Speaking for himself Jack speaks for everyone. For France. For all of Europe (as the self-appointed make-do head of the EU). For you. For me. For the world at large. Who knew? But [Pause.] such is the breadth and wonder of his wise allocutions. We are confounded that strife has found its toehold anywhere.

CHIRAC SAYS ISRAEL WANTS TO 'DESTROY LEBANON'
PARIS July 14, 2006 (Times UK)

Here is the relevant exchange from Jack's Bastille Day television interview:

QUESTION - Il n'y a pas un agresseur et un agressé ?

Oui, il y a effectivement un agresseur et un agressé mais tout dépend de la définition que l'on donne à ces termes. Je voudrais tout d'abord dire que, si j'en crois les dernières nouvelles, celles de ce matin, on peut se demander s'il n'y a pas, aujourd'hui, une volonté de détruire le Liban, ses équipements, ses routes, ses communications, son énergie, son aérodrome.

Et pourquoi ? Le Liban est un pays avec lequel la France a, depuis très longtemps, des relations d'amitié, de solidarité. La France est donc particulièrement sensible à ce sujet. Je trouve, honnêtement, comme l'ensemble des Européens, que les réactions actuelles sont tout à fait disproportionnées.

Question: Is there an attacker and an attacked?

Yes, there is effectively an attacker and an attacked but it all depends on the meaning assigned these terms. I would like first of all to say that, if I believe the lastest news, this morning's reports, one may well ask if there isn’t today a kind of wish to destroy Lebanon - its infrastructure, its roads, its communications, its energy, its airport.

And for what? Lebanon is a country with which France has, for a very long time, friendly relations, of solidarity. France is particularly sensitive on this subject. I find, honestly - as do all Europeans - that the current reactions are totally disproportionate.

But that was faraway Friday and a free box lunch ago.

G-8 HANDS BUSH DIPLOMATIC WIN OVER LEBANON

CAIRO, Egypt July 17, 2006 (The Sun) - Leaders of the world's most powerful nations will descend from the summit at St. Petersburg, Russia, having handed President Bush their support for his call for the terrorist group Hezbollah, backed by Iran and Syria, to be disarmed, as required by the United Nations.

America demanded that Hezbollah be disarmed, in compliance with U.N. Security Council resolution 1559, which was passed in 2004. Sensing the mood of the summit, Mr. Chirac abruptly changed his tone yesterday. "Forces who jeopardize the security, stability, and sovereignty of Lebanon must be stopped,"

[Hat tip: ¡No Pasarán!]

Of course not everyone has Jack's fabulous calipers for properly measuring proportionate causality among warring nation states. For example, we must stop and reflect, did the United States wage war disproportionately against Germany and Japan?

In WW II, the total German dead were 10.82% of the population, and the much lower Japanese rate was 3.61%. But the UK lost 0.94% and the USA 0.32%. Were the Allied defenders of freedom "dis-proportionate"?

What moral or military or historical logic suggests to Chirac and Putin that Israel is “disproportionate”? Since when is the aggressor entitled to suffer only the same losses as the defender? Did De Gaulle or Stalin make that complaint in, or after, WW II ?

[Hat tip: Tom Carew via The American Thinker]

Thankfully, France again presents herself as the exemplar, providing contemporary and instructive instances of proportionate response in answering threats and attacks to her sovereignty and her people. Pay attention and learn.

If you are "peace-keeping", shacked up with the rebel forces, and are collaterally bombed by the forces of the nominal but legitimate government come to bomb the rebels, well, forget your special sensitive mission. It is not disproportionate to bomb right back even though the unintended threat has ceased. This sort of thing also gives you a free hand to murder scores of unarmed civilians in self-defense.

If you happen to have a few nuclear bombs lying around, well, it is not disproportionate to issue ultimata to unidentified nations for threats that have not been made. Make sure you let them know who is the boss so they will feel so intimidated as to never seek the same advantage for themselves.

America has only itself to blame for the current state of things. For it has been lonely France who time and again makes the headlines condemning terrorists who attack innocent citizens -- unarmed, mothers, children, infants -- and withholding support and recognition to the corrupt and murderous masterminds of terrorism. That was France wasn't it?

Lucky for Jack there is M. Douste-Blazy, the dimmest bulb in the dark Chirac marquee™. As Jack is the sink of cupidity, ignorance, and hauteur in French government, M. le Ministre is the sink of stupidity. The perfect foil, everyone improves by comparison to M. Douste-Blazy.

FRANCE CONDEMNS LEBANON STRIKES

PARIS July 13, 2006 (AFP) - France Thursday condemned Israeli army strikes on Lebanon as a "disproportionate act of war."

"We obviously ["Typically" is the more correct word choice.] condemn this disproportionate act of war which also has two consequences [This is a great improvement over the manifold consequences of yesteryear wars.]," Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said on Europe 1 radio.

"The first is to force anyone wanting to now enter Lebanon to go either by sea or by Syria [We had naively thought the first consequence might be the threat to life.]," he said. "The second consequence is to run the risk of plunging Lebanon back into the worst years of war with the departure of Lebanese who will want to flee while they were in the process of rebuilding their country [That's three consequences by our count.]," he said.

We hoped that somewhere among M. le Ministre's two (or three) consequences would be the actual enforcement of UNSCR 1559 requiring all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias, the malefactors behind the crisis in Lebanon, to disarm.

Mdm. le Ministre de la Défense, Michele Alliot-Marie, a former dimmest bulb, chimes in:

"We must move towards a dialogue, recognising each other and permitting the civilian population to live in peace."... France's "position of balance" allowed it to talk with both sides, she added.

Just what is the "position of balance" between a long-suffering sovereign state and state-sponsored terrorists? Alas, the French position is not one of balance but equivalence, a position that affords all claims standing, and, where this is flagrantly not the case, smooths down, ignores, or denies the contradictions. Thanks all the same, Mdm. le Ministre, but we'll take a pass on chatting up Hizballah.

PFFT (What is this?): Speaking for us all ¼ | Rayonnement français 0

Go Israel. Do as much damage as you can before stopping. In Iraq, Afghanistan, hell, the entire world, muslims are killing muslims and other civilians. No body seems to care. It is only if the US and Israel kill civilians then those with too much lace on their panties get upset.

Good point about the German civilians being killed. Perhaps it is time to rethink a few strategies…if it is a war, then make it a war. If we or Israel get rid of some terrorist “civilian” sympathizers, well, too bad.

Good luck to France in the muslim “reverse colonization”.

well, hospitals with no power nor water, civilians airport destroyed, harbor destroyed, no food, 300+ civilians killed VS 15 israelis.

an entire country pays for a few she cannot handle in their country, i think the price is a little too high...

AS usual you like to critisize a country that do not think like you do.

Well lol from a country where 12 year old gilrs sings "white power" i'm not very surprised... cheers in your next civil war....

you guys never learn...and for the "France support terrorists thing" don't forget that 10% of you enterprises are hold by Ben ladens people...

your colateral thing bombing is disgusting...but not surprising for a country that's never known war on it's own teritory.

you make me sick, this blog is just a bunch of anti french primates.

What we like about posters like M. LOL is that they demonstrate better than we can describe the limited and uninformed French mind at work.

Hizballah has been rocketing Israeli towns and killing its citizens in earnest since Israel withdrew from Lebanon six years ago. M. LOL brushes all this off as "a few she [Lebanon] cannot handle in their country". But M. LOL has a different, inscrutable, calculus for principle when it is France in Cote d'Ivoire.

We of course cannot understand M. LOL's self-serving self-exculpating application of cheap French principles because he believes America is "a country that's never known war on it's own teritory". Let's overlook 9.11 as just too much for M. LOL to wrap his meager intellect around. And let's skip over Pearl Harbor and the American-Mexican War (1846-1848) because these are too much history to expect from M. LOL. But what of the War of 1812, where America was France's sleeve ace? The battles of Horseshoe Bend, Detroit, the District of Maine, Lake Champlain, Baltimore, New Orleans, and the burning of Washington all took place on American territory. But again that is too much history for M. LOL.

But what do "attacks on it's [sic] own teritory [sic]" have to do with France attacking and murdering Ivoirian citizens, who are not attacking or at war with France, in the Cote d'Ivoire, which is a sovereign state and not a French territory? Well, nothing actually.

That M. LOL finds himself sick is a good clue to avoid Pave altogether before what little of his brain is left completely evaporates.

Oh, and yes. It is not uncommon for us to criticize countries -- and reckless and stupid posters -- whose fainting and uninformed opinions we do not share. Not that M. LOL would ever so stoop as to criticize "a bunch of anti french primates".

DGB

your colateral thing bombing is disgusting

In the Arab world, in almost any poll that one reads, 65% – 70% think that “killing of civilians” in carrying out their political agenda is OK. Well, then, if they think this way, they must live (or die) with the consequences of their actions.

Hamas, Hezbollah, all the terrorists groups survive by killing civilians. They hide their weapons in civilian areas, they send homicide bombers into civilian areas, and they send rockets that they can not aim directly into densely populated areas in order to kill civilians. But none of this bothers you. It just bothers you when the bad old US and Israel kill civilians. If civilian deaths bother you, then complain about all civilian deaths.