Art vs. The French
Dav1936531
missing a certain perspective of what is occurring at the UN.
I believe that what we are watching at the UN is termed "choreographed
diplomacy", i.e., the various NATO players have been assigned certain roles to
play in bringing about resolution of the Iraq situation. They are now going
through the motions of playing their assigned roles until such time as all the
military preparations are completed and, based on Saddam's cooperation (or lack
thereof), war will be instigated as the solution, or, if some other avenue
(coup or assassination) pans out, war can be averted.
You can't play "good cop-bad cop" if all the cops are bad. The US has been put
in the position of playing bad cop, while our reasonable allies the French and
Germans have been put in the position of playing good cop by careful "back
room" diplomatic planning.
I believe that Colin Powell (the quarterback) has called the "play" that the
Western allies would carry out to get us to the solution to the Iraq problem.
That "play" requires the French (a security council veto power) to hold out its
threat to veto military action until such time as all preparations for war have
been completed. (The various members have been in agreement since day one that
Saddam was not going to voluntarily disarm....did anyone really think he
would?)
Now that we have gone through the proper procedural motions of sending in
inspectors, we have exhausted all the required diplomatic protocols. We cannot
just haul off and launch a war upon Iraq without giving them the opportunity to
declare their intentions, vis-a-vis disarmament and return to normal diplomatic
status, after all. We must give Saddam all the rope required to hang himself.
And now, GW Bush gives the go ahead for the end game. He declares that the UN
must pass a further resolution authorizing war, or that the credibility of UN
resolutions will forever be called into question. Who wants to wager that the
entire security council will now fall into place behind war, i.e., no veto as
was "threatened" by the French as per their assigned diplomatic role.
I think the recent flare up between several French posters and Art may just be
based in a lack of understanding of what is happening at the diplomatic level.
However, I could be completely incorrect.....so I am now donning my flame proof
suit. :)
Dave
Badballscrew
"Dav1936531" <dav19...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030207142552...@mb-fn.aol.com...
That sounds like a half reasonable explanation to me..
Flying Frog
> I don't mean to further rile up the situation, but I think we all might be
> missing a certain perspective of what is occurring at the UN.
[snip]
> Dave
Hello Dave,
Glad to read your message ! I do not think that you are wrong. Effectively,
France said that war is an admission of failure and must be used only in
any last appeal. War is not a safe game, except maybe for some, behind a
computer... There where they are necessarily very strong and are
invincible.
France has never said that she will never participate in a coallition...
She said that she would not make a war without having the certainty that
war is justified. Now, for the moment, we strictly have no proof of this
necessity.
The inspectors are on the ground and investigate. Saddam will not make
anything when the inspectors are in Iraq, it would be suicidal for him. So
let them make their work correctly and we shall see which are their
conclusions. For the moment, they did not find proof of what Powell and
Bush asserts and nevertheless they are on the spot, contrary to the two
persons that I named. A nuclear industry is easily locatable (I am placed
well for knowledge, that is my job), with good means and inspectors have
these means.
After this war, if it becomes evident that Iraqi had nothing of what Bush
and Powell accused them, what will it happen? People will have died for
anything, families will be destroyed for anything, kids will lament their
parents for anything or parents will lament their kids for anything.
I repeat it, let the inspectors work for the moment. War will well wait for
a week or for two more...
... And if the inspectors have the proof that Iraq really hid prohibited
weapons, no doubt that France will act as it is its duty !
--
Chris
---------------------------------------------------------------
scale modellism portal : http://www.ffsmc.com
portail de maquettisme : http://www.ffsmc.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Willshaw
> missing a certain perspective of what is occurring at the UN.
>
> I believe that what we are watching at the UN is termed "choreographed
> diplomacy", i.e., the various NATO players have been assigned certain
roles to
> play in bringing about resolution of the Iraq situation. They are now
going
> through the motions of playing their assigned roles until such time as all
the
> military preparations are completed and, based on Saddam's cooperation (or
lack
> thereof), war will be instigated as the solution, or, if some other avenue
> (coup or assassination) pans out, war can be averted.
Certainly thats the view some of the more experienced observer
on the BBC news channel are propounding. They are taking the
view that Dubya actually has a new security council resolution
in the bag and that what we are seeing is a piece of play acting
for domestic consumption in Germany, France etc.
Keith
Dav1936531
>Date: 2/7/03 6:58 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <b21h6q$24k$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk>
>
>Certainly thats the view some of the more experienced observer
>on the BBC news channel are propounding. They are taking the
>view that Dubya actually has a new security council resolution
>in the bag and that what we are seeing is a piece of play acting
>for domestic consumption in Germany, France etc.
>Keith
GW Bush wouldn't have called for a new resolution if it weren't already "in the
bag". It's a done deal. Count on it like clock work.
Dave
tscottme
> You can't play "good cop-bad cop" if all the cops are bad. The US has
been put
> in the position of playing bad cop, while our reasonable allies the
French and
> Germans have been put in the position of playing good cop by careful
"back
> room" diplomatic planning.
>
France has been increasingly anti-American for years. German elections
were won largely on anti-American campaign. Were these part of the
secret master plan?
I think you are assigning too much to an organization that rivals the
Arab League for incompetence.
Pierre-Henri Baras
AdacnSE8aPw...@comcast.com...
>
> Dav1936531 <dav19...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030207142552...@mb-fn.aol.com...
>
> > You can't play "good cop-bad cop" if all the cops are bad. The US has
> been put
> > in the position of playing bad cop, while our reasonable allies the
> French and
> > Germans have been put in the position of playing good cop by careful
> "back
> > room" diplomatic planning.
> >
>
> France has been increasingly anti-American for years.
Compared to the UK maybe. If you only call "friends" the counrties that kiss
your a** and follow you blindfoldedly and never ask questions, that's your
problem. Who was the 1st president that visited GW Bush and Ground Zero??
Where were the victimes of the USS Cole disaster taken and treated?? What
was the only country to send combat aircraft over Afghanistan?? Where are
most of your Special Forces based in the Gulf ??(hint: Djibouti)
When will you understand that two friends can disagree on certain subjects?
During the Algerian conflict, the USA strongly disaprooved of the French
position, but never stopped supporting De Gaulle.
BTW I strolled down the Champs-Elysées last night, and I assure you english
(american english) was the most heard foreign language; if ever you can call
english a foreign language!!!!
tscottme
Pierre-Henri Baras <ph...@free.fr> wrote in message
news:3e44ddf3$0$254$626a...@news.free.fr...
A friend isn't someone that is invisible during the good times and a
pain in the ass during the difficult times. A friend also isn't the
best friend Saddam has in the UN. The best method of avoiding war would
be universal pressure on Iraq instead of near universal pressure and
formerly important European nations running interference for Saddam.
France, Germany, and most of Europe have been ignoring their own defense
for so long they are impotent in time of need. Rather than face their
impotence, they prefer to pretend there is no need for force.
Alan Minyard
The statements of your leaders and the crowds in your streets belie
your statement. France is virulently anti US, and shows it at every
opportunity.
Al Minyard
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
news:ma2a4vcoj2o5r210t...@4ax.com:
> The statements of your leaders and the crowds in your streets belie
> your statement. France is virulently anti US, and shows it at every
> opportunity.
>
You're completly wrong, or you believe too much US propaganda. Open your
eyes for once.
And We're not as anti-US as the US are anti-french (or european)
--
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
`All those moments will be lost in time like tears in rain. Time to die.'
Franck
was Donald Rumfsfeld who said after a diner with sadam : we found a good
friend in the gulf, Sadam Hussein !!!!
--
Franck
Franck
your stupid president
If you think all teh people are not the same opinion of you are ennemy, look
on your country, lot af people in US aren't agree with your president and
his team
--
Franck
ArtKramr
>From: "tscottme" blah...@blah.net
>Date: 2/8/03 5:24 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <vbOdnXRdssK...@comcast.com>
>
>France, Germany, and most of Europe have been ignoring their own defense
>for so long they are impotent in time of need. Rather than face their
>impotence, they prefer to pretend there is no need for force.
They know there is always America to fill that need. And they depend on that.
They only hate us until they need us.
Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
news:b232ff$sv5$1...@news-reader12.wanadoo.fr:
> sorry but few years ago jsut before the gulf war,,the best friend of
> sadam was Donald Rumfsfeld who said after a diner with sadam : we
> found a good friend in the gulf, Sadam Hussein !!!!
>
;-))
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=2177
http://www.madison.com/captimes/opinion/editorial/39885.php
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52241-2002Dec29.html
But it may be French misinformation.....
Franck
--
Franck
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
news:Xns931C99BCF2FF1No...@193.252.19.141:
> http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=2177
>
> http://www.madison.com/captimes/opinion/editorial/39885.php
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52241-2002Dec29.html
>
Hey, Art, you don't have anything to say about this ????
Or are you making an apoplexia in your bed ?
Chris Mark
>France has been increasingly anti-American for years. German elections
>were won largely on anti-American campaign. Were these part of the
>secret master plan?
France is engaging in realpolitik, as are Russia, Germany and even Britain.
Same old same old. The US is engaging in its obsession to fight wars with
coalitions, needed or not. Even in Vietnam we had to have our Many Flags
program. Again, same old same old.
Chris Mark
Keith Willshaw
"Franck" <nn_fr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b232ff$sv5$1...@news-reader12.wanadoo.fr...
> sorry but few years ago jsut before the gulf war,,the best friend of sadam
> was Donald Rumfsfeld who said after a diner with sadam : we found a good
> friend in the gulf, Sadam Hussein !!!!
>
So what ?
Times change and situations alter. When fundamentalism
was running wild in Iran it was in the interests of the West,
including France and Germany to shore up the Iraqi's.
That is no longer the case and the Iraqis have become a major
threat to the stability of the region. To ignore that simply
because 20 years ago it was politic to be nice to them
would be incredibly stupid.
Keith
Cub Driver
>what we are watching at the UN is termed "choreographed
>diplomacy",
Very nicely put.
Always remember that M. Chirac's most recent blast at American
unilateralism followed by about his week his announcement that French
troops would be getting ready to deploy to the region.
France is ready to heap contempt upon the U.S. if and when it fails (I
say "when" because however the military operation goes, the end game
is going to be difficult), meanwhile patting itself on the back for
helping to oust Saddam.
The Democrats of course are doing the same. If everything goes well
(very unlikely) they will remind the country that they voted for the
war powers resolution. Otherwise we will hear about their wise
warnings.
This Bushkin is scary. He means what he says! America hasn't had a
president like this since Harry Truman.
all the best -- Dan Ford (email: web AT danford.net)
see the Warbird's Forum at http://www.danford.net/index.htm
Vietnam | Flying Tigers | Pacific War | Brewster Buffalo | Piper Cub
tscottme
Franck <nn_fr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b232ff$sv5$1...@news-reader12.wanadoo.fr...
France has never been picky about its customers. Hell, France was the
Hutu Power Government's shield in Rwanda and provided an escape for the
genocidal government when they got tired of murdering. US policy at the
time was to keep Iraq strange enough to prevent the Iranians from
spreading their revolution across the region. Multiple US official said
on TV the ideal outcome would be for both Iran and Iraq to lose the war.
France supplied Saddam with his nuclear reactor years before this
conversation you mention and is Saddam's best trading partner today, and
the key reason the UN is ineffective against Saddam. Maybe to your
distorted gallic mind saying nice things after dinner is more important
than a long-standing and continuing support of a dictator. That's why
many in my country ignore France when we can overcome our contempt for
France.
--
----
"Anti-Americanism is an emotion masquerading as an analysis, a morality,
an ideal, even an idea about what to do".
Todd Gitlin
tscottme
news:b23hb1$4ug$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk...
>
> So what ?
>
> Times change and situations alter. When fundamentalism
> was running wild in Iran it was in the interests of the West,
> including France and Germany to shore up the Iraqi's.
>
> That is no longer the case and the Iraqis have become a major
> threat to the stability of the region. To ignore that simply
> because 20 years ago it was politic to be nice to them
> would be incredibly stupid.
>
> Keith
>
And typically French
tscottme
ArtKramr <artk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030208090206...@mb-cc.aol.com...
.
>
> They know there is always America to fill that need. And they depend
on that.
> They only hate us until they need us.
>
>
> Arthur Kramer
They hate us even when they need us, they just haven't the spine to say
so until it's safe again.
tscottme
Nono Le Rouje/RBC <NonoL...@NOSPAMnetcourrier.com> wrote in message
news:Xns931C97D566538No...@193.252.19.141...
> Alan Minyard <aminy...@netdoor.com> a écrit dans
> news:ma2a4vcoj2o5r210t...@4ax.com:
>
> > The statements of your leaders and the crowds in your streets belie
> > your statement. France is virulently anti US, and shows it at every
> > opportunity.
> >
> You're completly wrong, or you believe too much US propaganda. Open
your
> eyes for once.
> And We're not as anti-US as the US are anti-french (or european)
>
>
That's right, the French printed one newspaper column after Sept 11 in
support of the US, so their quota of support for the USA is fulfilled
for 30 years. Go pound Algerian and Ivory Coast sand.
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
tujX...@comcast.com:
> That's right, the French printed one newspaper column after Sept 11 in
> support of the US, so their quota of support for the USA is fulfilled
> for 30 years. Go pound Algerian and Ivory Coast sand.
>
You're an arrogant ignorant. Go back to your swamp.
CZ
Dan:
From your web site:
"Huh. You don't seem to have Java Script enabled! -- Dan Ford "
What would I have seen if it was enabled?
TIA
BTW, nice web site
Gooneybird
"Cub Driver" <lo...@my.sig.file> wrote in message
news:8ogc4v86v6scvrg89...@4ax.com...
> On 07 Feb 2003 19:25:52 GMT, dav19...@aol.com (Dav1936531) wrote:
> This Bushkin is scary. He means what he says!
Ah yes, except those famous words "A promise made will be a promise kept" he
uttered when running for office. Remember "Concurrent Receipt" and his part in
how one screws one's troops? The entire House of Representatives voted for it,
Republicans included, but he ordered Rumsfeld and Hastert to stand it down and,
good soldiers that they are, that's exactly what they did.
He may mean what he says at the time he says it, but he's got the world's
lousiest memory.
George Z.
Pierre-Henri Baras
> They hate us even when they need us, they just haven't the spine to say
> so until it's safe again.
>
Euh...when exactly did you hear France say it hated the US? Apart from Vichy
I haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about.
Pierre-Henri Baras
> >
> >
>
> That's right, the French printed one newspaper column after Sept 11 in
> support of the US, so their quota of support for the USA is fulfilled
> for 30 years.
I'll say it again, but France was the only country to send combat in support
of US land operations in Afghanistan. UK & Australia sent tankers, but our
Super Etendards and Mirage 2000Ds flew CAS missions.
American civilians probably don't know that; but US servicemen sure do and
have thanked us enough for it, including on this NG!
It's funny how the americans fully involved in military affairs think so
differently from you arrogant would-be lecturers...
Keith Willshaw
>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > That's right, the French printed one newspaper column after Sept 11 in
> > support of the US, so their quota of support for the USA is fulfilled
> > for 30 years.
>
> I'll say it again, but France was the only country to send combat in
support
> of US land operations in Afghanistan.
Then you'll say it wrong. There were UK special forces there
from day one and Royal Marines at Bagram
> UK & Australia sent tankers, but our
> Super Etendards and Mirage 2000Ds flew CAS missions.
> American civilians probably don't know that; but US servicemen sure do and
> have thanked us enough for it, including on this NG!
Sure but that doesnt give you a free ticket for life.
> It's funny how the americans fully involved in military affairs think so
> differently from you arrogant would-be lecturers...
>
I rather doubt that many US military people are happy with
French behaviour at present since if nothing else it makes
war MORE likely.
As several commentators including an Iraqi dissident interviewed
on the BBC today have pointed out the best way to get Saddam
to comply with UN demands would have been a united front
in the security council.
Instead the repeated cries of 'we wont support a war' have
encouraged him to believe he can defy the security council
with impunity. This is exactly the idiocy we rightly criticised
Clinton for in Kosovo when he ruled out any possibility
of a ground war.
Let me provide a quote from an article by Thomas Friedman
which seems to sum up what many of them think.
<Quote>
I also want to avoid a war - but not by letting Saddam off
the hook, which would undermine the U.N., set back the
winds of change in the Arab world and strengthen the World
of Disorder. The only possible way to coerce Saddam into
compliance - without a war - is for the whole world to line
up shoulder-to-shoulder against his misbehavior, without
any gaps. But France, as they say in kindergarten, does not
play well with others. If you line up against Saddam you're
just one of the gang. If you hold out against America,
you're unique. As Michael Mandelbaum, author
of "The Ideas That Conquered the World." said
"France, it seems, would rather be more important in a world
of chaos than less important in a world of order,"
</Quote>
Keith
Dave Holford
There may not have been many; but there were definitely Canadian ground
troops in combat.
Dave
Pierre-Henri Baras
message de news: b25v2e$m2l$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk...
>
> "Pierre-Henri Baras" <ph...@free.fr> wrote in message
> news:3e467c34$0$246$626a...@news.free.fr...
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's right, the French printed one newspaper column after Sept 11 in
> > > support of the US, so their quota of support for the USA is fulfilled
> > > for 30 years.
> >
> > I'll say it again, but France was the only country to send combat in
> support
> > of US land operations in Afghanistan.
>
> Then you'll say it wrong. There were UK special forces there
> from day one and Royal Marines at Bagram
oops... that was "combat aircraft" of course, sorry
>
> > UK & Australia sent tankers, but our
> > Super Etendards and Mirage 2000Ds flew CAS missions.
> > American civilians probably don't know that; but US servicemen sure do
and
> > have thanked us enough for it, including on this NG!
>
> Sure but that doesnt give you a free ticket for life.
No it doesn't, but may help people here understand that WE aren't the
ennemy?
> "France, it seems, would rather be more important in a world
> of chaos than less important in a world of order,"
The problem is that I don't really believe that taking out SH will put more
order in the world. That was 200% right for Hitler, but for Saddam????
Pierre-Henri Baras
> There may not have been many; but there were definitely Canadian ground
> troops in combat.
see above: "combat aircraft". Furthermore IIRC a few of your snipers did a
remarquable job over ther!
Christopher Morton
Damned good snipers.
--
"If she's elected, I'll make a point of putting "D-Israel" after her
name." - Brian Zepp Jamieson referring to Black liberal Democrat, Denise Majette.
Tom Mosher
Obviously an opinion from someone who has never been to France.
I've been there three times in the last year (once each to Paris,
Suresnes, and Bordeaux). Based on conversations I've had with the
locals in the bars and restaurants, the French citizenry don't hate
Americans, they hate the policies of the US government.
Tom Mosher
Flying Frog
> Obviously an opinion from someone who has never been to France.
>
> I've been there three times in the last year (once each to Paris,
> Suresnes, and Bordeaux). Based on conversations I've had with the
> locals in the bars and restaurants, the French citizenry don't hate
> Americans, they hate the policies of the US government.
>
> Tom Mosher
That's exactly the truth Tom !
--
Chris
---------------------------------------------------------------
scale modellism portal : http://www.ffsmc.com
portail de maquettisme : http://www.ffsmc.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
news:2cef3335.0302...@posting.google.com:
> I've been there three times in the last year (once each to Paris,
> Suresnes, and Bordeaux). Based on conversations I've had with the
> locals in the bars and restaurants, the French citizenry don't hate
> Americans, they hate the policies of the US government.
>
That's what we try to explain to some people here, but the results are
poor... :-(
Franck
understand your explanation, he doesn't live on the same planet
Paris, Suresnes, Bordeaux !! do you work with Dassault Aviation or Dassault
Systémes ? ;o)
--
Franck
Sergio
news: qf5d4vo3ul03fvf7u...@4ax.com...
> Damned good snipers.
A kill from more than a mile away, I heard. Is that true ?
--
Sergio
http://www.aviation-fr.info
http://www.picavia.com
Tom Mosher
> tmo...@gbronline.com (Tom Mosher) a écrit dans
> news:2cef3335.0302...@posting.google.com:
>
> > I've been there three times in the last year (once each to Paris,
> > Suresnes, and Bordeaux). Based on conversations I've had with the
> > locals in the bars and restaurants, the French citizenry don't hate
> > Americans, they hate the policies of the US government.
> >
> That's what we try to explain to some people here, but the results are
> poor... :-(
Unfortunately, the majority of Americans have never been out of the
country, don't read anything but the local newspaper, and have zero
interest in anything that occurs outside of the US (unless the news
says it involves them).
Personally, I have no problem with the French - I have daily contact
with at least three (two in Merignac and one in Suresnes) that I
consider my friends - albeit that all three are business contacts.
Now concerning who hates who - you'll find that the majority of the
hatred directed toward the United States is directed at the US
government - not the people.
Tom Mosher
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
> Personally, I have no problem with the French - I have daily contact
> with at least three (two in Merignac and one in Suresnes) that I
> consider my friends - albeit that all three are business contacts.
In which domain do you work ?
> Now concerning who hates who - you'll find that the majority of the
> hatred directed toward the United States is directed at the US
> government - not the people.
>
That what we try to explain.
John Halliwell
<ph...@free.fr> writes
>I'll say it again, but France was the only country to send combat in support
>of US land operations in Afghanistan. UK & Australia sent tankers, but our
>Super Etendards and Mirage 2000Ds flew CAS missions.
The British put a lot of troops on the ground and had Canberra's flying
overhead almost from day one.
--
John
Christopher Morton
wrote:
>"Christopher Morton" <chr...@ameritech.net> a écrit dans le message de
>news: qf5d4vo3ul03fvf7u...@4ax.com...
>
>> Damned good snipers.
>
>A kill from more than a mile away, I heard. Is that true ?
I believe so, using .50 cal. sniper rifles, McMillens I think.
av8r
I propose that we declare an immediate unilateral ceasefire on the
French/U.S. flap that's been dominating this news group. It serves no
purpose to continue it since all objectivity was lost the first day.
People are entitled to their opinion. Right now all we are seeing is a
barrage of insults being hurled both ways across the Atlantic.
Personally, I'm getting pretty friggin tired of it all. This constant
rhetoric back and forth is not going to change anybody's mindset, so
just let it go and carry on with your lives. We have to accept the fact
that old wounds sometimes do not heal. Let's get back to the true
raison d'etre of this newsgroup and try to learn from each other's
aviation experiences.
Cheers...Chris
Peter Glasų
"Christopher Morton" <chr...@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:84qd4v8kp285474d8...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:28:18 +0100, "Sergio" <ser...@aviation.fr>
> wrote:
>
> >"Christopher Morton" <chr...@ameritech.net> a écrit dans le message de
> >news: qf5d4vo3ul03fvf7u...@4ax.com...
> >
> >> Damned good snipers.
> >
> >A kill from more than a mile away, I heard. Is that true ?
>
> I believe so, using .50 cal. sniper rifles, McMillens I think.
Actually it was 2400 yards..! Details were published in an article in SOF
magazine.
tscottme
I didn't say France had the spine to say they hate the US.
tscottme
Pierre-Henri Baras <ph...@free.fr> wrote in message
news:3e4690f9$0$273$626a...@news.free.fr...
And the same France that pretended Hitler was not violating Versailles
and gave Hitler nearly a decade of preparation before *he* decided when
the war would start is the same France that pretends a dozen or more
UNSCR violations by a dictator that has twice invaded neighbors and has
an unmatched record of atrocity in the region isn't a threat. Even
though France sold Saddam his nuclear reactor. And not just any nuke
reactor but one capable of making fissile material for weapons rather
than a safer light water reactor.
Presuming you have some humanity and *after* Saddam blows up Tel Aviv or
NYC with a WMD and that crosses your threshold for action, what are we
to tell the families of those victims? Some obstinate Frenchman didn't
think that what just happend could have happend, tough luck.
If I could be certain that by letting Saddam play with his toys only
France was at risk, I would be the first to say leave him alone. We can
act after Paris is a glass parking lot. They should have built up their
defenses. But that's not our best estimate of what Saddam wants to do.
And the US is powerful enough to do something about grave threats
without depending on the whims of pissed off Frenchmen.
You'll notice France and Germany did precisely zero between 1998 and GWB
speech at the UN challenging them to prove they aren't irrelevant. If
France or Germany wanted to solve this problem, their way, taking as
much time as necessary, they had the time. But like most problems, if
the US doesn't get involved it's not llikely to even be worked on.
tscottme
Tom Mosher <tmo...@gbronline.com> wrote in message
news:2cef3335.0302...@posting.google.com...
>
> I've been there three times in the last year (once each to Paris,
> Suresnes, and Bordeaux). Based on conversations I've had with the
> locals in the bars and restaurants, the French citizenry don't hate
> Americans, they hate the policies of the US government.
>
> Tom Mosher
And these are the people that elect anti-American leaders.
ArtKramr..
"ArtKramr" <artk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030208090206...@mb-cc.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Art vs. The French
> >From: "tscottme" blah...@blah.net
> >Date: 2/8/03 5:24 AM Pacific Standard Time
> >Message-id: <vbOdnXRdssK...@comcast.com>
> >
>
> >France, Germany, and most of Europe have been ignoring their own defense
> >for so long they are impotent in time of need. Rather than face their
> >impotence, they prefer to pretend there is no need for force.
>
> They know there is always America to fill that need. And they depend on
that.
> They only hate us until they need us.
>
>
Its like me i only pretend to hate em cos my mother was french.
--
Arthur Kramer S.D. (Senile Dementia)
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.cootcomp.com/artkramer
Alan Minyard
Well, they just vetoed NATO support of Turkey (which is a NATO member)
in an attempt to prevent US forces from staging there. That is direct
support for Saddam against the US. Of course their buddies the
Germans also vetoed any support for the US.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
The French veto of support for Turkey speaks for itself. France
supports Saddam against the US. The payback is going to hurt like
hell.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
>
>No it doesn't, but may help people here understand that WE aren't the
>ennemy?
>
>
direct attack on the US, and shows your support for Saddam.
>
>> "France, it seems, would rather be more important in a world
>> of chaos than less important in a world of order,"
>
>The problem is that I don't really believe that taking out SH will put more
>order in the world. That was 200% right for Hitler, but for Saddam????
>
you bear no responsibility. The US will make life VERY unpleasant for
the French in the near future.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
>I've been there three times in the last year (once each to Paris,
>Suresnes, and Bordeaux). Based on conversations I've had with the
>locals in the bars and restaurants, the French citizenry don't hate
>Americans, they hate the policies of the US government.
>
>Tom Mosher
I have been to France on several occasions. As long as you feed them
dollars, they will pretend to like you. But once you turn your back,
or put your wallet away, the hatred come through. And if they hate
the decisions of our elected officials, then they hate us.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
<flying-frog...@ffsmc.com> wrote:
>On 9 Feb 2003 10:58:16 -0800, Tom Mosher wrote:
>
>> Obviously an opinion from someone who has never been to France.
>>
>> I've been there three times in the last year (once each to Paris,
>> Suresnes, and Bordeaux). Based on conversations I've had with the
>> locals in the bars and restaurants, the French citizenry don't hate
>> Americans, they hate the policies of the US government.
>>
>> Tom Mosher
>
>That's exactly the truth Tom !
No, as shown by your veto of NATO support for Turkey, you are giving
aid and comfort to Saddam. Do not try to hide your vicious treachery
behind "oh, we only hate your policies", not when you intentionally
and directly endanger US troops.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
wrote:
I do. And your treacherous veto of support for Turkey will cost France
and the French dearly. Not to mention the Germans.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
wrote:
The US Government IS the people. The hatred of the French is more
than amply illustrated by their refusal to support Turkey. As for
your "business" contacts, as I said earlier, the French will gladly
feign friendship as long as the dollars keep coming.
Al MInyard
Franck
>the French in the near future.
bhouuou it's horrible !!!
--
Franck
Franck
France Support Saddam !!! open your eyes little brain
--
Franck
Flying Frog
Yes France choose veto, but your are wrong, France
doesn't supports Saddam... US wants war, but United Nations doesn't chhose
it for the moment, so not useful to display missiles in Turkey for the
moment.
The USA are too much sure that United Nations are going to kneel down
before them and to decide that war is only solution. Attention, a
disproportionate pride has already to you very bad surprises, even
recently...
Flying Frog
Tiens le comique troupier de service va encore me faire mourir de rire
,;o)))))))) Should we be afraid ??? LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL...........
,;o)))))))))))))))))
Young conceited ,;o))))))
Flying Frog
> No, as shown by your veto of NATO support for Turkey, you are giving
> aid and comfort to Saddam. Do not try to hide your vicious treachery
> behind "oh, we only hate your policies", not when you intentionally
> and directly endanger US troops.
We did not ask the American troops to go to put ourselves in danger there
where BU(ll)SH(it) sent them...
Keith Willshaw
"Flying Frog" <flying-frog...@ffsmc.com> wrote in message
news:mff7ith042zf$.ven6l2q4b0iz.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 11:07:29 -0600, Alan Minyard wrote:
>
> > No, as shown by your veto of NATO support for Turkey, you are giving
> > aid and comfort to Saddam. Do not try to hide your vicious treachery
> > behind "oh, we only hate your policies", not when you intentionally
> > and directly endanger US troops.
>
> We did not ask the American troops to go to put ourselves in danger there
> where BU(ll)SH(it) sent them...
> --
In case you hadnt noticed its not about US troops
or Bush.
Turkey, a NATO ally asked for AWACS planes,
anti aircraft missiles and chemical warfare decon teams
to defend it against an Iraqi threat that has been made.
France, Germany and Belgium have decided to block
this request. The consequences could well be the
destruction of NATO and the formation of new defensive
alliance that excludes France and Germany.
I think thats rather serious, dont you ?
Keith
Pierre-Henri Baras
> >ennemy?
> >
> >
> Yes, you are, as shown by your veto of support for Turkey. That is a
> direct attack on the US, and shows your support for Saddam.
> >
The world isn't all black or all white, you know?
> Then you are wrong. France is irrelevant, but that does not mean that
> you bear no responsibility. The US will make life VERY unpleasant for
> the French in the near future.
Oh yeah, threats, I LLLLOOOOVVVVEEE threats from ignorant, manipulated
rednecks.
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
news:1rmf4v4h2bnigr957...@4ax.com:
> I have been to France on several occasions. As long as you feed them
> dollars, they will pretend to like you. But once you turn your back,
> or put your wallet away, the hatred come through. And if they hate
> the decisions of our elected officials, then they hate us.
>
We could say exactly the same about the USA...
Flying Frog
No I don't : USA are not the Master of the world, And if NATO had to
explode because a quirk of the USA, NATO would have no reason to be. The
reason to exist of the NATO is not "to cover" the warlike actions of one of
its members!
The day when Turkey will be a democracy, the day when human rights will be
respected there, I will (maybe) tear the demands.
But to claim that it is Turkey who wishes the display of armament US
adorned me to be of the highest comic exactly as, some years ago, when the
USA have pulled their allies in a war to defend Koweit (renowned country
for the very big democracy, it is true), against this idiot of Saddam... As
to take out as proof an old thesis of a student which dates 1991, just a
little forged.
Be a little bit serious please.
Stephen Harding
> > In case you hadnt noticed its not about US troops
> > or Bush.
> >
> > Turkey, a NATO ally asked for AWACS planes,
> > anti aircraft missiles and chemical warfare decon teams
> > to defend it against an Iraqi threat that has been made.
> >
> > France, Germany and Belgium have decided to block
> > this request. The consequences could well be the
> > destruction of NATO and the formation of new defensive
> > alliance that excludes France and Germany.
> >
> > I think thats rather serious, dont you ?
>
> No I don't : USA are not the Master of the world, And if NATO had to
> explode because a quirk of the USA, NATO would have no reason to be. The
> reason to exist of the NATO is not "to cover" the warlike actions of one of
> its members!
No, it is to cover the defense of one of its member states: Turkey.
> The day when Turkey will be a democracy, the day when human rights will be
> respected there, I will (maybe) tear the demands.
So now the French have decided Turkey isn't democratic enough to be defended
by Germans, French or Belgians? Are any other NATO members unworthy of
defense consderations by France? They probably would like to know.
> But to claim that it is Turkey who wishes the display of armament US
> adorned me to be of the highest comic exactly as, some years ago, when the
> USA have pulled their allies in a war to defend Koweit (renowned country
> for the very big democracy, it is true), against this idiot of Saddam... As
> to take out as proof an old thesis of a student which dates 1991, just a
> little forged.
Or how about Europe pulling the US into a war to deal with Serbia, Bosnia,
Kosovo? No US interests at all, except on the most highly theoretical of
terms (a peaceful Europe is probably a good thing for the US).
> Be a little bit serious please.
Make up your mind. Is NATO an alliance or just another platform of
convenience in which to bash the USA?
France and Germany can rule the world via obstructionist diplomacy
through the UN and now NATO. Pretty cheap costs as well. Good for you!
The US should pull out of NATO. See how France and Germany's method of
enforcing UN resolutions will work! The inspectors wouldn't even be in
Iraq right now if it weren't for US/UK threats seen as very credible by
Saddam Hussein.
SMH
Drewe Manton
"Stephen Harding" <har...@cs.umass.edu> wrote in message
news:3E4809B3...@cs.umass.edu...
> The US should pull out of NATO. See how France and Germany's method of
> enforcing UN resolutions will work! The inspectors wouldn't even be in
> Iraq right now if it weren't for US/UK threats seen as very credible by
> Saddam Hussein.
This is the crux of it for me. . I'm still not entirely convinced of the
need for war as yet, but it's undeniable that if it wasn't for the
deployment of US and UK forces and the obvious willingness to use them
should the need arise that Iraq wouldn't have been at all co-operative in
any sense whatsoever. There will come a time when we need to stop using the
threat of force to extract pointless little gestures from the Iraqis and
just use that force. . . but I'm not sure when that point is. We need to
stop negotiating and start *telling* Hussein how it's going to be.
France and Germany may just have played a blinder here, I see no way that
their plan will be accepted by the Iraqis, which gives them the chance to
say "well, we tried, it's out of our hands now" and settle back to watch the
show. . .
--
Regards
Drewe
Rebuilt PC. . must think of a new sig line.
Flying Frog
> No, it is to cover the defense of one of its member states: Turkey.
How could you seriously think Iraq is a danger for Turkey ?
> So now the French have decided Turkey isn't democratic enough to be defended
> by Germans, French or Belgians?
That's just my own opinion... Do you know this country ? It seems not...
> Or how about Europe pulling the US into a war to deal with Serbia, Bosnia,
> Kosovo? No US interests at all, except on the most highly theoretical of
> terms (a peaceful Europe is probably a good thing for the US).
Except your respect, are you sure of what you write? The US had no
interest? Think a little more, and you will see that you make a mistake.
> Make up your mind. Is NATO an alliance or just another platform of
> convenience in which to bash the USA?
For the moment, it is a question without answer for me... In an alliance,
it is not suitable that a member says " either you are with me, or you are
against me "... As a rule, it is an association of common interests, and in
the case of NATO, this interest is called peace...
> France and Germany can rule the world via obstructionist diplomacy
> through the UN and now NATO. Pretty cheap costs as well. Good for you!
France, Germany, Belgium... None of these countries claims to govern world,
contrary some others.
> The US should pull out of NATO. See how France and Germany's method of
> enforcing UN resolutions will work! The inspectors wouldn't even be in
> Iraq right now if it weren't for US/UK threats seen as very credible by
> Saddam Hussein.
US need France in particular, and you should know it. If it was not case,
your government would not react so violently against us, but would make fun
of it, simply.
Keith Willshaw
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 17:34:14 -0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
> No I don't : USA are not the Master of the world, And if NATO had to
> explode because a quirk of the USA, NATO would have no reason to be. The
> reason to exist of the NATO is not "to cover" the warlike actions of one
of
> its members!
>
Clearly you werent listening, the Turks requested meetings to plan defence
of their country against Iraqi missiles.
> The day when Turkey will be a democracy, the day when human rights will be
> respected there, I will (maybe) tear the demands.
>
Turkey has a democratically elected government.
> But to claim that it is Turkey who wishes the display of armament US
> adorned me to be of the highest comic exactly as, some years ago, when the
> USA have pulled their allies in a war to defend Koweit (renowned country
> for the very big democracy, it is true), against this idiot of Saddam...
As
> to take out as proof an old thesis of a student which dates 1991, just a
> little forged.
>
> Be a little bit serious please.
Lets see what the Turks say shall we
from http://www.turkishdailynews.com/
<Quote>
NATO is living the most severe crisis of its history as Turkey requested
emergency consultations under NATO's mutual defense treaty on Monday after
France, Germany and Belgium blocked the start of military planning to
protect Turkey against the threat of an Iraqi missile attack.
</Quote>
from http://www.turkishpress.com/turkishpress/
<Quote>
Turkey, which called on NATO to make Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty
operational, gave the message to the NATO allies that, ''the threat is very
serious. We cannot tolerate any other delay.''
</Quote>
It seems the Turks arent happy with being left vulnerable
so France and Germany can make a political statement.
Frankly other countries are also going to be worried wondering
who might be left high and dry next.
Keith
Keith Willshaw
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 15:21:07 -0500, Stephen Harding wrote:
>
> US need France in particular, and you should know it. If it was not case,
> your government would not react so violently against us, but would make
fun
> of it, simply.
>
I suspect you may be about to find out how VERY
wrong you are.
Keith
Ian MacLure
news:b25v2e$m2l$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk:
[snip]
>> I'll say it again, but France was the only country to send combat in
> support
>> of US land operations in Afghanistan.
And you wonder why we are down on the French. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
> Then you'll say it wrong. There were UK special forces there
> from day one and Royal Marines at Bagram
Not to mention sniper teams from Canada. Canada!!!!!!!
The long distance single shot kill record is now held by a
Canadian for crying out loud.
Sheesh what is the world coming to.
IBM
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Flying Frog
> It seems the Turks arent happy with being left vulnerable
> so France and Germany can make a political statement.
>
> Frankly other countries are also going to be worried wondering
> who might be left high and dry next.
Turkey is not threatened, let us be serious. On the other hand, it is a
very important base US for the war... And it is THAT which interests United
States, not the security of the Turks.
As for the democracy of this country... You know Turkey? I yes!
Flying Frog
> I suspect you may be about to find out how VERY
> wrong you are.
I think no... France isn't alone to refuse war for the moment : Germany,
Belgium, China, Russia... and don't forget the people of some others
countries... include GB...
Pierre-Henri Baras
message de news: b2984n$hn6$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
>
> "Flying Frog" <flying-frog...@ffsmc.com> wrote in message
> news:1na2b6r1hkle0.1...@40tude.net...
> > On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 17:34:14 -0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
> >
> > No I don't : USA are not the Master of the world, And if NATO had to
> > explode because a quirk of the USA, NATO would have no reason to be. The
> > reason to exist of the NATO is not "to cover" the warlike actions of one
> of
> > its members!
> >
>
> Clearly you werent listening, the Turks requested meetings to plan defence
> of their country against Iraqi missiles.
>
Clearly you weren't listening either because France affirmed that it would
allow the AWACS and zone defense systems deployed AFTER Friday 14 and the
Blix report. Selective memory tss tss tss
Franck
>Belgium, China, Russia... and don't forget the people of some others
>countries... include GB...
include US also
--
Franck
Flying Frog
oeuf corse... sorry, of course ,;o))
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
> It seems the Turks arent happy with being left vulnerable
> so France and Germany can make a political statement.
>
I heard tonight on the radio that it was the first time article 4 was used.
Why does Turkey didn't use it in 1991, when the threat was much more
important and verified ?
Robert Briggs
> Flying Frog wrote:
> > US need France in particular, and you should know it. If it was
> > not case, your government would not react so violently against
> > us, but would make fun of it, simply.
>
> I suspect you may be about to find out how VERY wrong you are.
Indeed, Keith.
Blair has made it quite clear that, although he would *prefer* any war
to be approved by another Security Council resolution, he is *prepared*
to commit British forces to action *in the face of a veto* if he
believes that veto is unreasonable.
IOW, if the only reason not to fight is a French veto then Blair will
act anyway.
He's having enough trouble with some of his own party that a French veto
wno't make much difference ...
Flying Frog
> Indeed, Keith.
>
> Blair has made it quite clear that, although he would *prefer* any war
> to be approved by another Security Council resolution, he is *prepared*
> to commit British forces to action *in the face of a veto* if he
> believes that veto is unreasonable.
>
> IOW, if the only reason not to fight is a French veto then Blair will
> act anyway.
>
> He's having enough trouble with some of his own party that a French veto
> wno't make much difference ...
It is of the wind: Blair has also to think of his population which is
opposite to the war... But it(he) wants maybe to emigrate in the USA?
GB is not still 53-rd star of the US flag...
Keith Willshaw
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 22:14:20 -0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
> > I suspect you may be about to find out how VERY
> > wrong you are.
>
> I think no... France isn't alone to refuse war for the moment : Germany,
> Belgium, China, Russia... and don't forget the people of some others
> countries... include GB...
So you dont think that if Bush has a mind to
he can affect French trade interests in the USA
for example.
Hmmmh
Keith
Keith Willshaw
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 22:12:47 -0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
> > It seems the Turks arent happy with being left vulnerable
> > so France and Germany can make a political statement.
> >
> > Frankly other countries are also going to be worried wondering
> > who might be left high and dry next.
>
> Turkey is not threatened, let us be serious.
The Turks think they are, which is rather the point.
Keith
Keith Willshaw
"Pierre-Henri Baras" <ph...@free.fr> wrote in message
news:3e48275c$0$232$626a...@news.free.fr...
Actually no they didnt, they said they saw no reason to change their
position until at least Friday. Moreover what was at stake was not
actually deploying the systems but planning in case that becomes
necessary.
France, Belgium and Germany have taken it upon themselves
to block Nato planning to defend an alliance member.
That is a serious situation and threatens the credibility of
the alliance. A bad mistake IMHO.
Keith
Keith Willshaw
"Nono Le Rouje/RBC" <NonoL...@NOSPAMnetcourrier.com> wrote in message
news:Xns931EF04BBBE81No...@193.252.19.141...
> "Keith Willshaw" <keith@kwillshaw_NoSpam.demon.co.uk> a écrit dans
> news:b2984n$hn6$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk:
>
> > It seems the Turks arent happy with being left vulnerable
> > so France and Germany can make a political statement.
> >
> I heard tonight on the radio that it was the first time article 4 was
used.
> Why does Turkey didn't use it in 1991, when the threat was much more
> important and verified ?
>
Because nobody blocked it then and NATO forces were
moved to Turkey
http://www.shape.nato.int/HISTORY/evolut91.htm
Keith
ArtKramr
>From: "Keith Willshaw" keith@kwillshaw_NoSpam.demon.co.uk
>Date: 2/10/03 3:18 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <b29c0h$i24$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: Art vs. The French
>From: "Keith Willshaw" keith@kwillshaw_NoSpam.demon.co.uk
>Date: 2/10/03 3:18 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <b29c0h$i24$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk>
Turkey is a NATO member, France stabbed a fellow NATO member in the back. How
French.
Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer
Alan Minyard
>
>Yes France choose veto, but your are wrong, France
>doesn't supports Saddam... US wants war, but United Nations doesn't chhose
>it for the moment, so not useful to display missiles in Turkey for the
>moment.
>The USA are too much sure that United Nations are going to kneel down
>before them and to decide that war is only solution. Attention, a
>disproportionate pride has already to you very bad surprises, even
>recently...
France voted for Saddam and against the US. France is a cowardly,
despicable enemy of the US. This will not be forgotten.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
<flying-frog...@ffsmc.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 11:02:54 -0600, Alan Minyard wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>>No it doesn't, but may help people here understand that WE aren't the
>>>ennemy?
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, you are, as shown by your veto of support for Turkey. That is a
>> direct attack on the US, and shows your support for Saddam.
>>>
>>>> "France, it seems, would rather be more important in a world
>>>> of chaos than less important in a world of order,"
>>>
>>>The problem is that I don't really believe that taking out SH will put more
>>>order in the world. That was 200% right for Hitler, but for Saddam????
>>>
>> Then you are wrong. France is irrelevant, but that does not mean that
>> you bear no responsibility. The US will make life VERY unpleasant for
>> the French in the near future.
>>
>> Al Minyard
>
>Tiens le comique troupier de service va encore me faire mourir de rire
>,;o)))))))) Should we be afraid ??? LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL...........
>,;o)))))))))))))))))
>
> Young conceited ,;o))))))
You had better be, your economy is a pittance next to that of the US.
If we decide to conduct a trade war you will lose more than you can
imagine.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
<flying-frog...@ffsmc.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 11:07:29 -0600, Alan Minyard wrote:
>
>> No, as shown by your veto of NATO support for Turkey, you are giving
>> aid and comfort to Saddam. Do not try to hide your vicious treachery
>> behind "oh, we only hate your policies", not when you intentionally
>> and directly endanger US troops.
>
>We did not ask the American troops to go to put ourselves in danger there
>where BU(ll)SH(it) sent them...
Well we sure as hell were not expecting French troops (of course they
would be useless anyway). France is an enemy country.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
"Ignorant manipulated rednecks" with an economy that makes France look
like a part of the third world. When we embargo your "goods" your
economy will collapse. You stupid, socialist idiots.
Al Minyard
Alan Minyard
Of course the French refused to participate in NATO until the USSR
collapsed. And it was Tony Blair who quoted the research paper, get a
clue. And by the way, Turkey is at least as democratic as France.
When you are excluded from NATO you will be utterly helpless.
Al Minyard
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
news:p0eg4vsbmv4alrrc5...@4ax.com:
> You had better be, your economy is a pittance next to that of the US.
> If we decide to conduct a trade war you will lose more than you can
> imagine.
>
How can you compare the economy of the USA (280 M people) to french one (60
M people).
If you really want to compare, compare to the whole UE, and the comparison
is not so good for the USA...
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
> France voted for Saddam and against the US. France is a cowardly,
> despicable enemy of the US. This will not be forgotten.
>
blablablabla...
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
>
> Because nobody blocked it then and NATO forces were
> moved to Turkey
>
> http://www.shape.nato.int/HISTORY/evolut91.htm
>
if no, reconsider your message.
Alan Minyard
<flying-frog...@ffsmc.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 22:14:20 -0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
>> I suspect you may be about to find out how VERY
>> wrong you are.
>
>I think no... France isn't alone to refuse war for the moment : Germany,
>Belgium, China, Russia... and don't forget the people of some others
>countries... include GB...
Ah yes, the French in bed with Russia and China, such wondrous
examples of freedom and democracy. The three of you deserve each
other.
France is irrelevant, if irritating. What you do or say is of no
import.
Al Minyard
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
> "Ignorant manipulated rednecks" with an economy that makes France look
> like a part of the third world. When we embargo your "goods" your
> economy will collapse. You stupid, socialist idiots.
>
< warning>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Troll detected - use standard echelon 1 procedure
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
</warning>
___________________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please don't |
/ O O\__ feed |
/ \ the trolls |
/ \ \ |
/ _ \ \ ----------------------
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | __||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | /| | --|
| | |// |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ // |
/ _ \\ _ // | /
* / \_ /- | - | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
> France is irrelevant, if irritating. What you do or say is of no
> import.
>
If we are so unimportant, why do you take the pain to answer us ? why do
you bother about the fact that French support or not your fucking war ?
Nono Le Rouje/RBC
> Of course the French refused to participate in NATO until the USSR
> collapsed. And it was Tony Blair who quoted the research paper, get a
> clue. And by the way, Turkey is at least as democratic as France.
> When you are excluded from NATO you will be utterly helpless.
>
You quote like a pig: 58 lines messages for only 4 of your own. You can do
better.
ArtKramr
>Date: 2/10/03 3:48 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <Xns931F8365E7F3No...@193.252.19.141>
>
>Alan Minyard <aminy...@netdoor.com> a écrit dans
>news:1udg4v08qj5i31ijd...@4ax.com:
>
>> France voted for Saddam and against the US. France is a cowardly,
>> despicable enemy of the US. This will not be forgotten.
>>
>blablablabla...
>
You are a traitor and proud of it . How French.
B2431
>--
>
>Chris
>---------------------------------------------------------------
Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
Keith Willshaw
"Nono Le Rouje/RBC" <NonoL...@NOSPAMnetcourrier.com> wrote in message
> "Keith Willshaw" <keith@kwillshaw_NoSpam.demon.co.uk> a écrit dans
> news:b29cp5$og9$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk:
> >
> > Because nobody blocked it then and NATO forces were
> > moved to Turkey
> >
> > http://www.shape.nato.int/HISTORY/evolut91.htm
> >
> Did they use art 4 in 1991 ? yes or no ?
>
> if no, reconsider your message.
NO
They didnt need to
Article 4 is only invoked by a NATO member when it
feels threatened. In 1991 the alliance acted premptively
and Turkey had no need to invoke it. Had the normal defense
planning not been blocked Turkey would not be involing it now.
Turkey is invoking it because it feels thtreatened and NATO isnt
moving to its assistance.
Keith
Dav1936531
>Date: 2/10/03 11:57 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <mcmf4v8dgc4sf9u9r...@4ax.com>
>
>Well, they just vetoed NATO support of Turkey (which is a NATO member)
>in an attempt to prevent US forces from staging there. That is direct
>support for Saddam against the US. Of course their buddies the
>Germans also vetoed any support for the US.
>
>Al Minyard
So much for my theory of "choreographed diplomacy" I guess. It was just plainly
WRONG.
Dave
Gooneybird
George Z.
av8r wrote:
> Hi Everyone
>
> I propose that we declare an immediate unilateral ceasefire on the
> French/U.S. flap that's been dominating this news group. It serves no
> purpose to continue it since all objectivity was lost the first day.
> People are entitled to their opinion. Right now all we are seeing is a
> barrage of insults being hurled both ways across the Atlantic.
>
> Personally, I'm getting pretty friggin tired of it all. This constant
> rhetoric back and forth is not going to change anybody's mindset, so
> just let it go and carry on with your lives. We have to accept the fact
> that old wounds sometimes do not heal. Let's get back to the true
> raison d'etre of this newsgroup and try to learn from each other's
> aviation experiences.
>
> Cheers...Chris