In the War on Terror, most Americans (56%) believe that the United Nations is somewhere between an enemy and an ally.

A Rasmussen Reports survey of 2,500 Adults found that just 21% view the international agency as our ally while 16% believe the UN is an enemy of the U.S.

Assessments of France are even bleaker. Twenty-seven percent (27%) view France as an enemy in the War on Terror. Just 18% view that nation as an ally. Forty-eight percent (48%) say it is somewhere in between.

When it comes to the UN, Investor views are little different from non-Investors. However, on France, there is a significant gap. For every Investor who says France is our ally, there are two who say France is our enemy. Non-Investors are relatively evenly divided between those two positions.

Tu vois ?

And the point is ?

Stéphane,

And we thought you were a bright French boy. But take my hand and I will walk you through the brambles of a sorites argument:

1. An ally advances a friendly association.
2. A friendly association cannot survive the promotion of hostility.
3. France promotes hostility toward America.
4. America does not consider France an ally.

And there you are. Safe and sound at the proper conclusion of the post.

Regards,
DGB

France promotes hostility toward America.

They hate our freedom, blah, blah, blah, blah...

America does not consider France an ally.

Who is "America"?

You really can't be more simple-minded than that. Damian, you can do better than that.

M. Zoomerx,

You distinguish yourself again as a sloppy reader. The poll doesn't purport to show what Frenchmen hate.

blah, blah, blah, blah...

This hollowed out discursus means nothing. Do you have a point? Is it too much effort to make it? Or are you wasting time here just to admire your posts?

Who is "America"?

It's a poll of Americans. A poll is a representative sampling of a larger whole. The results here show the attitudes of Americans. Americans live in America. Here America is a synecdoche for Americans.

Simple enough.

Do French schools not teach rudimentary rhetoric?

DGB

Zoomerx, America is "me". I am America. Papertiger is America. Val is America. Doug is America. Millions of other individuals like us are America.

I would say that all of us, and as the poll suggests, many, many more do not consider France as a friend. Anything but.

Yeah, go ahead and blame this too on America, but you all have made your own bed. Now you have to sleep in it.

The biggest cheer at the RNC during the speech of Arnold was at this quote:
"If you believe this country, not the United Nations, is the best hope of democracy in the world, then you are a Republican".

Well, I must be a Republican.

The poll doesn't purport to show what Frenchmen hate.

I was giving an example of typical simple-minded bumper-sticker generalizations the world loves you for. Why would France "promote hostility" towards the US?

It's a poll of Americans.

So the average American thinks France "is no ally". The same "America" that also thinks Irak was directly behind 9/11 right? I see.

Zoomerx, America is "me". I am America. Papertiger is America. Val is America. Doug is America. Millions of other individuals like us are America.

America is not Pave.

Yeah, go ahead and blame this too on America, but you all have made your own bed. Now you have to sleep in it.

Elaborate please.

"If you believe this country, not the United Nations, is the best hope of democracy in the world, then you are a Republican".

Ah well, if Ahnold says so...

This is going shock some people who, by now, know about me. However, let me explain to you what I mean by this and then you decide if I'm off-base. I must thank the Europeans (and some others) for one thing. What is that, you say? I must thank them for imploring us to pay attention to what goes on in the world outside us.

Why would I say that? That's because too many of us - meaning those of us who don't take the time to understand the real truth about world affairs - have become complacent in their own little worlds and have accepted the silly idea that foreign affairs don't concern them. The end of the Cold War, coupled with the Clinton administration, had too many of us believing that history has ended or that it no longer matters. We have paid a heavy price for that folly, both in lives and wealth.

The shock of 9/11 have forced people to pay attention to things that are outside their own little worlds. The reactions to this have been quite interesting. Some of my fellow "citizens" hate that the terrorist threat is taking away time from more "lofty" persuits, like beer keg parties, drinking and driving, commenting on what Britney Spears or J.Lo is wearing, etc., etc.. These are the people who go wacko and say it's all Bush's or Cheney's fault. They haven't yet grasped that times are serious and require serious reasoning and (sometimes) unpopular decisions. Look at what's happening at the RNC convention. The hard left is attempting to take over the country by force. How will this country survive this, we shall see.

Those of us who understand the truth about the French and the UN have had to struggle with convincing many others about what we know. The French are an enemy, not because we say they are but because they have de-facto declared so. I have said this before and it may sound silly but I believe members of the French government are secretly working with terrorists to damage us right here. They see no end to bringing down the "mighty power", as well as hurting the British. Anti-Anglo-Saxonism and Anti-Americanism is deeply part of French culture. Heck, French culture is Anti-Americanism. Don't believe otherwise. The French have not been our friends since the end of the American Revolution. How else to explain the fact that the U.S. and UK have managed to align after all that bad history in the very beginning? The U.S. and UK have understood that both share the experience of being burned, at one time or another, by the French. The French have always had the dream of destroying both nations. Because the U.S. and UK have not capitulated to French desires, the French, in turn, then went with to their "Plan B": Cease hostilities for the time being; a "truce" or sorts, then slowly try to wedge the UK from their alliance with the U.S.. Isolating the UK would then make it easier for them to work on making London do what they want. The ultimate goal has always been putting down the American people and compromise our interests by any means necessary, whether by aligning with world Communists, Hizbollah, Hamas or the Canadians. ;)

Thanks to the outrage that happened at the Security Council, people are now doing research on foreign affairs, though it remains to be seen if the numbers are as great as presumed. But now that more of us and slowly waking up to what's going on, there's now hope that we will be joined to pressure our own government to stand up for the people and not let our enemies undermine us. There may be hope for this country after all.

Pro-Freedom. Pro-Progress. Pro-Enterprise. Anti-Terrorist.

America is not Pave.

Zoomer, you are not usually this, well, obtuse. Of course America is not Pave. I am saying that America is made up of individuals, of differing viewpoints, just as Pave is made up of a group of individuals. At times, due to circumstances, these individuals will come to the same view of an issue. This is the case with “America’s” view of France now. And, as the poll suggests, “America’s” view of France is poor. A correct view, I might add.

Even your leaders are seeing that the world, along with America, has a tarnished view of France. French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier, speaking at the French Embassy in Cario on Monday: “France is not great if it is arrogant. France is not strong if it is alone.” Geez, Zoomer, why would France be alone? Pissed of Britain, and other EU countries lately, as well as the US? A little less French influence in Europe lately? (And please don’t blame this solely on the expansion). You had to notice France’s failure to land her “favored” candidate (Verhofstadt) as European Commission head. (Just what where the other EU countries thinking anyway?)

Keeping political distance from America, fawning visits to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, attempting to bully other countries in the EU, dreaming of a grand alliance with Germany and Russia to counterbalance the US is taking a toll on Frances image.

Remember Chirac in ceremonies in June as he described France as an “ally and forever friend” of the US? It appears that this view is not being shared on this side of the pond.

I have said this before and it may sound silly but I believe members of the French government are secretly working with terrorists to damage us right here.

It doesn't sound silly, it is silly. Sad, really. There's really nothing to say.

They see no end to bringing down the "mighty power", as well as hurting the British.

Well of course. France being one of the top major investors in the US (and vice versa) would do just that, it makes sooo much sense, pro-freedom. Same with the UK. Your absurdities seem to have no end. Frankly, it's comical.

The French have always had the dream of destroying both nations.

Yes, that would make a terrific Bond movie. France and mini-me Belgium plotting to take on the US (starring "Republican" Arnold as the pro-freedom American avenger). Do you still play with marbles pro-freedom? I hope you realize that it's very hard to take you seriously. Even your friends here would agree (I think).

Pro-Freedom. Pro-Progress. Pro-Enterprise. Anti-Terrorist.

Me too, pro-freedom.

And, as the poll suggests, “America’s” view of France is poor. A correct view, I might add.

Fair enough, I'm aware of that. However you're kidding yourself in thinking your administration (yes, even Bush) views France as an "enemy". That's just for neocon mass-consumption via FoxNews etc... Bumper-sticker mentality. Black & white reasoning.

fawning visits to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat

Your point?

dreaming of a grand alliance with Germany and Russia to counterbalance the US is taking a toll on Frances image.

How so andy? "Counterbalance" in terms of what? Do you really beleive it is in France's interest to risk that would jeopardize the US' economic success? When are you going to realize that because you "say so" (and not necessarly always wrong), the rest of the world (it's a very big world, besides France) doesn't have to genuflex?

Andy & Damian :

In france we consider the normal american as our friend, even if you do not consider us as your friends it doesn't matter.

You know that if one day, you need something for a REAL reason we will be please to give it to you.

Kind regards

PS: Maybe you believe that you don't need something from us, doesn't matter at all, please to see that you have enough comfort.

You know that if one day, you need something for a REAL reason we will be please to give it to you

Well Stephane, I happen to believe that terrorists wanting to obtain nuclear weapons to kill us, planning and committing attacks on continental America, attacking Americans and American interests abroad are REAL reasons for REAL allies to come to our assistance.

I believe that terrorists and rogue nations sending money, fighters, and weapons to Iraq in order for thugs to kill American troops are REAL reasons for REAL allies to come to our assistance.

I believe that terrorists that kidnap French journalists, blow up trains, behead American hostages and kill those that are in Iraq working to help the country grow, fly airplanes full of innocent people into buildings, hang women for speaking their minds, shoot women for wanting to go to school and wanting to vote are REAL reasons for REAL allies to join the fight against them.

I believe that an enemy with no conscience, which targets Iraqi civilians, uses civilians and mosques as shields are REAL reasons for REAL allies to join the fight against them.

Stephane, your statement is a classic example of why Americans are at odds with France. We do see the REAL dangers of appeasing these islamofacists. It is obvious that you and your country do not.

Maybe you believe that you don't need something from us

This is not true. We do think we need your assistance. That is why we are so upset with France, because we think we are NOT GETTING your assistance.

However you're kidding yourself in thinking your administration (yes, even Bush) views France as an "enemy".

Zoomer, they may not think them an enemy (I don’t think we will be bombing Paris soon) but they certainly do not think of them as friends. You are keeping political distance from America, Bush is keeping political distance from France.

Bumper-sticker mentality
How did you know I have a BOYCOTT FRANCE bumper sticker on my car???

Your point?
Arafat should be gone, and you know it. Pretending that he is a leader worth anything is ridiculous.

Do you really believe it is in France's interest to risk that would jeopardize the US' economic success?

I never said France wanted to do anything to our economy. You need some fools to buy all that wine and cheese. I’m talking about political influence. Look at the relationship with China and US. Economically ok, politically different. Same with France and US.

I do, however, like some of the things I’ve been reading from Foreign Minister Barnier. If he keeps this up I would be pleased. I hope this is just not “anti-de Villepin” spin, however.

but they certainly do not think of them as friends.

And you are not making a lot of "friends" over the Irak issue, don't kid yourself andy.

Of course when you need French assistance in Haiti, Liberia (evacuation and protection of your citizens), Ivory Coast (idem), Congo, Afghanistan (Al Quaeda has made vague threats against France right after fresh new troops were sent a few monts ago, but who in the US gives a damn), Djibouti (the US maintains a military presence there, courtesy of the French), it absolutely falls into deaf ears, why give credit to the French, right? And these are just a few examples where France has been perfectly willing to assist you. The insinuation that France is "appeasing" terror is absolutely ludicrous, but it sells and makes nice bumperstickers too.

Arafat should be gone, and you know it. Pretending that he is a leader worth anything is ridiculous.

Kim Yong Ill, Kahaffi etc... should be gone too. Again, a perfect example of hypocritical fingerpointing.

Stéphane,

Pave in its small way and America in its far bigger way are always heartened by the solicitous sentiments of nice French folk.

Had France stepped up for Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, or Paul Johnson Jr. as she has for Georges Malbrunot and Christian Chesnot perhaps we could believe that

one day, you need something for a REAL reason we will be please to give it to you.

Thanks all the same for the kind words. Please keep us posted if France ever actually delivers on them.

Andy,

Although almost anyone other than M. de Villepin as foreign minister constitutes improvement, M. Barnier is no prize. There is nothing in the body of his pronouncements to signal a change in French policy, smug French self-righteousness about ruling the world by French lights, or giggly French schadenfreude at the smallest American misfortune. However, the new FM has thsu far spared us any affectations as poet and philosopher. So that of course is a big plus.

DGB

And you are not making a lot of "friends" over the Irak issue

Yes, many French and Russians etc. who were making millions off of the fraud for oil program are very much pissed at US right now.

Of course when you need French assistance in Haiti, Liberia

Zoomer, all of the “help” you describe is also vital to France. That is the only reason she is in those countries. It has not much to do with help to the US. It is in your own ‘national interest’ to be there. (Former UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick once said “you don’t know the meaning of ‘national interest’ until you have tried dealing with the French”).

In Afghanistan, of course we are pleased with the help. But the level of your brave, capable troops (I think only about 400 or so?) is nothing more than perfunctory help.

The insinuation that France is "appeasing" terror is absolutely ludicrous
So being French is no longer “protection” against the Muslim thugs. Being a “friend” of the Muslims is no longer protection against the thugs. France is part of the West and therefore a target. The Muslims have figured this out, America has figured this out. When will France?

Kim Yong Ill, Kahaffi etc... should be gone too
I’m sorry; I must have missed what France has done to get rid of Kim Yong Ill. Besides “finger pointing” at the US and telling America to get rid of him.
Seriously, Zoomer, what has France done about it?

With all our peace-loving, freedom bringing friends that we have in France, meaning, Hamas, Hizbullah and muslim brotherhood, not forgetting all the saddamite sunnie clergy in Irak, we don't need american friendship anymore!

And ofcourse animosity toward americans is soo easy...
Even the most die hard redneck from deep texas won't bomb anything in France, and many airlines will still buy airbuses.

But we must be sure to never do anything that may,god forbid, displease our new above mentioned arab friens !

Had France stepped up for Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, or Paul Johnson Jr.

What can France done about it except condemn these odious murders? Do you really think the US State department would let France (of all countries) meddle with a US hostage crisis? Be realistic.

as she has for Georges Malbrunot and Christian Chesnot

Aren't you surprised at the outpour of outrage and sympathy coming from the Middle East in regards to the French hostages? And not just from Arafat, but from the Saudis, Jordan etc... Even the Muslim comunity in France. Does that frustrate you, Damian?

Zoomer, all of the “help” you describe is also vital to France. That is the only reason she is in those countries. It has not much to do with help to the US. It is in your own ‘national interest’ to be there.

I agree. It's also in our national interest to assist you in Afghanistan, not in some bogus "pre-emptive" attack.

(I think only about 400 or so?) is nothing more than perfunctory help.

More than that, but small indeed (although the 3rd non-US largest contigent). It's clear that that the initial pounding (with French air assistance) of the Taliban was best left to the US, and done well, but how many men do you need now to fight a battered but elusive and well-hidden group?

The Muslims have figured this out, America has figured this out. When will France?

If you think the French government has been rolling its thumbs while radical Muslim cells have infiltered the country for decades, you're dreaming.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1092280020498&apage=1

Seriously, Zoomer, what has France done about it?

Nothing I'll concede (at least publically, but what could France do, really?), but it doesn't answer my point regarding your insinuations regarding France speaking with Arafat. Of course France also speaks with Israel too, but Pave only sees what it wants to see...

btw, France is playing Israel Saturday in football World Cup qualification. I promise "we" will behave.

Zoomerx,

The whole point is that we, as french, should at minimum NOT bragg about support from a bunch of autocratic regime and terrorist organization.

It is now obvious that our foreign policy has just been locked on arab regime support, and the key thrown away.

Are you sure that it is good for France?
For the moment it looks convenient, but in the long run?

I don't think no one is "bragging", frenchfregoli, and frankly I've been quite surprised at the arab reaction, moderates as well as less moderates.

It is now obvious that our foreign policy has just been locked on arab regime support, and the key thrown away.

I think you are over generalizing a bit. "Arabs" and fundamentalist Muslim groups are two different things, and the latter clearly do not have a high opinion of us (make no mistake, we're on Bin Ladin's shit list too). The same could be said about the US relashionship with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan despite the fact that mindless anti-West thought is deeply rooted in these "friendly" regimes.

Are you sure that it is good for France?
For the moment it looks convenient, but in the long run?

Fair point but what are you implying exactly? That we'll have a "debt" to pay?

Here's an interesting article by the way regarding a rare French-American agreement regarding our British friends tendency to over-extend their welcome to some very dangerous characters.

Aren't you surprised at the outpour of outrage and sympathy coming from the Middle East in regards to the French hostages? And not just from Arafat, but from the Saudis, Jordan etc... Even the Muslim comunity in France. Does that frustrate you, Damian?
Posted by zoomerx at September 3, 2004 10:11 PM

M. Zoomerx,

Do you think yourself cute?

I sincerely hope for Messrs. Malbrunot et Chesnot's safe return. It is you who should feel frustrated by the friends France has attracted to her cause.

Your and France's benighted confidence in Hamas, Hezbollah, and the likes of Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawi will soon enough disappoint. And Arafat? Pffft. Is France so desperate to have her plush fanny nuzzled that she will let any terrorist stick his nose up her mesial groove? We are all aware that France has no shame, but has she no pride?

And then there is this Middle Eastern voice, but France pointedly doesn't welcome his message.

Here's a suggestion, try not being so smug while people's lives hang in the balance.

DGB

We are all aware that France has no shame, but has she no pride?

You're quick to draw conclusions, but it's your job. As if France was inactive in prosecuting terrorists or arm-locking Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawi to condemn the kidnappings. As far as Hezbollah, the group that claimed the lives of 52 French paratroopers in Lebanon 1982, we don't really like what they have to say these days. I suppose we could let the journalists meet their fate just to "save face"?

Here's a suggestion, try not being so smug while people's lives hang in the balance.

Not "smug", just comforted by the outpour of condemnations all over the world as well as in France. The situation is not over yet.

M. Zoomerx,

In theory you are correct. Condemnations beat the open support and promotion of the terrorists. But do not delude yourself, most of this support is writ on the wind. Your new-found best friends will slice France up a treat when it suits them. France, try as she might, cannot come to terms, cannot appease the terrorists.

I do not hope or look forward to France's day of reckoning, but it will come. The terrorists already have France in their sights.

There is no accommodation with an enemy that has plainly announced its intent to bury the West. This is the lesson of Munich (1938). Don't think that the terrorists won't exploit to the hilt the differences between our two countries. It is the strategy of wolves culling a herd.

You are cynical and so cute to suggest Pave prefers French heads anywhere but on French shoulders. Pave prays for good outcomes for Messrs. Malbrunot and Chesnot. Let's hope that France doesn't sell her soul in the process.

Regards,
DGB

Don't think that the terrorists won't exploit to the hilt the differences between our two countries

They already are. And the French are putty in their hands.

In a speech on Arab satellite networks earlier this week, Mohammed Bashar Al-Faidhy, spokesman of the Association of Muslim Scholars had this to say about his best new buddy, France, and the kidnappers of the French journalists:

"To our brothers in the Islamic Army of Iraq. We wish to inform you that we totally understand the extreme rage that is boiling in your hearts regarding the French decision to ban the Hijab in their schools, and we share you your disappointment. We officially condemned the French decision at the time….however, killing the two hostages without considering the grave consequences of such an act would be harmful to our cause and would isolate us from our international support….Our goal is to besiege the Americans politically in every spot of the world and this act is not serving that goal…France as an anti-occupation country has been helpful to our cause[emphasis mine]…You might say that the French stance is not an altruistic one and that they have their own political interests that caused them to disagree with the Americans….but it is also our goal to turn them against each other to serve our cause so France has a strategic importance for us.”

Kind of takes a bit of the luster off the “outpour of condemnations” from the middle east, does it not Zoomerx? They don't care about the journalists, just that it is hurting their cause....

Andy,

Please post a link. This is very damning and I'd like to read the whole of it. Thank you.

France cannot be blind to the impermance of Islamite friendship, the crude opportunism of Islamite intervention. So what is it that they are angling for? Five years, 10 years respite? Does France risk the world in flames just to protect her appearance of metropolitan placidness? The Islamites are maneuvering France toward criminal complicity. Why does France acquiesce? Why does once proud France play coy with Islamite thugs and their facilitators?

Regards,
DGB

Zoomer,

I came upon this summary of some french politologues who basically caution us on the support from "fringe" groups.

fringe is pc for terrorist

http://www.ttc.org/200409070227.i872rvl28377.htm

Why do the Americans hate us ?

Thanks to the lies provided by « anonymous American intelligence sources in the pentagon»
(French companies had sold Iraq spare parts for airplanes and helicopters and Roland 2 missiles as late as 2003, France had helped wanted Iraqi leaders to escape to Europe by providing them with French passports, etc ...) and extensively published without verifications by Fox News, the New York Post, The Washingtontimes, and all the conservative medias.

France is a very easy target : since there are no large group of french voters in the US, why not bash the French ? ? French-bashing is still useful to make consevative laught at the republican convention :
« The cheapest applause lines in New York last week were ones that ended in "the French," "Paris," or, worst of all, "the United Nations," «

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5915512/site/newsweek/

Please post a link. This is very damning and I'd like to read the whole of it. Thank you.

OK. The part I posted was in the Washington Times last week (?) I'm not sure of the date, but I'll find out.

Also, portions of the quote was in the Washington Post this morning. I'm a newspaper clipper...but I'll find links to the articles for you and post in a bit.

Link to the story in Washington Times here

The Washington post article today is here

You must register at Washington post. Use this to get in, or go to bugmenot.com and get another.

fedup@mailinator.com
fedup

This was also of interest in the article:
But an editorial published Friday in an Iraqi newspaper with the same name as the capital, Baghdad, said of French President Jacques Chirac: "Chirac, who wants to present himself as fair, must take his share of responsibility in the kidnapping of his two compatriots as he opposed all international resolutions aimed at restoring Iraqis' security." France's Foreign Ministry declined to comment on the editorial, which was titled "Chirac You Did Not Hear Our Pleas." The newspaper is controlled by the party of Ayad Allawi, the interim prime minister.

Let's hope that France doesn't sell her soul in the process.

I agree with you. And I see your point, frenchfregoli.

« The cheapest applause lines in New York last week were ones that ended in "the French," "Paris," or, worst of all, "the United Nations,"

"I don't want Paris to decide, I want my President to decide" (Zel Miller).

Laughable indeed.

Two Italian women have been kidnapped by the thugs in Iraq.

Any guess if France will use her "clout" with their buddies (the terrorists) to get them released?

I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for it.

French connection armed Saddam is the headline.

Article is here. Laughable indeed.

Can't open your link, andy. France armed Saddam until 92, period. There were no diplomatic relations after that. Remember that it is Pave's favourite spokesman, FoxNews, who claimed that "French-made WMD's" would be found in Irak. Yes, laughable to see how desperate you have been to divert your own embarassment. Remember that the US had no problem whatsoever with France regarding Irak throughout the 80's, in fact, they (and the UK) did a little "trade" of their own, it's no secret.

List of US Companies That Sold Weapons Technology to Iraq

Key: A - nuclear K - chemical B - biological R - rockets (missiles)

1. Honeywell (R,K) 2. Spektra Physics (K) 3. Semetex (R) 4. TI Coating (A,K) 5. UNISYS (A,K) 6. Sperry Corp. (R,K) 7. Tektronix (R,A) 8. Rockwell )(K) 9. Leybold Vacuum Systems (A) 10. Finnigan-MAT-U.S. (A) 11. Hewlett Packard (A.R,K) 12. Dupont (A) 13. Eastman Kodak (R) 14. American Type Culture Collection (B) 15. Alcolac International (C) 16. Consarc (A) 17. Carl Zeis -US (K) 18. Cerberus (LTD) (A) 19. Electronic Associates (R) 20. International Computer Systems 21. Bechtel (K) 22. EZ Logic Data Systems,Inc. (R) 23. Canberra Industries Inc. (A) 24. Axel Electronics Inc. (A)

This list doesn't include governmental and quasi-governmental agencies that gave technology to Iraq, including the Pentagon, Lawrence Livermore Laboratories, Sandia Labs, Los Alamos, and the Centers for Disease Control.

Source: Die Tageszeitung (Berlin daily newspaper), who says it came from the original Iraqi report to the UN Security Council.

Zoomer

Lets see the listing of French&German companies which sold weapons tech to saddam. Bet you won't find a German or Frenhc newspaper listing that.

No, it's no secret France is the 3rd largest arms trader in the world with Russia (especially to M.E and Asia). But nothing was sold to Irak after 1992. The UK exports far more than France in the Middle East, btw. What France and the UK export is relatively small compared to the US.

Germans are all panty-bunched about the confinement by US authorities of Amir al-Sadi, leader of the Iraqi chem-weapons skunk works. Medienkritik writes: "Recently, the German Foreign Ministry made several requests to Washington for Mr. al-Sadi's release. When the US failed to respond, German Chancellor Schroeder himself brought up the issue of al-Sadi's release in a direct conversation with President George W. Bush." Bush has so far not answered this tear-jerking plea.

The one industry that Germany is recognized as the world leader.
Why Gerharts' Squeemishness? Could it be Germ mans were servicing Saddam with their unequaled in Quality product?

Much of Baghdad's modern infrastructure is German-built.

Zoomer,

There are numerous French politians who have explicitly stated that they wanted a strong EU to "counterbalance" the "hyperpower" that is the US. THEY see US as the enemy. Why, you ask, would they want to do something like that? Ask them.

I think it's because they want to attain some level of prominence that they have not had since, oh, say, the creation of the UN (which gave them a far to prominent place with a veto on the Security Council, certainly out of proportion to their influence and military 'might'). Maybe they view US as the dangerous ones, and not their bed buddy Saddam Hussein.

The French HAVE been our enemy in many ways. During the run up to the Iraq war, they not only opposed us (which is fine) but they actively leaned on the smaller countries on the UNSC (deVillepan made personal visits to these small countries and threatened them, Chiraq threatened withholding EU membership from some of our coalition). It's one thing to oppose us, which as I as is fine, but wholly another to diplomatically battle us. They could have said "we're against this, but you're our ally and we understand. We just aren't going to participate." Instead they tried to sabotage us.

And that's not the end of it. If ANYONE was being influenced by money in this Iraq debate it was the French. The tired refrain of "no blood for oil" should instead have been "oil for no blood" as the French companies had billions of dollars in contracts with Hussein that they stood to lose out on. In addition, they were selling the Iraqis up to date anti-aircraft missiles that shot down our planes in last year. There is evidence that one of the missiles used to shoot down one of our helicopters was manufactured within months of the Iraq war having started (meaning that they were selling Hussein this stuff AFTER we made pretty clear that we were intent on taking him out).

How can you possibly say that those are actions of an "ally"?

Try this link.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040908-123000-1796r.htm

Here's the pertinent paragraphs:

Made in France
The war in Iraq, which began March 19, 2003, provided disturbing evidence that France's treacherous dealings come at a steep cost to the United States.
On April 8 came the downing of Air Force Maj. Jim Ewald's A-10 Thunderbolt fighter over Baghdad and the discovery that it was a French-made Roland missile that brought down the American pilot and destroyed a $13 million aircraft. Ewald, one of the first U.S. pilots shot down in the war, was rescued by members of the Army's 54th Engineer Battalion who saw him parachute to earth not far from the wreckage.
Army intelligence concluded that the French had sold the missile to the Iraqis within the past year, despite French denials.
A week after Ewald's A-10 was downed, an Army team searching Iraqi weapons depots at the Baghdad airport discovered caches of French-made missiles. One anti-aircraft missile, among a cache of 51 Roland-2s from a French-German manufacturing partnership, bore a label indicating that the batch was produced just months earlier.
In May, Army intelligence found a stack of blank French passports in an Iraqi ministry, confirming what U.S. intelligence already had determined: The French had helped Iraqi war criminals escape from coalition forces — and therefore justice.
Then, there were French-made trucks and radios and the deadly grenade launchers, known as RPGs, with French-made night sights. Saddam loyalists used them to kill American soldiers long after the toppling of the dictator's regime.

Maybe we ought to bill the French for the downed A-10....

Here's more from the article about our "allies" the French:

A Defense Department-sponsored report produced in February identified France as one of the top three suppliers of Iraq's conventional arms, after Russia and China. The report revealed that France supplied 12 types of armaments and a total of 115,005 pieces.
A major reason Iraqi militants posed a threat to U.S. forces for so many months was that they had access to weapons that Saddam stockpiled in violation of U.N. resolutions.

A close call
One of the most frightening examples of how the militants put French weapons to use against the Americans came Oct. 26, 2003. That morning, at about 6 o'clock, they bombarded the Rashid Hotel in Baghdad with French missiles....
The driver stayed just long enough to open a panel on the end of the metal box that was pointing upward toward the hotel. The car sped off. Minutes later, a pod of 40 artillery rockets set off by remote control began firing at the hotel, their trails leaving sparks as they flew. The rockets hit one floor below where Wolfowitz and about a dozen aides and reporters were staying.
One rocket slammed into the room of Army Lt. Col. Charles H. Buehring, a public-affairs officer. The explosion hit Buehring, 40, in the head. A reporter discovered him and tried to help, but the Fayetteville, N.C., resident died a short time later.
In all, between eight and 10 missiles hit the hotel. The casualties might have been higher, and included Wolfowitz, if the improvised rocket launcher had fired all the missiles. Because of a malfunction, 11 failed to go off.

Playing defense
Half the missiles fired at Wolfowitz's hotel were French-made Matra SNEB 68-millimeter rockets, with a range of two to three miles. The others were Russian in origin.
The French missiles were "pristine," Navy SEAL commandos reported.
"They were either new or kept in very good condition," said one SEAL who inspected the rocket tubes. The rockets were thought to have been taken from Iraq's French-made Alouette or Gazelle attack helicopters.

Look, France and the US just co-sponsored a UN declaration against the Syrian presence in Lebanon. When French interests correspond with those of America, the French cooperate. All of this break-up of the west talk is overblown.

The general anti-French animus that Americans have has been whipped up of late because Chirac is a particularly bad fellow. France has made a point of shoving its thumb into Uncle Sam's eye at the UN just because it makes French people happy. Chirac's original campaign got a huge cash influx from Syrian and Lebanese sources, a payoff that at least he seems to have finally dropped. And most importantly, through the Oil-for-Food scandal and recent revelations that France kept honoring its arms shipments to Iraq through the sanctions and on up through the military campaign in 2003, it's become apparent that France not only refused to join the coalition, which was acceptable, but deliberately undermined the war effort and helped get American kids shot, which is not.

And the reason the investor numbers are so high against France is that the French are notorious for subsidizing corporate bribes to the 3rd world nations offering government contracts. It really pisses off investors when shoddy corporations producing sub-standard products get big contracts through cheating.

Late on this one . . .

I don't know about your average Frenchman on the street, but I do know this: a close friend just rotated out of the Mid-East theater. He commanded a corps support battalion (yep, LTC) tasked with supplying 65,000 U.S. army and coalition forces in the field. Paranthetically, with over 2,000 Regular Army, Guard, and Reserve personnel under command, he brought every single one of his boys and girls home alive and in one piece; they were at the front on a daily basis (new Logistics doctrine, written in large part by my buddy while serving at the Pentagon).

Now what to do with those empty trucks at the front after they've offloaded the beans and bullets? How about trucking captured materiel back to the rear? Okay. John tells me, as did his XO and CSM among others at his Change of Command ceremony, that those trucks carted back literal tonnages of binary chemical munitions. Unsurprisingly enough, manufactured in 2001 and 2002, and equally unsurprisingly, with "Fabriqué en France" stamped on their data plates. I would have posited a guess that a Syrian business was used as an intermediary, but apparently would have been wrong.

Now I KNOW that the deals that sent those warheads to Iraq were in violation of several binding U.N. resolutions; I'm also morally certain that the relevant officials within the French government built in sufficient "plausible deniability" to avoid any kind of international sanction. Did they know it was going on? Certainement.

Several former (and perhaps some current) French government ministers and TotalFinaElf executives profited from the "Oil For Palaces" scam; how many and how much is all that remains to be discovered. Saddam was (quite obviously) using the kickbacks to buy proscribed weapons systems FROM FRENCH MANUFACTURERES and to fund terrorist activities.

With "allies" like these, what the hell do we need with ideological enemies?

'Berg

more importantly, how does the ole Skerry think that he would effin nuance the frogs in this situation, impossible, you'd never be able to bribe them enough to cooperate, so Skerry's techniques for getting the effin frogs and the krauts to help would not be possible, there goes another "idea" of lurch's.

I live in Seattle, Washington, USA. It's a very liberal city, strongly Democratic, and as pro-French as any city in the USA. France is not regarded warmly. This goes well beyond the "War on Terror". Most people are somewhat apathetic towards France, but have picked up on the idea that France is not an ally. Of the politically active crowd (again, largely Democratic), most of the "pro-French" crowd are not really pro-French. They are political activists who use the "traditional ally" argument rhetorically for election purposes. These same people will turn around and blast the French for what they see as backing for the Rwanda genocide, the war in Algeria, the Green Peace boat that was blown up in New Zealand by French Intelligence, etc. They just won't do it now because it's not seen as helpful to the Democratic cause at the moment. Don't count them as Francophiles.

But largely the survey is correct in assessing US public opinion and matches my personal observations. The words "France" and "ally" are most commonly used together here in jest or mockery. Even the liberal elements of our media are unsympathetic to the French government’s claims of "close" friendship ... .

About a third of the adult population believes France is an enemy. About another third believes France is an adversary. Not quit an outright enemy, but definitely not friendly and not to be trusted. This crosses party lines. It seems that most of the intellectuals and civic leaders fall into one of those two camps, so I don't see this opinion changing in the next decade or so without something extraordinary happening. Obviously, many of the people in these two groups are just along for the ride and are being influenced by the "thinkers". But still, a solid two thirds view France as adversary/enemy. Of the other third, a large portion view France neutrally and there will always be the group that thinks France is a province in Canada. It seems that the only groups that really think of France as any ally are the Socialists and the Communists. But they only make up about 10% of the population, and are viewed here as anti-US.

So how does the survey come up with 18%? There is a significant group who in general views France as an adversary, but feels that France has been helpful in the War on Terror. They can put forth a logical argument, but this line of thinking puts France in with other "War on Terror Allies" like Pakistan, Russia and Saudi Arabia who should be engaged constructively. But these are clearly understood as allies of necessity and convenience. Not to be confused with true allies or friends.

So the sobering reality for the French public and French politicians should be that the survey is probably accurate, but is narrowly focused on the War on Terror. The overall view of French/American relations here in the US, may actually be worse and if anything is understated by the press (ABC, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, Fox tend to preach "tolerance").

In interest of full disclosure, I view the French as enemies. This is based on the last 50-70 years and not just on Iraq. Strategic differences were glossed over during the Cold War, but have now become impossible to ignore. In contrast to the Soviet Union, France was simply an adversary. But now relative to the current political landscape, France has taken center stage as an outright enemy.

Our politicians will avoid using the word “enemy” since it implies that some sort of overt action will be taken. But in general, the American public is quit willing to be direct, and won’t question France’s desire/intent to be a political counterweight to the US. So don’t be surprised that you will probably get just what you are asking for. Only, it just won’t come quit the way you would like.

France would like more respect, deference and recognition from the US. Regardless of who wins the election they’ll certainly get part of their wish. So to the French ... You’ve got our attention now. Hope you enjoy it.

Damian,

Just poking in by way of Mr. Reynold's House. I must say that your comments are so delightfully droll and blistering that one wonders where some of these poor souls find the courage to riposte. Very nicely done, sir. Or are you merely WFB's on-line pseudonym?

regards,
Art

Au contraire, Zoomer. The cheapest applause lines of the night began "certain disingenuous..."

Unsurprisingly enough, manufactured in 2001 and 2002, and equally unsurprisingly, with "Fabriqué en France" stamped on their data plates. I would have posited a guess that a Syrian business was used as an intermediary, but apparently would have been wrong.

Oh please. You're going to tell me that every piece of military equipment sold over the world by France or the US eventually ends up to its exact destination? No US-made weapons ever ended in the wrong hands of course, eh? Jesus, here we go again... "oh but we could never do that etc...".

France did not sell weapons to Irak after 1992, unless you find me some hard evidence. Remember the Polish forces finding French-made Roland missiles? Turned out to be untrue too. No WMD found in Irak.

Blame the French.

It's so easy.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/longroad/etc/arming.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/boles1010.html

I just neutered the cat.

Now he's French.

You are keeping political distance from America, Bush is keeping political distance from France.

Not quite true. We did just have that complete and utter ass-grab of a resolution on Lebanon/Syria, just to remind us how spectacularly UN-style "multilateralism" fails.

Kim Yong Ill, Kahaffi etc... should be gone too
I’m sorry; I must have missed what France has done to get rid of Kim Yong Ill.

Oh, Andy - that had nothing to do with France, or getting rid of dictators for that matter. That was the old "If you're not going to depose every despicable tyrant on the planet, then you're not allowed to depose any of them" line, and you fell for it.

What can France done about it except condemn these odious murders?

Well gosh, as soon as there were French hostages in the hands of those animals, it seemed as if there was every manner of thing France could do about it.

(make no mistake, we're on Bin Ladin's shit list too)

More points for Zoomer - it's nice to see this recognized.

giggly giggly giggly giggly. How weird that word looks in this font. In other news, "mesial groove" has just become my favorite phrase.