt to an F-4 Phantom. There is no comparison.

The F-22 is practically invisible to all radars and air-to-air weapons the Russians or Euros can make, and it's own LPI (Low Probability of Intercept) radar is as invisible to them. The F-22 can use it's radar, lock them up and launch it's missiles and they'll never know it's there until the AMRAAMs go active a little before striking their targets.

The Eurofighter beats any Russian fighter though. Most of the advanced Russian gear exists only on paper anyway. Advanced Russian gear is also VERY unreliable, their stuff breaks up all the time and often doesn't achieve all the spec sheet claims even when it happens to work.

Most Russian gear built since about 1970 has been hopeless attempts to build SOMETHING, ANYTHING to make it seem they're counterin every product made iin the west. It didn't matter if it was crap and didn't work... they COULDN'T make it work.. so they tried to make it SEEM they had something...

The emperor had no clothes but it didn't become completely apparent until 1991 and Desert Storm just how massive the gap was.

Eurofighter is a nice fighter for 1980's standards and worlds above what the Russians can produce and make work, but that's all that it is. Rafale is Eurofighter's poor kid brother, to serve the French arrogance (they CAN'T buy foreign...) and greed. Expect to see Syria, Libya, Iran and other countries where no respectable nation would sell weapons fly Rafales within a decade or so.

#177 Viking Kitten

Also, that meme about European (well, Irish anyway) sympathy for the US after 9-11 was apparently bullcrap.

No. there was (and is) genuine sympathy for the victims of 9-11 in Ireland. There is also a range of views as to the wisdom of the previous and subsequent US foreign policy. You don't have to buy into Bush to be sympathetic to victims of terrorism.

You don't have to tout the virtues of the F/A-22 to me... Charles could probably tell you where I'm coming from. I'm not sold that the Typhoon is more capable than the SU-37. So far, the SU-37 has won more export orders, but for that matter, even the F-16 (1970's design) has beat the Typhoon in head-to-head competition. The Rafale does some nice aerobatics, but has squat for range and is under-weaponed. The Gripen is a pretty decent fighter, and it has also beaten the Typhoon in head-to-head competition.

Now for some examples of post 9-11 Irish Sympathy:

"There is in American culture a fundamentalism no less strong than that of those who may have plotted yesterday's carnage. The tendency to divide the world between the forces of God and the forces of Satan, the elect and the damned, is, ironically one of the things that America shares with its most ferocious enemies." September 12, 2001 Irish Times Fintan O'Toole

"Osama bin Laden is the number one suspect... until he is found to be innocent" September 12, 02 Irish Times - Michael Jansen

"... America is an enormously powerful force. It is so powerful, indeed, that it has become isolated in its world authority. Yet it has been wounded and humiliated. It is filled with an angry and vengeful people. This is a most dangerous threat to all of us." September 15th 01 Irish Independent

It started on RTE news the very night of the [attack], where some academic... pointed out that if he lived in despair in the Middle East he'd bomb America too. This was the first of many voices in the Irish media trotted on to give the line that America was "reaping the thorns of its foreign policy".

Back at the Times, Fintan O'Toole was next door to the editorial taking a pop at an America "that has always been wedded to a sense of power" which has made it "so arrogant and merciless". Kick em while they're down...." September 16th 2001 - Sunday Independent - Brendan O'Connor

What the European reaction to 9-11 reminds me of is those anti-gay protesters who go to the funerals of AIDS victims chanting "turn or burn" and assuring the grieving family that their son is in hell for being a sodomite. That's what this Euro-trash "we're sorry for the victims, but your arrogance and foreign policy brought this judgment down on you" attitude reminds me of.

#182   Viking Kittens

Where exactly is that analogy supposed to make any sense?

Sympathy for the victims of 9-11 was real. The doubts about the expected military response were real. There were at least half the US population who didn't agree with the invasion of Iraq before the die was cast, why would you expect less from countries that have less investment in supporting misguided US policy?

I was shocked by 9-11. I have friends who live in downtown NY, and I've worked in that neck of the woods myself. My generation has a lot of personal investment in NYC. The fact that I had concerns about the consequences of a misdirected US military backlash doesn't undermine my genuine empathy and concern for new yorkers on that day and since. Bush is the wrong leader in this time, and the 'with us or against us' mindset is needlessly divisive.

"Misguided Foreign Policy?" --- Gee, perhaps we should have reverted to the... 'Thank you, sir, may I have another" Clinton-Era terrorism policy.

Thanks, JohninLondon (#176), for posting that article. Everyone on this board should read it. I've long been saying that it's the Germans, not the French, who are America's most hateful "ally" in Europe.

VFI

"With us or against us" is the nub of the issue.

Why the hell should Americans listen to whiners like you ? People who pretend to have sympathy but then shy away from real effective action are neutralists, pacifists, and not worth the time of day.

Ireland has sat on its hands since 9/11. More and more people are seeing that, are lumping Ireland in with "Old Europeans" like France and Germany.

Carry on being squeamish, carry on with you underlying anti-US drivel, your moralising, your moral equivocation. You represent the mass of Irish opinion these days, and it is important that Americans can see this clearly.

The EUtopians--- the French, especially, but also the Belgians, Germans --- are just playing for time. Their leaders are old enough so that they know that Islam is a problem for their grandchildren to deal with, and they are content to cut deals with the cannibals in return for a promise of being eaten last. The Irish see Islam as a problem for continental EUtopia and America, and since they don't see themselves as threatened, do not feel inclined to lend any support to those who are, lest they draw unwanted attention to themselves.

VFI #183 - If Bush is the "wrong" leader, just who would do better, in your estimation? Remember, this declared war started long before Bush was on the scene (WTC 93, USS Cole, Khobar Towers, etc), and we didn't deal with it forcefully or effectively at all in the previous administration, thus the escalation. I suppose the "right" leader should just sit down and discuss mutual grievances with Osama, perhaps?

I think you're seeing the world through peat colored glasses.

It is good to see the British Foreign Secretary attacking the French anti-US stance :

[Link: sg.news.yahoo.com...]

I am a European/Scot who lives in Ireland, I visit this site because it offers a differing viewpoint to the traditional media with regard to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I am not Jewish, but I loath the media/leftwing distortion of what is happening to Isreal.

I am very much pro-israel, and dislike any form of fundamentalism thats fosters terrorism - unfortunatly the leaders of the muslim faith/countries are setting a dismal example for their people.

I close my business on September the 11th to give respect to the innocents who were slaughtered. I also dislike the view that America somehow brought this on itself through foreign policy - this is crap, there are NO excuses for this bloodshed. I think the USA has done an admirable job of protecting its own interests, while for most part respecting other nations.

--------------

However I am getting really sick of the 'FOX-NEWS' style attacks on anything claimed to be at odds with American views. You cannot paint entire nations/continents with one brush, this does not lower world opinion of the countries in question, it fosters the leftwingers, and gains them support - this is a BAD thing.

The cartoon in Le Monde, is crass and in very bad taste, but this does not mean that all French people hate Americans. Many of the French people that I have met are arrogant and egocentric, the same can be said for Americans. I advise all people to look beyond the half truths of the media and examine the bigger picture.

With regard to the French 'ignoring' the war on terror - The French have experienced terror attacks for many years, just because they do not want to anger another group of terrorists, who did not attack them, dont label them cowards. The US has failed to deal with the problem of Palestine terrorism, beacuse it would not fit with their political aims. This is not cowardice on the US part, it is acting in their populations best interests, which is what the govenment is elected for.

If Bush is the "wrong" leader, just who would do better, in your estimation?

I'm guessing she'd pick Hillary, Howard Dean, Kofi Annon... or anyone else willing to put the USA in the position of "Terrorist Whipping Boy."

I note HRC took the occasion of 9-11 to gratuitously bash the president on air quality after the terrorist attack. A class act, those Clintons.

Maybe Colin Powell would be a good choice for president.

Maybe Colin Powell would be a good choice for president.

Nah, Arnie might be the best bet. At least he's willing to defend the country without bringing it into a recession :)

VK #191 - You're right, her dream ticket would be Hillary & Kofi, I suspect.

63 #190 - Thanks for an interesting post. I do have a problem with this, though:

With regard to the French 'ignoring' the war on terror - The French have experienced terror attacks for many years, just because they do not want to anger another group of terrorists, who did not attack them, dont label them cowards.

That to me seems the definition of cowardice - not supporting an ally, who has bailed you out more than once, in their own war on terror, out of fear.

Especially after Hillary does to Mrs. Arafat what Madonna did to Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera.

VK #196 - Too soon after breakfast to contemplate that!

#186 JohninLondon

Aw, she can quit any time now. We've got the total picture, at this point, of her 'values'. Caton gave me some great advice shortly after she arrived that I have for the most part faithfully adhered to.

I will never knowingly buy a French product ever again.
They hate America, they hate Britain, they hate Jews, well I hope that they learn to love sharia. For every Geroges Clemenceau they have thousands of Jacques Chirac's and Pierre Lavals.

You can bash the French all you want, but it wouldn't suprise me at all to wake up and see an editorial cartoon like that in any major American newspaper (OK, not The New York Post or Washington Times). I don't think its fair to tar an entire nation of people based on one cartoon that looks like it was drawn by someone with a bad case of the DT's. Idiocy is not exclusively a French or European characteristic. Read Mark Morford, Robert Scheer, Ted Rall, or Maureen Dowd lately?

This is on NRO this morning. I'll hit the high points:

As many as 12,000 Frenchmen died in a heat wave the size of Tucson because of a confluence of government mismanagement of health services, a deep love of the Kyoto Treaty, and a sweaty disdain for Yankee-style air conditioning — along with a propensity for every adult in France (including, apparently, most doctors) to pile into a Peugeot or Airbus and run away from responsibility for a month.

If the U.S. lost 15,000 American soldiers in Baghdad in a month, I suspect there would have been a different set of headlines yesterday in Paris.

France settled with Libya years ago for the 1989 bombing of a UTA DC-10; a French judge awarded the families $33 million in 1999. The French then announced that as far as France was concerned, Libya had met its obligations and U.N. sanctions against the country should be lifted — despite ongoing efforts by the U.S. to hold the Libyans responsible for the 1988 destruction of a Pan Am 747 over Lockerbie, Scotland. The PanAm families persisted and finally settled for $2.7 billion. France suddenly did an about-face. Villepin moved to veto any resolution easing restrictions against Libya — and thus blocking a payment of the PanAm settlement — unless the French got more money than they had settled for earlier. Fortunately for the PanAm families, Libya acquiesced.

Now for a pop quiz: When the latest agreement between France and Libya was reached, who said, "What matters to us is honor. We don't care about money." Was it Libya's Muammar Qaddafi? Or France's Dominique de Villepin? It was Qaddafi, believe it or not.

LINK

VFI is just another morally void EUtopian who sheds crocodile tears and wallows in schadenfreude when America's (or Israel's) nose is bloodied, but recoils in disdain when either defends itself.

#176 JohninLondon

Thanks fo rthe great article in the Spectator. Nice to know that the children of the people we saved by teh Berlin airlift enjoy it when American soldiers are killed. As Winston Churchill once said "the Hunis either at your throat or at your feet."

#195 - In an ideal world terrorism would not be tolerated, this is far from an ideal world.

The situation between Israel and Palestine is an example, the US should stand by its ally and help them wipe the terrorists out. However it does not make political sense for them to do this - right or wrong.

France believes it does not make political sense to get involved in a war in Iraq, this is not a national cowardice, its politics.

The antagonism in the media serves to drive two countries that essentially stand for the same thing further appart. It also causes your average dimwit to spew anti-american/french propoganda (pay attention neil cavauto/le monde).

There is too much of the 'my country bailed yours out' rhetoric floating around at the moment. There were many American interests at stake when they joined the World Wars. There are very few French interests served by them helping in Iraq.

For anyone who may have missed it, this is one of Steyn's best.

Certainly, Iraq has its problems. Jacques Chirac, en vacances just up the road from me in North Hatley, Quebec, took time out of his three-week holiday to issue a statement on events in Baghdad, where 20 people died on Tuesday. But he didn't bother to interrupt his vacation to issue a statement on events in France, where so many people have died, the funeral homes are standing room only and they're having to store bodies in the freezers at the fruit and veg markets.

Now that his old pal and nuclear client has been removed from power, M Chirac is utterly irrelevant to the future of Iraq. But surely France still falls within his jurisdiction, doesn't it?

And where are the Red Cross and Oxfam and Human Rights Watch and all the other noisy humanitarians? If 10,000 Iraqis had died of dysentery on George W Bush's watch, you'd never hear the end of it. A few weeks back, with three fatal cases of cholera, the Humanitarian Lobby was already shrieking that we stood on the edge of a humanitarian catastrophe.

France isn't on the edge, it's in the abyss.

[Link: www.portal.telegraph.co.uk...]

Way OT but someone just told me taht John Ritter died.

France believes it does not make political sense to get involved in a war in Iraq, this is not a national cowardice, its politics.

I'm not in total disagreement. I think the French trying to stave off the Iraq war was more about cynicism and greed than cowardice. The French had lucrative contracts with Hussein regime, and had been arguing for the lifting of sanctions for years.

However, the French failure to deal with anti-Semitism and violence for fear of upsetting its increasing Arab population, as well as Chirac's craven posturing to appease that populace... that, dear, is cowardice.

Bush's unwillingness to confront the Saudis is, likewise, a form of cowardice.

63 #190,

Interesting post.

The cartoon in Le Monde, is crass and in very bad taste, but this does not mean that all French people hate Americans.

For one of their largest daily newspapers to print a cartoon which suggests that 9/11 was similar to the Allende coup suggests something about French positions. I have French cousins and go to France fairly frequently, so you'll excuse me if I don't buy that this cartoon is fairly representative of the views of many French folks.

With regard to the French 'ignoring' the war on terror - The French have experienced terror attacks for many years, just because they do not want to anger another group of terrorists, who did not attack them, dont label them cowards.

I have no problem with the French being craven cowards (which incidentally is what the first part of your post suggests you think they are - even if you disagree with the label). I have a problem with them actively opposing us when we try to take care of terrorism.

The French have tried to appease all of the terrorism that happened in their own backyard for a very long time - from letting palestinian terrorists go scot-free after attacks to allowing Algerians to bomb the Paris subway with no repercussions. The French don't believe in fighting back - and that's fine, that's their choice. If, however, they had decided to fight back against Algerian terrorism and America had actively opposed them I would have to think that America was wrong.

#192,

Maybe Colin Powell would be a good choice for president.

OK, you've lost me - you're pro-Israel but would like an anti-Israeli guy for President?!?

#201 - Please dont talk about the deaths in France because of the heat wave, thats media hype again. How many of the 'victims' would have died during that month anyway?

Thats like me saying:

In 1999, 28,874 Americans were killed with firearms--in homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings - therefore the Americans must have a really bad police and civil adminstration.

That statement is garbage, as is the comment about the 12,000 people dying due to a mismanagement of health services, and that somehow making the French an 'untermensch'

France believes it does not make political sense to get involved in a war in Iraq, this is not a national cowardice, its politics.

France seems to think its their best political interest to "not get involved" in most wars.

60 YEARS LATER

Oops, my #207:

I don't buy that this cartoon is not fairly representative of the views of many French folks.

Preview is my friend.

#210 Ariel

I don't buy that this cartoon is not fairly representative of the views of many French folks.

Twenty minutes ago, LCI, one of the two French news channels:

Israel's American Godfather opposes the removal of Arafat.

'nuff said.

#186   JohninLondon

"With us or against us" is the nub of the issue.

Why the hell should Americans listen to whiners like you ? People who pretend to have sympathy but then shy away from real effective action are neutralists, pacifists, and not worth the time of day.

I'll reserve the right to make up my own mind who's got the balance of justification in any conflict, thank you very much. Bush is in no postion to dictate the morality of fighting terrorism his way only. I've also great difficulties with giving credence to anyone that claims they have 'god on their side'.

'Whiners' like me are the ones who actually try to apply a little critical faculty before blindly thowing my lot behind the jingoism that you so obviously hanker. Maybe you missed this little nugget from those who should know yesterday?:

Yesterday's report discloses that in February this year, a month before the invasion of Iraq, Whitehall's joint intelligence committee (JIC) warned that "al-Qaida and associated groups continued to represent by far the greatest threat to western interests, and that threat would be heightened by military action against Iraq".

The intelligence chiefs added: "Any collapse of the Iraqi regime would increase the risk of chemical and biological warfare technology or agents finding their way into the hands of terrorists, including al-Qaida."

The MPs' committee reveals that it discussed the risk with Mr Blair. He agreed there was "obviously a danger that in attacking Iraq you ended up provoking the very thing you were trying to avoid".

However, he added: "You had to ask the question, 'Could you really, as a result of that fear, leave the possibility that in time this developed into a nexus between terrorism and WMD in any event?'"

The prime minister continued: "This is where you've just got to make your judgment about this. But this is my judgment and it remains my judgment and I suppose time will tell whether it's true or it's not true."

The committee's report criticises the September dossier for failing to admit the paucity of hard information about Iraq's banned weapons programme and for making claims out of context.

It says the use of the phrase "continued to produce chemical and biological weapons" in the dossier and its foreword, signed by Mr Blair, could give a misleading impression.

The JIC "did not know what had been produced and in what quantities", the report says. It did not know "precisely which munitions could be deployed from where to where".

Saddam was not considered a current or imminent threat to Britain - the most likely chemical and biological munitions to be used against western forces were battlefield weapons and not strategic, longer-range, ones. "This should have been highlighted in the dossier," the parliamentary committee says.

It says the dossier should also have highlighted the point that the claim that Iraqi forces could deploy chemical and biological weapons within 45 minutes of an order also referred only to short-range, battlefield, weapons. "The omission of the context and assessment allowed speculation as to its exact meaning. This was unhelpful to an understanding of this issue."

The 45-minute claim - mentioned four times in the dossier, including, in the strongest language, in the foreword - is at the heart of the row between the government and the BBC reporter Andrew Gilligan.

In its overall judgment on the credibility of the September dossier, the committee said: "The jury is still out on the accuracy of the intelligence, the assessments, and therefore the dossier."

Guardian article

No clear cut 'war on terror' justification for the invasion of Iraq there then.

Ireland didn't 'sit on it's hands' btw. It put it's support behind the security council, and confimed that it saw the UN as the only legitimate authority for mandating any action in Iraq. That the US and UK chose to go their own way is in no way binding on Ireland.

Ariel #207 - Great post. France's position on international terrorism for years has been head in the sand, and, yes, that's a form of cowardice, even if 63 tries to prettify it by saying it's political. What would drive such a political position other than "Maybe they'll just blow someone else up?"

207 - The Americans proposed one way of dealing with a 'terrorist' threat in Iraq, the French disagreed, they are entitled to do that.

I did not like the way they tried to persuade other nations to back them, but I have seen many larger nations do the same (aid to turkey?)

The debate is still ongoing about 'Iraqs' actual threat, I am personally happier to Saddam gone (and supported US/UK action), but as to Iraq being a WMD threat - I doubt it.

I dont agree with appeasing terrorism, but I dont believe in the Iraq case this is what the French did.

As regards the newspaper comment, as I have said the cartoon was a disgrace, how about this link though:

[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

See folks, the United States contains world class idiots. In addition to the afformentioned heavyweights, (see post 200) we have a university system, particularly our Ivy League universities, that is second to none in granting tenure to idiots and incubating idiocy in their student bodies.

A highlight from the Cornell 9/11 Remembrance

...Professor Cynthia Farina, associate dean of the faculty, read poetry about “wild geese” and then began to cry. It was a stirring scene for all those who get choked up about fowl metaphors (for the 9/11 attacks).

Huh? Wild Geese a metaphor for 9/11? Who blew up da Geese? Who?

VFI #212:

Ireland didn't 'sit on it's hands' btw. It put it's support behind the security council, and confimed that it saw the UN as the only legitimate authority for mandating any action in Iraq. That the US and UK chose to go their own way is in no way binding on Ireland.

And we all know what rousing success stories the UN has enjoyed in Kosovo and Rwanda.

PS The possessive of it is its.

Ireland didn't 'sit on it's hands' btw. It put it's support behind the security council, and confimed that it saw the UN as the only legitimate authority for mandating any action in Iraq. That the US and UK chose to go their own way is in no way binding on Ireland.

So, basically, Ireland supported France and Russia's SC votes to protect their oil leases, supported the Hussein's regimes refusal to comply with UN resolution, and allow the USA and Israel to be diplomatically bitch-slapped. How proud you must be.

The dirty little secret is, EUtopia's response to terrorism is to blame America and direct terrorist anger to Americans, because the political calculation, as 63 puts it, is that EUtopians are safer if terrorists can concentrate on America.

214 - I also use the 'In political best interests' argument to justify the US involvement with many dictators and 'small wars' over the years. Dont forget, at a certain time it was in Americas best interests to get the CIA to work with Osama.

Just to be clear, I am only commenting on the Iraq issue, I have many views on French military failures and problems caused by them over the past 60 years.

#216   Doug

Efficiency and legitimacy are distinct concepts Doug. There are lots of efficient but morally dubious routes one canb apply in life.
I wouldn't be waving any banners for the effectiveness of the current intervention in Iraq by the way.

My humblest apologies for the apostrophe gaff.

#217 - Its not EU policy to direct terrorism at the US, the bulk of the Arabs hatred goes to the US, because wheras America usually supports Israel, the EU is supporting the wrong side in the Middle East.

#35, I really don't know about our fingerprints being all over that.

Did we help? Yes.

However over at Winds of Change, IIRC, there is an essay by a gentleman who read 3-4 different books, one by a right-winger, 1 by 3 marxists and the other(s) by professors who were there at the time.

He discusses his conclusions, and it's not the first time I've read this. The plurality, if not the outright majority wanted Allende gone, and they didn't want to wait until the next election.

They chose, either by culture or by design, since I'm not familiar w/their constitutional recall provisions, to go that route.

Look at Venezuela, Chavez is importing the Libyans and Cubans. And look how long it's taking them to vote.

When one is consolidating power, sometimes you don't have the time for democratic niceties. You're going to lose those democratic niceties if you don't move now.

#217: VK v. VFI! I put my money on VK in a TKO.

and allow the USA and Israel to be diplomatically bitch-slapped.

It's been too long since the vast majority of Europeans cared about either country.

Inferiority/Superiority complexes have that affect on people.

Morality does not enter into the equation.

Chirac as the leader of the "Peace" movement? Please. The citizens of Le Cote D'Ivoire might have some interesting opinions on that subject.

France's position on international terrorism for years has been head in the sand, and, yes, that's a form of cowardice, even if 63 tries to prettify it by saying it's political. What would drive such a political position other than "Maybe they'll just blow someone else up?"

Which very little different to the US standpoint against terrorism prior to Sept 11. It was only once they got hit themselves that they considered Terrorism in such a manner. If France had been hit by terrorism, and they had decided to invade another nation, the US would have been one of the 1st nations to cry against such an action. There is no difference, between the two nations.

#217   Viking Kitten

Where did Israel come into the equation?

The UN debate has been re-hashed endlessly. You know where I stand, and I don't need you to repeat the supposition about why other countries chose to disagree with the US (and taglalong Tony's) position.

Ireland had nothing to gain from Saddam, and chose to keep out of the 'coalition of the willing' - even though 'membership' didn't involve any actual committment or obligation. Like it or not, it was a principled stand (although completely undermined by allowing continued landing/refueling rights during wartime).

(#220) 63:

So directing Islamic terror at the U.S. is just a nice, healthy fringe benefit of the EU's Middle Eastern policies?

It's about two things:

Oil and fear.

France, in particular, has a large Muslim population that is very, um, excitable. Best let the French Jews deal with them, rather than the French gov't.

That is typical cowardice, and plays right into the hands of the French anti-Semites as well.

#223, SoCal Justice. If morality entered into it VFI could be a tour guide in hell.

#227   gymnast

Oh, Boo Hoo.

Ireland had nothing to gain from Saddam, and chose to keep out of the 'coalition of the willing' - even though 'membership' didn't involve any actual committment or obligation. Like it or not, it was a principled stand

Yes, founded on the bedrock principle of "So long as it's other people who are dying, what do we care?"

VFI #219 - Must be nice to live in Ireland, and not in the real world. Actually I can grasp the difference between efficiency and legitimacy, and in this case, while certain nations dithered about legitimacy, real people were threatened and some dying due to rogue states and groups. Many think the coalition actions were legit, others think not, but at some point the US felt it was time to become efficient, which the UN is assuredly not. I feel certain that in the long run many will live because of this. See Kosovo for precedent.

63 #214,

The Americans proposed one way of dealing with a 'terrorist' threat in Iraq, the French disagreed, they are entitled to do that.

France is entitled to do whatever she likes. It is a sovereign nation (at least theoretically).

That doesn't change that their action - actively opposing the US (not merely disagreeing) - is something that I think is wrong and, were the roles reversed and France had been attacking Algerian terrorists and America had actively opposed France, I would still think it was wrong.

You're not making the distinction between capability and morality. Of course France has the right to do whatever it wants - but that doesn't mean that it's right.

I dont agree with appeasing terrorism, but I dont believe in the Iraq case this is what the French did.

How about with Hamas?

In the Iraq case, France's actions were more focused on how to protect their sweet oil deals then on appeasing terrorism. However, since Iraq was a major backer of terrorism, France's actions effectively appeased terrorism even if that was not their intent.

As regards the newspaper comment, as I have said the cartoon was a disgrace, how about this link though:

First of all, the point is not that it is a disgrace (which it is). The point is that it is representative of a not insignificant proportion of the French - probably a plurality at the least, and I'd guess it might be a majority.

That link - it does all right when criticizing the French politically, but goes into moonbat-land when discussing French cultural practices. Though one thing which it reminds me of - when we discuss kosher slaughter (as we have in this thread and many others) it's interesting that many Europeans find it objectionable but have nothing to say about foie gras. Incidentally, I have no problem with foie gras - I rather like it.

Ireland had nothing to gain from Saddam, and chose to keep out of the 'coalition of the willing' - even though 'membership' didn't involve any actual committment or obligation. Like it or not, it was a principled stand

The neutrality of ireland constitution prevented the government from joing the coalition if they wanted it.

226 - I agree, I wish the EU would change their stance on the Middle East.

Some would consider it a 'fringe benefit', I consider it an unfortunate consequence. I feel that America should be supported in the Middle East.

Again I am only refering to the Iraq conflict, I think we agree on the on the other muslim problems.

--Sorry yanks, but your dollars made pinochet, enemy of your economical interests on minerals and gas in chile, your dollars made chemical weapons for iraq against iran, your dollars and stingers helped al-qaeda against soviets in afghanistan, your dollars made anything.--

And Chile's less of a basket case than most of south of the border.

We're even looking at their individual savings program.

----

BTW, euro, what did european $ do?

VFI #219 - Must be nice to live in Ireland, and not in the real world. Actually I can grasp the difference between efficiency and legitimacy, and in this case, while certain nations dithered about legitimacy, real people were threatened and some dying due to rogue states and groups. Many think the coalition actions were legit, others think not, but at some point the US felt it was time to become efficient, which the UN is assuredly not. I feel certain that in the long run many will live because of this. See Kosovo for precedent.

Odd considering the US only decided to make these moves once they themselves were attacked. So up until that time the US were living in a dreamland? Come off it. Ireland has seen terrorim first hand, whereas until sept 11, the US hadn't been hit more than once or twice. Its nice to see a nation thats relatively new to the terrorist experience, tell everyone how it should be done. Especially since many of these terrorist groups arose from US and Russian funding & training.

--The intelligence chiefs added: "Any collapse of the Iraqi regime would increase the risk of chemical and biological warfare technology or agents finding their way into the hands of terrorists, including al-Qaida." --

But since he doesn't have any, what's the big deal?

Non-issue.

Which very little different to the US standpoint against terrorism prior to Sept 11. It was only once they got hit themselves that they considered Terrorism in such a manner.

The USA was hit by Islamic Terrorism prior to 9-11-2001. The WTC was first attacked in 1993. Then, there were the embassy bombings in Africa, as well as the attack on the USS Cole.

The difference is, during those attacks, the US was led by a president who cared more about diddling his interns than dealing with serious problems... and the rest of his administration was as morally vacant as he or was VFI is... who thought the answer to terrorism was for the UN to write words on pieces of paper and speak them into microphones... and any military response would be 'misguided foreign policy' ... because the only legitimate use of the US military, in their eyes, is to deliver meals on wheels and lob cruise missiles into empty buildings on days when the president needed a distraction.

In fairness, I doubt GWB would have responded as forcefully to those same events as he did to the 9-11 attacks... but the Clinton foreign policy... subservience to the UN, appeasement of Arafat, and complete indifference to Saddam and bin Laden... was exactly what the EUtopians wanted from the US and the end result of that policy was September 11, 2001.

Dirk Diggler #215,

In addition to the afformentioned heavyweights, (see post 200) we have a university system, particularly our Ivy League universities, that is second to none in granting tenure to idiots and incubating idiocy in their student bodies.

While there are Ivy Leagues which are problematic (Cornell, Columbia), you'd be hard-pressed to hear something like that at Penn (my alma mater) or Harvard (the alma mater of many of my friends).

In the Iraq case, France's actions were more focused on how to protect their sweet oil deals then on appeasing terrorism. However, since Iraq was a major backer of terrorism, France's actions effectively appeased terrorism even if that was not their intent.

Iraq was not a major backer of Terrorim. Saddam made private fund contributions to anti-Israeli groups. There is no linkage between Iraq and any terrorist groups that attacked the US. So where did this "War against Terror" really affect Iraq? It didn't. The US invaded for other reasons. France chose not to agree with those reasons.

If the US had asked France to combat Terrorism, not an invasion, then perhaps things would have been different.

Kinda figures that South Boston made Ireland what it is today. Although the Irish schools do a better job of teaching math and science they seem to have left a few behind when it comes to morality.

Well, well, well, Ireland, this is an interesting blurb off of andrewsullivan.com. And you can link to the blog in question, too!

"Blog-Irish scans the Irish press two years ago for evidence of the huge amount of sympathy and support for the U.S. after 9/11. Not much there. The U.S. was hated and resented before 9/11. And America's effrontery in fighting back had an absolutely predictable response. How can we be expected to please people who refuse to be pleased?"

Interesting that the Le Monde conjures up the spectre of American involvement in the Pinochet coup while ignoring their own complicity.

As to the greater US/EU bit, why worry? Countries don't remain allies forever. Look at the wars of Europe and you'll see that yesterday's comrade-in-arms is tomorrow's opponent. Europe gets to choose its own destiny, and if they want to define themselves in opposition to the US, so be it. Canada practically does that now, and we get along just fine.

What gets my goat is when continental European countries pretend they're still allies, still "friends" giving us "advice". As much as I detest Bush going to the UN - better to create two additional divisions we badly need anyway - he's doing it to provide cover for Russian or Indian cooperation. Nobody wants the 10k or so French/German/Belgian troops they could provide.

Ireland will sit this war out, like they sat out WWII. Fine. All I ask is that people refrain from Monday-morning quarterbacking on the national level.

(#233) 63:

IMO, the Iraq conflict was very much about terrorism. Not necessarily about 9/11 and direct links, mind you, but terrorism nonetheless.

The link to 9/11, IMO, is that it gave Bush the justification (or excuse, depending on one's mindset) to do what should have been done long ago.

Saddam, just like Assad (father and son), the al-Sauds, Ghaddafi/Qaadafi, Mubarak, the Iranian Mullahs - you name it: they all sponsor terrorism against Israel AND Western interests. It's a constant flow of money to Hezbollah, Hamas, PIJ, the PLO, etc...

They all do it to:

A) Distract their local population from their own home-grown oppression by illustrating that there are worse places to be Arab/Muslim

AND

B) Look good to their "citizens" by showing how they are helping that most important of Arab causes, Palestinian Nationalism/Anti-Zionism.

It's a two-fer, and it's kept some of these tyrants in power for too long. Of course, many in the "Arab Street" blame the U.S. (natch) for their own leaders.

Saddam was part and parcel to this political system that is Arab-world-wide.

I'm not too concerned with how Bush, Cheney, Powell and Rumsfeld viewed it. Iraq is just removing one link from the chain. We still have Syria, Saudia Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Arafat - terrorism isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

You have to start somehwere thoug. And if I were Iraqi, I'd say Saddam is a fine place to start.

#229   Viking Kitten

You don't seem to get the bleeding obvious - Where is the evidence that Saddam was involved in any threat to the US or UK? Saddam was a tyrant to his own people, but that isn't why the US went in to Iraq. People getting killed in a justifiable and unavoidable conflict is heartbreaking, people getting killed in a needless war is offensive.

So we've had a war, and people were killed. People continue to be killed. For all the dismissive put downs of references to 'quagmires', Baghdad is not under control - It is a place of anarchy, and no obvious thought has gone into how to handle the longer term situation there.

#240 - There is far too much support for the lefties here. I have no idea where that came from, it is worth saying that the US did land its planes in Ireland, and that the hippies were largly ignored.

If you want to be a real help, you can visit the biggest political forum here, where numbskulls frequently blame 911 on America, and where the Palestinians are 'Freedom Fighters'.

Its not something I am proud of but perhaps some of the readers here can re-educate some misguided people.

[Link: www.boards.ie...]

bob #235/239

There is no linkage between Iraq and any terrorist groups that attacked the US

You know this for a fact, do you?

And the US was unfortunately hit too many times by terrorism before responding. In addition to the times mentioned by VK, there were the Khobar Towers, the Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, and the Beirut barracks.
Do some research before throwing out such statements.

Kinda figures that South Boston made Ireland what it is today. Although the Irish schools do a better job of teaching math and science they seem to have left a few behind when it comes to morality.

I'm sorry but i don't understand the reference to South Boston.

In regards to our morality, it seems strange that you consider yourselves in much a better position to judge. Our educational system is considered one of the best in europe, and we still have a very powerful religious background.

Sure we're not interested in wars, or bombing foreign nations, but we surely must be missing in morals. We have no need to collect massive piles of nuclear, chemical & biological weapons, but because the US does so, i suppose our morality suffers.

Or perhaps its because we still have an unarmed police force, that has only small problems with policing our country, whereas your nation's police officers are forced to carry firearms.

Yup i see now what you mean. We lack the desire to inflict violence on other people, so our morality suffers.

bob #235,

So up until that time the US were living in a dreamland? Come off it. Ireland has seen terrorim first hand, whereas until sept 11, the US hadn't been hit more than once or twice.

The US had been hit many times before 9/11. We just never chose to pay attention to the Iranians attacking our Embassy, the Hezb'allah killing our marines, the American ambassadors killed in Sudan, etc, ad infinitum. That was the wrong policy - we lived in a dreamland. None of that would ever happen here within our borders, we dreamed, and so we never responded (seriously) to it - with the minor exception of trying to hit Qaddafi.

239 bob writes:

Iraq was not a major backer of Terrorim [sic]

Council on Foreign Relations: Iraq Terrorism

For the record, COFR is a liberal group that was against the invasion of Iraq.

If the US had asked France to combat Terrorism, not an invasion, then perhaps things would have been different.

"Terrorism" is not the enemy. Terrorism is a weapon used by the enemy. If this is a "War on Terrorism" then World War 2 was a War on Panzers and Messerchmitts.

The alternative to taking the war to its source would be the Hillary approach of hiring more "first responders" (code for additional public employees, i.e. democrat-voting union lackeys) so you can clean up the mess more efficiently after the next attack.

Was Iraq the fount of all terrorism, probably not. Was Iraq the most practical target to open up a front to draw the enemy to us, on our own terms? Probably so. Would that rationale have flown prior to the war? Probably not. If not a course of direct terrorism, was there not a high probability that Iraq was involved in supporting terrorism? You'd have to be a fool to believe otherwise (unless that fuselage in the training camp was just a piece of playground equipment). Did Iraq have WMD? I challenge anyone who doesnt think so to take a long drink out of the Tigris and Euphrates.

[Link: www.terrorismanswers.com...]

My apologies. In all the time that the discussions about the Iraqi invasion, not once did i see any reports that Iraq had supported Terrorist activites abroad.

#244, VFI. "So we've had a war---". No you havn't had a war, we have. The IRA is your war. It is a civil war decended to the level of a criminal enterprize. Talk to us about your war. My war is not your war. Your country stayed home.

243 - Personally, I dont care about the reason why Iraq was taken off the map, it needed to be done.

Some people get irritated by the blatent propoganda that it had something to do with WMD. There were many political reasons why Iraq needed to be cleaned, my point is that the French did not share these political reasons. I disagree that it is cowardice, at best it is a lack of a bigger picture, and at worst extreme self interest.

Appealing to other nations to side with them, is not wrong, this happens every day, on every level of politics.

WRT, the rest of the trouble makers in the middle east, I hope they are removed soon. I fear that the US self interest may get in the way of this happening any time soon.

Bob #251

In all the time that the discussions about the Iraqi invasion, not once did i see any reports that Iraq had supported Terrorist activites abroad.

As if Saddam would advertise it, with the US already staring him down. I don't see how this equates to the bald statement

There is no linkage between Iraq and any terrorist groups that attacked the US.

bob #239,

Iraq was not a major backer of Terrorim. Saddam made private fund contributions to anti-Israeli groups. There is no linkage between Iraq and any terrorist groups that attacked the US.

Iraq was a major backer of terrorism. You can easily dismiss the terrorism against Israel (only killing Jews after all) but that doesn't change that he was a major backer of terrorism. (Incidentally, what the hell is "private fund contributions" - are you suggesting that Saddam donated his own money to palestinians and not the money of the Iraqi government?!?)

Linkages between Iraq and terrorism that attacked the US:
* Assassination attempt on Bush 41
* First attack on WTC towers in 1993 was backed by Iraq (the attackers had Kuwaiti passports captured by Iraq when they invaded Iraq)
* There is evidence that the Oklahoma City bombing was coordinated by Iraq (John Doe #2, unidentified co-conspirators in the case - see [Link: www.jaynadavis.com)...]
* Ansar al-Islam, linked to Al Qaeda, was based in Iraq
* Czechs refuse to deny that Iraqi intelligence chief met with Atta in Prague
* Iraqi diplomats expelled from the Phillipines for backing Abu Sayyaf, linked to Al Qaeda
* Paintings in Saddam land of the destruction of the WTC glorify the attack

bob:

CNN's Q & A with COFR. Even more indepth than COFR's report.

(#253) 63: I agree that, WRT Iraq, the French games were all about self-Interest, not cowardice.

Their position did help assuage the French-Algerians, but, unlike the French position on Israel, I don't think that was the primary motivation - although, conveniently, it fit right in with their master plan of creating an anti-American EU bloc, and desparately trying to maintain their business interests.

#252   gymnast

You're welcome to keep your war. Unfortunately the consequences will be felt worldwise. 'Global US dominance' is not a notion I'd subsribe to, cheers.

As if Saddam would advertise it, with the US already staring him down. I don't see how this equates to the bald statement

Actually i was talking about the reasons put forward by the US and the UK. Neither nation showed any evidence of Iraqi based terrorism, in any of the articles i saw, or the board discussions that i saw.

Iraq was a major backer of terrorism. You can easily dismiss the terrorism against Israel (only killing Jews after all) but that doesn't change that he was a major backer of terrorism. (Incidentally, what the hell is "private fund contributions" - are you suggesting that Saddam donated his own money to palestinians and not the money of the Iraqi government?!?)

Actually i wasn't ignoring the support of terrorism against israel. What i was saying that Saddams support was funded by his own opinions, not by the official stance of Iraq. However, you've shown that the Bush administration believes it to be so, from that article. I withdraw my statement, since i was wrong. Again my apologies.

What i was saying that Saddams support was funded by his own opinions, not by the official stance of Iraq.

Um, dude... Saddam was a dictator. There was no difference between his opinions and the official stance of Iraq.

257 VFI:

'Global US dominance' is not a notion I'd subsribe to, cheers.

Nostalgiac for the Cold War then?

Or enjoying the attempted EU rise as a check?

Or is there an option C where everyone holds hands?

Doug

#217: VK v. VFI! I put my money on VK in a TKO.

I have yet to feel a glove on me. How's she doin'?

'Global US dominance' is not a notion I'd subsribe to, cheers

Living under the constant threat of Islamo-fascist terrori is not a notion I'd subscribe to.

Living under the decrees of the UN --- where bastions of liberty and tolerance like Saudi Arabia, Libya, Cuba and Syria --- have an equal vote to pluralistic democracies --- is not a notion I'd subscribe to.

VK - It's way over, she just doesn't know it!

#257, VFI. Thank you, we will treasure it always, and it will be know eventually as the war that brought the cradle of liberty to the cradle of civilization. Good luck with your "troubles", maybe the French will once again interfere in your religious civil wars and bring you everlasting peace. The minarets will not seem so strange after a few years. Besides, you are tolerant arn't you?

260 - The islamo-facsist threat needs to be resolved as soon as possible.

As for US dominance, I believe that its fading, you will increasingly see the EU and Asian Groups balancing the American viewpoint.

This is a good thing. I view the Americans as an annoying older sibling, sure from time to time I get irritated, but I wount forget who family is. The best recent example of this is the UK in Iraq.

It's been enjoyable, folks. 63, I appreciate the reasoned views from across the pond. VK, it was no contest. Later.

Laurie Mylroie wrote this in May of 2002.

A decade ago major terrorist strikes on U.S. targets were considered to be state-sponsored. For all practical purposes, that meant Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Yet that is supposed to have changed with the first attack on the World Trade Center, in February 1993, one month into Bill Clinton's first term in office. The Clinton administration claimed that the bombing represented a new kind of terrorism that did not involve states.

The New York FBI office, however, strongly believed Iraq was behind the 1993 Trade Center attack. The Clinton White House did not want to hear that and FBI Headquarters accommodated the president — echo of the charge made by Coleen Rowley, Minneapolis FBI counsel and agent, of rampant careerism there. And thus was born the notion that major terrorist strikes against the U.S. were carried out by individuals, or "networks," without the support of states. The predictable happened. Terrorism continued. In fact, it grew far worse because the state sponsor of the terrorism was never properly identified and punished.

Like the FBI, the CIA accommodated Clinton's aversion to hearing that Iraq was attacking the U.S. and is now committed to its past. Shortly after 9/11, a European diplomat complained to this author that the Agency did not want to hear about leads pointing to Iraq and that had a dampening effect on his own country's investigation. Most recently, CIA Director George Tenet helped spread the story that Czech authorities no longer claimed that Mohammed Atta, leader of the hijackers in America, met with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague a few months before the attacks. The Czechs responded by reaffirming that he had.

Senior U.S. officials are now involved in what William Safire politely terms "covering their posteriors." That exercise is so irresponsible as to defy belief. People will put consideration of their careers above the national-security interests of this country, including the lives and well-being of American citizens.

Washington's experts on Iraq — in and out of government — also accommodated Clinton's desire not to hear Saddam Hussein was a serious problem. They downplayed the danger posed by Iraq's unconventional weapons and denigrated the strategy promoted by the U.S. Congress for removing Saddam: Arm and train the opposition Iraqi National Congress. In their overwhelming majority, the Iraq experts maintained there was no pressing danger, and even if Saddam's ouster was desirable, little could be done, as the INC was not competent. (Three such experts wrote a screed to that effect in Foreign Affairs, entitled "The Rollback Fantasy." The senior author was rewarded with an appointment to the Clinton White House).

In late 1998, this author pressed a colleague as to where responsibility would lie if Saddam did something terrible, because he had been left in power. What if Saddam developed a nuclear weapon and used it? What if he carried out a biological terror attack and many people died? This expert, from a prestigious Middle East institute, responded, "The times are very cynical and everyone must do what he must do for his career."

[Link: www.nationalreview.com...]

(#265) 63:

I suppose that's a nice change from the "spoiled little child" view.

As long as there's no confusion about the common goals of ridding the world of Islamofascist terrorism, I don't care which groups rise up to challenge that.

George Bush has no monopoly on the solution to the common problems. Obviously many Americans feel that way too.

Still, I don't enjoy the Chirac's, De Villepin's and Schroeder's (let's not forget how he managed his latest campaign) of the world and their methods of solidifying and/or increasing power. We don't need Europe to be anti-American for anti-America's sake.

#255   Ariel

Please, less of the 'only jews' snideness. I don't see the US marching into spain to take out ETA. The justification given was that of a threat to the US (& UK). Israel didn't enter into the equation.

* Assassination attempt on Bush 41

But no actual assassination. Bush was a private citizen when he went there, and he had been responsible for a war against them. No excuse for attempting this sort of nastyness, but hardly the stuff of 'international terrorism'.

* First attack on WTC towers in 1993 was backed by Iraq (the attackers had Kuwaiti passports captured by Iraq when they invaded Iraq)

Good point. Probably the only one.

* There is evidence that the Oklahoma City bombing was coordinated by Iraq (John Doe #2, unidentified co-conspirators in the case - see [Link: www.jaynadavis.com)...]

Do we really want to get into looney conspiracy theories? I won't be rushing out to buy Ms davis' next tome.

* Ansar al-Islam, linked to Al Qaeda, was based in Iraq

In the kurdish controlled region, where Saddam had little influence or practical ability to do anything about them (had he cared. we don't have evidence one way or another)

* Czechs refuse to deny that Iraqi intelligence chief met with Atta in Prague

This has been around the houses too often to warrant raising as evidence. The US intelligence people don't seem to rate it as such anyway.

* Iraqi diplomats expelled from the Phillipines for backing Abu Sayyaf, linked to Al Qaeda

Too much static in relation to the US/Philipino joint 'war on terrorism' there to know what degree of actual support the diplomats were supplying. Could be something, could just be mutually useful propaganda.

* Paintings in Saddam land of the destruction of the WTC glorify the attack

Not really 'terrorism' though, is it? It certainly doesn't prove anything other than taking pleasure in your enemy's misfortune.

Where's the beef in relation to the 'clear and present danger' posed to the US?

Let's face it. Ireland is about as much use as a fart in a spacesuit in international affairs.

No point even listening to them. They will just shilly-shally, and side with the Weasels.

Maybe it is time Americans went to Scotland or the English Lakes rather than Ireland to see mountains and lakes/lochs. And get less VFI-type blarney.

Ireland has not stood by America, why should America care about Ireland ?

270 JohninLondon:

Ireland has not stood by America, why should America care about Ireland ?

In practical respects for International Relations, it doesn't really matter that much either way.

St. Patrick's Day can be fun, though. ;-)

Meanwhile Ireland and France are side-by-side in Cancun at the WTO shindig - trying to hang on to all the agricultural subsidies they screw out of the rest of Europe.

View From Ireland once again shows why she should be called River In Africa... (and I don't mean the Congo). She concedes that Iraq very, very likely had a hand in the 1993 WTC bombing, but then acts like it was a one-time thing, and after it, Saddam went back to building milk factories and day care centers and hanging out with his good buddy Abu Nidal, who lived out his golden years in Baghdad, but that was probably because... um... he enjoyed the resemblance between Saddam and the "Time to make the donuts" guy.

In any case, even if the terrorists were only (very) probably involved in Iraq before, they are definitely there now, and a good thing, too. Better to have terrorists fighting US soldiers armed with M-16s than US civilians armed with plastic sporks.

VK by a knock-out ?

It's feeling more like a smackdown. A really good lefty can at least get me mad in an argument... this is too easy.

Ariel,

While there are Ivy Leagues which are problematic (Cornell, Columbia), you'd be hard-pressed to hear something like that at Penn (my alma mater) or Harvard (the alma mater of many of my friends).

I had the oppportunity of eating dinner with several former Ivy Leaguers who had pursued advanced degrees at various universities in Texas. I was not impressed. I was shocked at both their all-consuming arrogance and complete ignorance when it came to current events. They were idiotarian to the core, all of them, their wives and girlfriends too. "Talkin' loud and sayin' nuthin" pretty much sums up these types. I did steal a busty Mexican beauty from one of these guys though. Poor sap had been hitting on her all night, left to go to the can, within 5 minutes she was all mine...

VFI #269,

Please, less of the 'only jews' snideness.

When somebody simultaneously acknowledges that:
* Saddam wasn't a backer of terrorism and
* Saddam funded palestinian terrorists who kill Jews
I'm afraid that snideness is appropriate. Next time I see you commenting that any anti-Jewish terrorism is actually terrorism, I'll be sure to remember it as the first time.

I don't see the US marching into spain to take out ETA.

Yes, but nobody was talking about whether Iraq backed ETA. Incidentally, ETA can hardly be considered to be a group backed by a government, unlike, e.g. the palestinians. I don't think if say the French were funding ETA that we would be particularly thrilled about it.

Israel didn't enter into the equation.

I'm not perfectly sure of this. I wouldn't say that America did it 100% for Israel, but perhaps Bush thought that by taking out support for palestinian terrorists, they would become less intransigent - thus undercutting one of the Arab world's sore points. He was wrong, incidentally, if he thought this.

But no actual assassination. Bush was a private citizen when he went there, and he had been responsible for a war against them.

I see. A failed assassination attempt is not the moral equivalent of an assassination. Does it take a special kind of moral obtuseness to distinguish between these two shades of black?

Do we really want to get into looney conspiracy theories? I won't be rushing out to buy Ms davis' next tome.

Feel free to deny the connections. They're there.

In the kurdish controlled region, where Saddam had little influence or practical ability to do anything about them (had he cared. we don't have evidence one way or another)

Ansar al-Islam operated in the Northeast, but not exclusively in the Kurdish areas. You might recall that Kurdish troops (backed by US special forces) attacked an Ansar al-Islam camp as they advanced through Iraq, i.e. it was not in Kurdish controlled territory.

This has been around the houses too often to warrant raising as evidence. The US intelligence people don't seem to rate it as such anyway.

Please see Laurie Mylroie's comment above.

Even though the CIA is in CYA mode, the Czechs have completely refused to drop the issue.

Too much static in relation to the US/Philipino joint 'war on terrorism' there to know what degree of actual support the diplomats were supplying. Could be something, could just be mutually useful propaganda.

Of course, it's always propaganda if it's in America's interests and G-d's truth if France says it. After all, France never acts in its own interests, just in the interests of all of mankind - though some may end up being more equal then others.

FYI - it's Filipino. The Phillipines, but Filipino.

Not really 'terrorism' though, is it? It certainly doesn't prove anything other than taking pleasure in your enemy's misfortune.

Given that he was implicated in the first takedown attempt of the WTC towers, it might suggest that he backed AQ, no? Especially when you consider the relationship between OBL's declarations and those of Saddam - both temporally and content-wise. Both called for no American troops in the Saudi entity, an end to American sanctions on Iraq, and a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict - in the same order and roughly at the same time on several occasions.

I had forgotten to mention the backing of the Muhajedeen-e-Khalq, the PKK, etc. when discussing Saddam's backing of terrorists.

As many others have pointed out, Saddam's backing of terrorists is pretty clear. Given that the US is effectively at war with Islamic terrorists and that Saddam backed many of them, why shouldn't we have attacked him?

Also, given the problems in the Saudi entity, it seems that Iraq may have been quite a strategic choice - both for reasons for energy needs and because attacking the Saudis while having our bases in their country would be impolitic.

#273   Viking Kitten

By that reasoning you'd have been better invading Libya. At least Ghadaffi was successful in his attack on US interests.

OT- Johnny Cash died this morning. RIP man in black.