| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| Fighting words as de Villepin stands firm |
| 2003-09-12 |
| Tuff toikin’ from the world’s most expensively coiffeured two-bit mot-merchant... Dominique [who is a man] de Villepin, France’s foreign minister, defended his country’s honour... Yes, so many philosophical questions need to be answered ...yesterday from charges that its behaviour over Iraq has been motivated by money and cowardice. Non! Abseulement non! Eet wuz monaiii, cowardeece, et... un geuwd dause ov populeest antee-Americaineeeszum! In a rare meeting with British and American journalists, he spoke angrily of the misrepresentation of French motives and the unfair portrayal of France by foreign politicians and the press. "I hear people talking about France having ulterior motives to get oil contracts in Iraq," he said. "It is absurd." He also rejected the "caricature of France as a pacifist country which refuses to assume its responsibilities". What responsibilities? We can’t even look after Numero Un! M de Villepin’s fighting words served as a prelude to the meeting this weekend of Security Council foreign ministers in Geneva. France is still unhappy with America’s proposed resolution to expand international involvement in Iraq. M de Villepin said he wanted the resolution’s emphasis changed from dealing with violence to rebuilding the country. His remarks came as many, both inside and outside France, wonder how long President Jacques Chirac and M de Villepin will keep up their diplomatic battle with America. As long as it’s popular, presumably. French businessmen especially have been agitating for France to make up with America. Judging by M de Villepin’s performance yesterday it will be some time yet. Asked if he regretted the short-term political impact of France’s position on Iraq, M de Villepin, a published poet and historian of Napoleon, let rip with: "In the life of men, as in the life of nations, there are difficult moments. In France, we need courage and sang-froid If you really do find some courage an level headedness, we’ll let you apologise if you ask nicely. To those who questioned France’s motives in resisting first war in Iraq and now America’s handling of the country, he said neither he, M Chirac nor any other French official had any concern beyond the "principle of responsibility". Well that clears it up then. He added: "There’s no problem with Franco-American relations because we are dealing with issues much bigger than that. We must learn how two allies, two friendly countries can find solutions for the world. It is not by navel-gazing that we find solutions." I wouldn’t bother looking for this Frenchman’s guts either. He said France was in a stronger position now than at the time of the first resolution on Iraq, because it had remained firm and had threatened to use its veto. Respec to you Dom. You da man. "Abstention would have been washing our hands," he said. "It’s never a brave act and we were never likely to do it." Heh. The French don’t wash. He said it, not me. He hoped that France’s arguments would now be examined by America with "more clarity and less passion". Supply it and find out. He tried to resist the kind of gloating so evident in the French press about American and British problems in Iraq but he noted: "Iraq was not a terrorist country before the war." That war had brought "various divisions" and "created favourable conditions for instability and terrorism". Are we here to discuss French domestic and foreign policy? |
| Posted by:Bulldog |
| #7 Isn't the Chirac party the most pro-American of the alternatives? |
| Posted by: Not Mike Moore 2003-9-12 11:35:41 PM |
| #6 Ok, Dom, we'll take you at your word that it's not about O...I...L.... contracts. BTW, care to sign this piece of paper declaring same? But there is Alcatel and the telecom contract. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2003-9-12 2:48:31 PM |
| #5 Dominique ( who may be 'male' but isn't a man ) would have us forget much. Simple cowardice... €...how convenient to 'forget' about the legacy of French imperialism that led to WWI's clash of rival Empires €...how convenient to 'forget' about the tyrannical 'peace' of WWI that led to the rise of Hitler and WWII €...how convenient to 'forget' about the Vichy French complicity in the holocaust with the Nazi's €...how convenient to 'forget' about the post war re-imposition of French exploitive colonialism in Algeria and Vietnam in bloody wars €...how convenient to 'forget' about Suez in '56, one of many French post war interventionist failures €...how convenient to 'forget' about the Saddamized colonialization of Iraq that perpetuated a fascist regime for French Oil profits. So OK frogs... let's just propagate the lie that America deserved 911... let's just propagate the lies about Chile and their failed little fascist state... let's blame it all on America... because distractive fabrication is the French way, so we all don't dwell on your 20th century exploitive Imperialistic history and how it demonstrates how devolved your culture has become... The 'Big Lie' the way of the coward... the way of France. |
| Posted by: DANEgerus 2003-9-12 2:46:14 PM |
| #4 Bomb: I don't think we'll withdraw from the UN. We'll just not go to it with anything important (unless, as in the present situation, making the effort has PR value in securing cooperation from others). However, by staying in, we get to use our veto in the Security Council to keep the UN from doing anything truly mischevious against us. |
| Posted by: Mike 2003-9-12 1:27:08 PM |
| #3 ..when the US finally accepts the overwhelmingly obvious evidence that it is primarily a hindrance and anchor - with little redeeming value - and withdraws. Unfortunately, this is probably not going to happen on GWB's watch. He seems to think that the UN actually adds value while events have shown otherwise... |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2003-9-12 12:38:40 PM |
| #2 As an avid follower of the English-language websites posted in Phrawnce by poor trapped souls (Merde in France, Dissident Frogman, Pave France, etc) what strikes me is the absurdity of their being offended by the anti-Phrench sentiment in America. It pales in comparison to the anti-American sentiment in Phrawnce, much of it published by sources with strong Govt connections. It seems there is nothing new in this other than they remain in the role of obfuscators, apologists for Arabs, and UN nay-sayers. The irony is that the anti-UN sentiment in the US is growing by leaps and bounds, as a result of their abusing it in such a crass and craven self-serving political ploy. Since it is all that remains of Phrench stature, it will be a blow to them and to their successors when M Chirac and M de Villepin have reduced it to the shell it will be when the US finally accepts the overwhelmingly obvious evidence that it is primarily a hindrance and anchor - with little redeeming value - and withdraws. C'est la vie, eh? |
| Posted by: .com (Abu This RoP™ Asshats) 2003-9-12 9:56:13 AM |
| #1 "Dominique [who is REPUTED TO BE a man]...." Did he say anything substantive at all? At least he acknowledged the argument that France is accused of being oil and profit motivated. He dissmissed it without providing any substance, but still he acknowledged it. |
| Posted by: Craig 2003-9-12 9:36:18 AM |