French Foreign Minister a Steaming Turd

Dominique de Villepin says: "With the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, a dark page has been turned."

He then added: "One which we vehemently opposed turning, and threatened to use our veto power at the U.N. to keep from being turned."

What a bunch of assholes.

[Undertoad]

Perhaps his tears are for the 8 billion dollars in loans that they will not be able to collect.

[Rucita]

Then, perhaps your smiles and happyness are for the dollars you are going to collect?

Perhaps you think so, and if it so I'll tell you "there is a difference between U.S. and France: France doesn't kill for money"

Then if you are wrong about your way to get the freedom of iraqi people, don't wonder why the rest of the countries considers U.S. like an devastator and evil empire.

Do you want to the rest of people to think that about U.S.? Unfortunately that's what you are succeeding.

No, France just turns a blind eye to all that in the hopes of collecting money later.

How much are we going to get out of Iraq? Well, first we have to realize that we're sinking, oh, about $80 BILLION dollars in to this war. I'm paying for that, as are my fellow citizens. Then, we're going to have to rebuild the damn country, and we'll probably spend at least $300 or $400 doing that, which puts what we *should* recoup right at about $80,000,000,400 (guessing). Iraq's oil reserves aren't so spectacular that we're going to be swimming in money, Rucita. I'm sorry, but it's just not the way it is. It's not about money or oil. The argument just doesn't hold up.

"Evil triumphs when good men do nothing." If you saw a man raping a woman, and you had the power to do something about it, would you?

France wouldn't, because the rapist owes them money. Are you really in the same boat?

[Rucita]

Originally posted by dave

If you saw a man raping a woman, and you had the power to do something about it, would you?

Yes, I would, but not what you have done. I mean I'll try other ways before.

You don't understand my previous message. I think U.S. has declared the war on Iraq because of many reasons but principally because September 11th. What I say is: if you think France don't want war because of their own interessting, then don't suprisse if other countries people think the same about you.

By the way I guess Ben Laden still alive and he is the directly guilty, and not so the Iraqi children and babies.

[Undertoad]

Do I want the rest of the world to think the US is an evil empire?

No, but it is not an evil empire, and they think that anyway. They think what they enjoy thinking.

If someone is big and powerful, everybody wants to find faults and problems and mistakes and flaws with that person. It is the same thing with countries.

So, I would rather be right than popular. Popular is temporary. Right is permanent.

I don't think it's about September 11th. If it was, it would have happened a long time ago.

But we're free to disagree about that, yeah?

France wouldn't be drawing my criticism if they were still sticking to their guns. But they've done pretty much a "170" if you will. Not quite a complete 180º degree turn, but pretty close. Suddenly the war is a good thing? A dark page has been turned? What changed? You know?

I'm against the war too, if the question is "Do you support sending Americans to a foreign land to die, far away from their families, while at the same time killing innocent people?"

But I'm for the war if the question is "Do you support freeing people that desperately want to be freed but cannot do it themselves because the oppresive power they are under is so great?"

[Rucita]

It’s being really hard to me to try to explain my feelings and my opinions about Iraq war, because I don’t have a good command of English. So I plead to you to understand me in the most loving, tough but firm, style.

Originally posted by Undertoad
Do I want the rest of the world to think the US is an evil empire?

No, but it is not an evil empire, and they think that anyway. They think what they enjoy thinking.

If someone is big and powerful, everybody wants to find faults and problems and mistakes and flaws with that person. It is the same thing with countries.

So, I would rather be right than popular. Popular is temporary. Right is permanent.

If I were an empire I’d rather to command respect because of my negotiation capability, my talent to make up for poor countries, my acts for remedding the hunger around the world, my intelligence, my diplomacy and my ability to resolve national and inernational conflicts with these wirtues I’ve mentioned, but not only because of my army and my force.

Originally posted by dave
I don't think it's about September 11th. If it was, it would have happened a long time ago.

But you think is about the killed kurdish and it happened 15 years ago. Also you think is about the killed Iraqi and Kuwait people and it happened 12 years ago.

By the way, then is it not about the weapons of massive destruction?

I said none of those.

What Bush's motivations were, I can never say. I simply don't know. However, going at it for oil simply doesn't make sense, because it's not cost effective.

The evidence that there <b>are</b> weapons of mass destruction is growing, and the fact that millions of people are becoming free is a pretty huge bonus.

Look, as far as the weapons of mass destruction goes, I'm not sure the war is justified. But when we look at the Iraqis that are gaining their freedom, then it becomes obvious to me that the war is going to have very good consequences.

You said yourself that you hate Saddam and think he needs to go. Well, that's what's happening. Besides civilians being killed, why is that a bad thing?

[Rucita]

Besides civilians being killed... besides? Is not that enough reason?

The way of doing all that is the big problem. I still do believe we could have resolve the conflict by other ways.

If the conflict is "weapons of mass destruction", then maybe.

What is too big a price to pay for the freedom of millions? One life? Ten thousand?

Now I'm just guessing, but I bet you could find 100,000 Iraqis that would give themselves if they knew that, in doing so, Iraq would be free from the Ba'ath party. You could maybe even find significantly more.

Let's face it, we weren't getting rid of Saddam without force. And we weren't getting Iraq's freedom unless we got rid of Saddam. For me, that is the compelling reason for this war.

[Rucita]

Between 1936 and 1939 in Spain we suffered a civilian war. Is finished and then here started a dictatorship, with dictator Franco. Nobody came here to free us. Finally in 1975 that dictatorship finished. Yes, it was because of many reasons including that the dictator died, but we'd rather this way before the war way. We had ha time for transition and we, ourselves, put up a democracy regime. I think spanish did by the right way because we didn't create more violence.

Anyway if it is the reason, then I believe (not agree with, but believe) it only when U.S. go ahead for other dictatorships...

[Whit]

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Let's try this. We are at war. At this point there is nothing the common US citizen can do about it. Don't you think it's reasonable for us to focus on the good that will come from this? Do you think fewer innocents would die if Sadam was left in power and one of his son's took over for him when he died? If you look around the older threads you'll find a lot of us don't believe the reasons Bush gave for going to war. Does that mean we should not be happy about any potential good that comes from our military's actions?

[Elspode]

Rucita said: "If I were an empire I’d rather to command respect because of my negotiation capability, my talent to make up for poor countries, my acts for remedding the hunger around the world, my intelligence, my diplomacy and my ability to resolve national and inernational conflicts with these wirtues I’ve mentioned, but not only because of my army and my force."

We have negotiated for 11 years. No one has *ever* negotiated more than we. We tried sanctions, and were assailed for "starving innocent children". Nowhere has anyone ever pointed the finger at Saddam, least of all you, Rucita.

Intractable despots only understand one thing...power. It is what they use to stay in control, and it is the only way to unseat them. Saying that we didn't negotiate enough is simply untrue. And as far as feeding the hungry...name me one nation that provides more aid than the US...just one, please.

I admire your manner when trying to convey your points, Rucita. You are unfailingly polite and obviously firm in your beliefs, but you are off base here, mi compadre. Saddam bad, we kick ass, things get better.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by Elspode
Saddam bad, we kick ass, things get better.

We hope...