Not happy with American electoral outcomes, Michel Barnier has made an empassioned plea to EU delegates to grab their pitchforks and rally round vague French ideas of EU-lateralism:

Reacting to Mr Bush's victory, Michel Barnier, the French foreign minister, said four more years of a unilateralist administration in Washington required Europe to develop its own diplomatic and defence machinery.

"Our world needs several powers. We are in the process of gathering the pieces and the will to become another power," he said.

Meanwhile it was left to the day help at the ministère des Affaires étrangères to flatly deny what the Minister is plainly saying:

Q - Mr. Barnier spoke on RTL this morning about a multipolar world in which the "Americans can't contemplate building, being in charge of and being the driving force behind the world on their own." Is that to be taken as a warning that if the second Bush administration acts the same way as the first, France will again pose diplomatic problems?

A - Nothing in the above resembles a warning but on the contrary reflects our intention to work with the new American administration.

As the most heavily medicated people on the face of the earth, M. Barnier modestly insisted the French are the natural leaders of a brave new bipolar world, so if the American lapdogs comprising the bulk of the EU wouldn't mind shutting up and falling in line, France can get on with the business of counterweighing yahoo America.

Tony Blair seemed to capture the French position perfectly:

Blair suggested many Europeans had lost touch with reality.

"I think it's pretty obvious if you read the comments that are made by people around Europe over the past few months, there are some people who have not wanted to come to terms with the changes that have happened," he told reporters.

"I'm not going to go and start pointing fingers at people. [Wink wink. Starts with a "C". Wink wink. Ends in a "c".] What I'm really saying is that we've got to move on now. There's a new reality so let's work with that reality," Blair said.

As foreign policy minister, Mr Barnier must stay within the limits of polytical correctness and could not comment W's reelection as simply as I will do in two words:

"It sucks..."

For various reasons:

The first is very selfish (shame on me) but I must admit that I would have much more fun reading some blogs, including pavefrance, I Kerry had won (ore more exactl, if W had lost).

beyond my personal little fun,
I think Kerry would have been less deaf about the worldwide people voice.

I think that with a broader mind America would get much better support in her rightous action against terrorism.

I think that with more intelligence or may be simply less corruptionn this WOT would work making the terrorist fewere and weaker. The mess today in Iraq shows that Bush just got the inverse result.

But all this is consideration from another country about what's going on in other countries.

So I will try to refine my 2 words comment above by taking the result by the other side

Bush got almost 59 millions votes getting then 51%

so, with 48%, Kerry got about 55,5 Millions votes

Means that there are 55,5 Millions Americans who look beyond themselves and keep some concern about what happend for the remaining of the world.

Thanks to them !
... And good luck for ALL !

Pierre

I think that with more intelligence or may be simply less corruptionn this WOT would work making the terrorist fewere and weaker.

I agree, if France, Russia, and China were not so corrupt, in the pocket of a mass murdering terrorist supporter like Saddam, the WOT would be more successful at this stage.

I think Kerry would have been less deaf about the worldwide people voice.

You mean France's voice. When are you French people going to give up your fantasy that President Bush must listen to YOU. Who are YOU in the scheme of things?

And when are you going to give up your fantasy that countries spend their time listening to 'the worldwide people voice'? Last time I checked, W was president of the USA - not the world.

I am so tired of all these eurofantasies being taken for reality by all the euroweenies.

Grow up, pull your heads out and start acting like you people actually care about the future more than you do your petty anti-Americanism. Got it?

Remember. These are the same dunderheads who say that we're a hyperpower and the world police. So, in their wacked out minds, they conclude that they have to have a say on how we conduct our affairs.

It's all Freudian to me. ;-)

I think Kerry would have been less deaf about the worldwide people voice.

When will the arrogant Euros realize we have much more important things to think about than them! Why should "the worldwide people voice" tell us how to run our country?

I voted Bush for a plethora of reasons none, of which had any consideration of france/germany/etc.

Most Americans don't want to be like Europe, and we don't have to. I think that's the problem many Europeans have with us.

Our election, Our choice, Our President, Our sovereign nation.

The big question is, where are France et al going to find the money to arm themselves effectively? I realize the French and British actually have meaningful defense budgets, but most of the rest of europe does not. Moreover, what funds they do spend focus on personnel, which is fine for raising up infantry to hold a country (and for pumping money into people's pockets), but lousy for providing any kind of exportable power. For that you need lots of very expensive equipment.

Perhaps they shall have to disassemble some of their social programs to pay for it?