Why France didn't go to Iraq...

Rumsfeld was Regeans special envoy to Saddam. There is a nice big pic of Rumsfeld and saddam Shaking hands....

Mr. Kloos is dead on when it comes to the US "official" realtionship with Iraq between 180 and 84 and the "unofficial" realtionship before then when we were providig them with Intel which was in direct conflict with our public stance and proclimation of nuetrality.

The main reason France didnt want war with was simply economic greed......
not cowardice or the failure to recognize the threat of Islam.
 
There is a nice big pic of Rumsfeld and saddam Shaking hands....
Click to expand...
So what? I'm sure I can post plenty of photos of Carter and Clinton shaking the hands of some terrible people. Big deal. In the real world of diplomacy, you have to deal with people you don't like:
http://byrddroppings.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/carter_arafat.jpg
http://writingcompany.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/clinton_arafat.jpg

The policy of letting Iraq and Iran bleed each other white was a resounding success. But the liberal/left cannot possibly give credit when credit is due. Of course what policy they would have persuded, if any, remains a mystery. It's always easier to tear down someone actually doing something, instead of standing by wringing their hands.
 
Why would we want a Soviet client state to win and exert even more influence and force over the ME oil reserves, reserves that were (and are) vital to the West?
Click to expand...

Then why did we not lift a finger to even the odds for the Iranians, when in the first year and a half of the war the Iraqis beat the crap out of them? Your "bleed each other out" theory does not hold water, and I maintain that it's simple revisionism. It's retroactive history book fudging. The fact remains that we either didn't think he was that bad of a dude until he invaded Kuwait, or we didn't have a problem with him being a brutal dictator as long as he was fighting the people we like even less.

Even if I grant your point, and we knew all along that Saddam was a bad dude, and we went in there from the beginning with regime change and nation-building in mind (which would have been a lot easier to swallow than the reason-of-the-month excuse parade that came from Cheney and Rumsfeld), the question remains why we are sacrificing 2,000 American lives and several hundred billion dollars of taxpayer money to topple a bad guy who may have been pursuing WMD... and we leave alone the bad guy who admits to having WMD, who has successfully tested long-range delivery systems by firing them over the territory of an allied nation, and who controls and oppresses his population on a scale that makes Saddam look like a Salvation Army volunteer?

If you make the case that the primary reason for the war was that Saddam was an evil dictator trying to get nukes, you have to explain why we're not pouncing on the evil dictator who admitted to having nukes. And don't even start with the "Saddam was in league with Al Qaeda" song...I have not seen a shred of credible evidence for that claim, and even our President has backed off of claiming that connection.
 
It was such a resounding sucess that Iran will soon have nuclear missles !

While we bleed ourselves in Iraq where there are no nuclear missles!

And Iraqi trade continued growing, even through last year. France has become Iraq’s top European trading partner, displacing Russia. Nearly 60 percent of French companies have business ties with Iraq, pulling in $1.5 billion annually. France ranks as Iraq’s third largest trading partner under the UN’s Oil-for-Food program, raking in $3.1 billion since 1996. (Russia is number one, incidentally, with a cool $4.3 billion.) France has felt no need to go to war to leverage Iraq’s oil; the French oil company Total Fina Elf has received the option to explore an estimated 25 percent of Iraq’s oil supply.

this was published in April 2003......

SHOW ME THE MONEY!
 
If you make the case that the primary reason for the war was that Saddam was an evil dictator trying to get nukes, you have to explain why we're not pouncing on the evil dictator who admitted to having nukes.
Click to expand...

Ummm...China?

Good enuf as any I reckon

WildlilkimsfirendsarestrongerthansadamsAlaska
 
I had no idea that the french asked us for help.
This was not the only country who fought a civil war.
Freedom? what freedom?
There should be no blood spilled just to satisfy those who believe their ideals are the right ones, we as people should be able to live our lives together and with the freedom to be whichever party we choose without being criticiced as long as there is no harm involved that's when the term LAW is needed.


The United States has bailed France out twice in two world wars.

The freedom you are enjoying right this moment is the freedom you have that was given by the sacrifice of others. Maybe you don't understand what you have but you have it none the less.

To critisize is the only way to keep others honest. That critical thinking and questioning is absolutly necasary so that we don't have blind followers as to the conditions of our freedom. Choose a party, but if your party decides they want to take away my guns then you will hear critical thinking loud and clear.:D

It is a fantasy world to think people won't spill blood over their belief. I believe my family and home should be safe and would spill blood to make sure of it. That is a belief and if you choose not to do the same then live with that belief and don't ask others to protect you. If you are not willing to protect your way of life then why should others die for you?

25
 
It's retroactive history book fudging.
Click to expand...
Then we'll have to agree to disagree. Regardless, the result was the same.
and we leave alone the bad guy who admits to having WMD, who has successfully tested long-range delivery systems by firing them over the territory of an allied nation, and who controls and oppresses his population on a scale that makes Saddam look like a Salvation Army volunteer?
Click to expand...
Ah yes, the North Korean argument. Apples and oranges. The fact that our good ally South Korea's capital Seoul is well within artillery and missle range from North Korea, and that the North would kill hundreds of thousands of civilians at the first sign of military action, seems to have escaped the armchair stratiegists among us.

That we could have pushed the North Koreans/Chinese much further back during the war, is another topic.
 
You left out Iran Rebar... wonder who the target of thier nukes will be?

the notion of Iraq being a cleint state died when the cold war died. The Soviet union wasnt footing the bill anymore....... it went form client state to trading partner.
 
France has been living in terror of its Muslim population for years for simply this reason.

It had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the first Gulf War coalition, and almost as soon as the war was over, began pounding the drum for the abolition of sanctions, including those put in place at the end of the war.
 
You left out Iran Rebar... wonder who the target of thier nukes will be?
Click to expand...
Iran's theocracy of the mad muhlla's will fall soon. It's hugely unpopular with the vast majority of it's people. And I'd be mighty suprised indeed if there weren't A-teams operating in Iran right now.
the notion of Iraq being a cleint state died when the cold war died. The Soviet union wasnt footing the bill anymore....... it went form client state to trading partner.
Click to expand...
Yes, but during the time of the Iran-Iraq war, the cold war was in full swing.

And big deal yet again. Even at the height of the cold war, we still traded with the Soviets, we sold them millions of tons of wheat every year. So what, that made us buddies? No, it did not. We sold Iraq a lot of rice, so what? You're taking the perfectly normal interactions of nations, and giving it some sinister implications which have no validity.
 
The French people in the countryside could still remember our Dad's and Uncles liberating them from the Nazis. They are kindly and grateful to the US.

They hugged our arms, and kissed our hands, and gave us food and those who could remember cried grateful tears of joy...

The French people in the cities are much like people in Boston and San Francisco, New York ... liberals. :p

When I was there in 64, their Socialists were like our Communists... :mad:

I dislike the French mentality I was met with back then...
I dislike the attitude in their press against us, which was the same in 64 as it is today.

However, to their credit, they are some of the toughest fighting men in history. The Foreign Legion and the French Resistance, commandos, and the men who fought at Verdun and held the enemy much longer than anyone thought they would. Including the Kaiser's men.

They have been between conquering armies or navies many times. They have been conqueror's themselves under Napoleon and Charlemagne and Jean D'Arc and others.

Their selfish single-mindedness is what makes them survivors... which gives a whole new meaning to the phrase, French Resistance... :D

Credit where it's due... cowards they're NOT ... ;)

Just self-satisfying a$$____s. :mad:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top