Article

2003-04-23 International

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymous 2003-04-23 03:12 am|| || Front Page|| [11136 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Er, heh. Ahem. Before anyone else points it out, weasels ain't rodents. They're mustelids. That's all for today's Biology 101.

Posted by Bulldog 2003-04-23 03:32:56|| 2003-04-23 03:32:56|| Front Page Top

#2 Note that the Froggies are not suggesting the elimination of the sanctions - just to merely SUSPEND them...

While we move on ahead, sans the UfuckingN, France, Germany, Belgium, Turkey, and the Russkies can admire themselves and their grand baggage in History's rear-view mirror.

I piss in their general direction...

Posted by PD 2003-04-23 06:29:42|| 2003-04-23 06:29:42|| Front Page Top

#3 I saw the show last night. It wasn't so much that Powell didn't specify what Franco-American relations would be in the future, as much as the immediacy of his "Yes" to Charlie's question. No hesitation. Jacques, Dominique, ecoutiez-vous? I think Charlie was a bit taken aback, decided no more elaboration was needed, and then moved onto another topic. Wow. Chirac/Da vile pin have really pissed him off.

Posted by Michael 2003-04-23 07:58:12|| 2003-04-23 07:58:12|| Front Page Top

#4 The French are so corrupt that you should know better than to think they will have some sort of awakening! I think this explanation seems a bit more in character. http://quasipundit.blogspot.com/2003_04_20_quasipundit_archive.html#93096484

UNITED NATIONS, April 22 -- France today proposed the immediate suspension of all civilian U.N. trade sanctions against Iraq but insisted that the 13-year-old embargo could not be formally lifted until U.N. inspectors certified Iraq's disarmament...The French initiative, which caught U.S. officials by surprise, reflected mounting concern by Paris that it could be viewed as preventing Iraqis from reviving their economy as they emerge from more than a decade of sanctions.

The proposal would achieve a key French objective by guaranteeing international control over Iraq's oil revenue until an internationally recognized Iraqi government is in power... France still wants to keep the sales of Iraqi oil, and the revenue from those sales, under "international [read: UN] control", while at the same time allowing foreign investment & export financing. Nevermind that Iraq might be better off selling her own oil, investing the proceeds in rebuilding herself and financing her own exports.

Posted by becky 2003-04-23 08:52:03|| 2003-04-23 08:52:03|| Front Page Top

#5 Michael: Yes. Timing is everything.

I'm against suspending the sanctions, especially if there is a time limit and automatic re-imposition: It gives France too much power to re-impose them, chilling any potential long-term business contracts and relationships deemed necessary by the new Iraqi Government as essential to getting a good deal. No sane business will ink a contract with that kind of sword hanging over the other party...

Posted by Ptah 2003-04-23 08:54:55|| [www.crusaderwarcollege.org] 2003-04-23 08:54:55|| Front Page Top

#6 The worst thing the United States can do to France is to ignore her completely. That means limit diplomatic exchange to a Charge d'affairs, rather than an ambassador (HUGE slap in the face), ignoring France's role in any international treaties or agreements, cutting off any aid to France, working through NATO channels that exclude the French, discourage trade (but do not IMPOSE SANCTIONS), and "suggest" alternate tourist visitations for US citizens. France has been "in our faces" trying to prove it's still relevant in the modern world. The one thing that will hurt the most is to be ignored.

We should do the same thing to the United Nations, as well. It, too, is no longer relevant. It has proved itself to be merely the toy of those with immense egos and little substance.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-04-23 09:42:15|| 2003-04-23 09:42:15|| Front Page Top

#7 I like it the way this is deveoping, even though I know it's going to change later as we move to the outer limits of official attention span.

It's so nice to see that Powell sat down and asked himself, "Why do we have to please them?" Joe Biden and his buddies might call us "bullies" for it, but the obligation always seemed to me to go both ways, even if the practice didn't.

Arab Streetâ¢, you're next.

Posted by Fred 2003-04-23 10:11:40|| 2003-04-23 10:11:40|| Front Page Top

#8 Chiraq always goes for the "big" headlines and plays to the world press, and, he hopes, "world opinion" (whatever that is). I can see that GW has a definite course of action and goals, and that does NOT include France. No headlines, no foaming, just a few significant phrases dropped here and there. As was said in an earlier post some days ago, France will either be on the train, standing at the station, or under the train, but the train is leaving the station. GW's pattern of decision making, statements, and action play over and over again, but Chiraq just does not get it.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-04-23 10:26:51|| 2003-04-23 10:26:51|| Front Page Top

#9 If I had my way, I'd like to see a WWII vet accompany the U.S. diplomats everytime they go to France. Preferably someone who was at Normandy. I surely would love to see/hear a Sunday morning interview with someone in the White Hizouse saying that they like Australian wine. Maybe A U.S. Diplo, flanked by WWII vets could visit France on Bastille day, to "officially" inform them about the demotion to Charge D'Affairs.
If none of the above happened, I would still be happy if we just aired some of their Ivory Coast laundry. Not, just going to the press and saying "France, Bad! Lookit!" But, maybe the Bush administration could start an Ivory Cost Peace Initiative. I think that would be a fine FU.

Posted by Mike N. 2003-04-23 10:32:11|| 2003-04-23 10:32:11|| Front Page Top

#10 BD:" Before anyone else points it out, weasels ain't rodents. They're mustelids."

Yeah. Like somebody was going to. ;)

Posted by mojo 2003-04-23 14:20:47|| 2003-04-23 14:20:47|| Front Page Top

#11 I knew I didn't like Mustelids, I just could never figure out why. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Posted by Mike N. 2003-04-23 15:17:56|| 2003-04-23 15:17:56|| Front Page Top

#12 I had a weasel get into my house up north years ago. Couldn't get him out. Finally shot him with a .22 pistol under the washing machine. Hit him in the musk gland, stunk up the house. Messy. Which brings me to the metaphoric point: it is nasty business purging oneself of weasels....

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-04-23 15:44:34|| 2003-04-23 15:44:34|| Front Page Top

#13 Mojo, I only pointed that out 'cos I'm (supposed) to be a biologist. Not a taxonomist mind you, but that's no excuse. It was early in the morning. I don't want to take up more of Fred's reserves on frivolity, but I can't help sharing some interesting info I noticed in the link I posted above - three varieties of weasel are the Siberian, Least and Yellow-bellied. Hmmm...

Mike, mustelids tend to be a bad bunch, and all should be approached with caution, or avoided altogether. Amphibians, on the other hand: only avoid the two-legged variety.

Paul - thanks for warning! It's corroborated by the link: "Mustelids have well-developed anal glands, which are particularly potent weapons..."

Posted by Bulldog 2003-04-23 16:01:38|| 2003-04-23 16:01:38|| Front Page Top

#14 I still think we should invoke the Monroe Doctrine and kick them out of the Western Hemisphere. The South Pacific too.

Posted by Ned 2003-04-23 17:24:30|| 2003-04-23 17:24:30|| Front Page Top

#15 I still think we should invoke the Monroe Doctrine and kick them out of the Western Hemisphere. The South Pacific too.

I think that's stretching a point of law. That's three-quarters of the planet.

Jeez, Ned, lose your parking space to a weasel, or what? It's not like they're after an independent Mustelistan Republic.

If you could explain the purpose of sanctions to a mustelid, they'd have lifted 'em two weeks ago... what's the point after the rodents are gone?

Posted by Mark IV 2003-04-23 22:43:00|| 2003-04-23 22:43:00|| Front Page Top

#16 Damn, Alaska, why didn't you just live trap him and then close the hole that let him get in?

If I didn't have to crush the first coackroach that got through my household defense system yesterday, and you didn't write such good posts, you'd be on my list.

Posted by becky 2003-04-24 11:52:21|| 2003-04-24 11:52:21|| Front Page Top

11:52 becky
09:03 raptor
08:37 raptor
07:24 raptor
06:59 raptor
23:49 Pink & Fluffy
23:32 Bomb-a-rama
23:29 Bomb-a-rama
23:23 Bomb-a-rama
23:06 11A5S
23:05 Someone who did NOT vote for William Proxmire
22:58 11A5S
22:43 Mark IV
22:32 Nero
22:30 Someone who did NOT vote for William Proxmire
22:22 Raj
22:20 Raj
22:14 Nero
22:04 Brian
22:03 Fred
21:30 anon1
21:26 Alaska Paul
21:22 anon1
20:58 Raj