« Bush on God | Main | Welcome to Mainz Mr. President! »

Comments

@ g-punkt: I've never seen Mardi Gras but I can remember the boycott of french ("cheese eating surrender-monkeys") goods just because they didn't want to join war.

Are you really so ignorant or are you just a wannabe propagandist? Ever hear of "Oil for Food"? Saddam used the money meant to feed and support the Iraqi people for the purposes of bribing entire countries, including France. In October of 2002, UN Resolution 1441 passed the Security Council unanimously, which told Saddam (for the 17th time) to come clean on reporting what happened to his nuclear, chemical and biological weapons or face serious consequences (that is war). France told the US in the form of Colin Powell personally, face-to-face, that they would not veto a second (unnecessary) resolution specifically authorizing the threatened attack.

France lied. France opposed the second resolution. France sent Villepin around to other members of the Security Council, Cameroon for example, in order to torpedo the second resolution. France told Saddam that they'd prevent the US from attacking. French weapons sold to Saddam during the period of sanctions, which France itself voted for, have been found in Iraq. It is very possible that French weapons have been used to kill Americans and Brits and Iraqis.

France aligned itself with Saddam and the Baathist, some of the most brutal and indiscrimate killers ever, ever to control a modern state. We see their handiwork almost every day on the news, with another car bomb or roadside IED or kidnapping of female Italian journalists. France did everything in its power to try to have the US lose the Iraq War and make the post-war reconstruction impossible. France has been on the side of the terrorists, the Baathists, the murderers. Luckily, France is so weak and useless, it's best efforts have failed. Iraq will be stabilized as a free and democratic nation. We're seeing this happen in front of our eyes.

g-punkt, please explain why France is not an enemy of America.

@ Jabba,

I think you were addressing me instead of g-punkt. But let me give you a short answer. First of all, regarding the oil-for-food scandal, around $21 million went missing thanks to oil-related smuggling and 'only' $5 million of this total was due to the oil-for-food programme (Economist, Feb. 4th).
But now for France: George Bush is still talking to Chirac, France is in the Nato, we have cooperations on Haiti and Kosovo, both countries are democracies, both are in Nato. I know that the French are arrogant but they are not enemies.

As for French weapons used to kill Americans... I wouldn't be surprised if there were American soldiers being killed by American weapons. After all the US had supported Saddam and the Taliban during the 80s. As for French weapons dealings during times of sanctions, I would love to see a credible source on your statement.

Phil,

You will not find this in the media.... This is not the position of the media. In fact, if you look at those media organizations which supported Kerry you would find them to be very pro french and by extension pro german. They have a strong left bias.

Americans, Phil do not need the media or elites to lead us around or to tell us how to think. For over 200 plus years we seem to have gotten it right more times than not.

And I do not understand the point of the trade figures you cited. They have little bearing on American opinion. In fact, if all trade with france stopped tomorrow the vast majority of Americans would not notice other than to see some of the prices of the stocks they hold in their stock portfolios dip in value. There are lots of nations America trades with. Some of these are our allies, some of them are more or less neutral and others are our potential enemies.

And what of Haiti or Kosovo? Haiti a former french colony, located close to America. America’s concern has to do with human rights and immigration. Your point on Kosovo being what the french did not stand in the way of a NATO deployment? Well for the life of me, I am not sure why there are Americans there. If you remember, Luxemburg was the President of the EU at the time and told the US that the EU could handle this without US help. We all know how that worked. Then the EU gets all jacked out of shape because the Americans did not act quickly enough.

So the euros can handle the Balkins or not.

Phil, Americans did and do not look positively on the actions of the french. The french and I am sure they truly do not understand this have burn more bridges than they will ever be able to build in the next 3 generations or more.

There will at some point be an American payback. It will be by the American people and it is going to come as a huge surprise not only to the french but to people like you.


Phil,

There were Ameircans killed by french weapons in Iraq.

And if the EU weapons embargo with China is lifted and it results in one single American dying bcause of this. Then I am all for turning france into a nuclear wasteland.

@ Joe,

it's 3 o'clock around at my place so I'm off. Just briefly: I don't want to come across as pro-French because I am very much opposed to many French policies (including their behaviour in the run-up to the war). But I disagree strongly with the view that the French are enemies of the US. They aren't, not now and not in the future. And if you talk about an American 'payback' you just sound like someone who can't wait.
Luckily the current US government takes a more moderate position. Sleep well.

@ Joe,

I strongly oppose any weapons-trades with China. It's a disgrace.

My question are:
- were there Americans killed by French weapons that were imported during the time of the embargo? If so, could you give me a source since I have not heard about this from a credible source.
- were there Americans killed by American weapons that got imported during the 80s?

@phil

france may not be the enemy, but it certainly is not an ally. an egotistical opportunist at best. any country willing to send some real euros their way will be strategically defended/manipulated by french foreign policy. iraq, china, huge chunks of africa come to mind. i'm not claiming any american altruism here- a democratic world benefits the u.s., but i will say that generally, the current foreign policy of america also benefits democracies everywhere. democratic/free trading countries, well...trade more with everyone, and have bigger economies.
a larger point is that failing economic policies (welfare states) pressure governments to make some deals that are counter to long- term western international interests (please see china arms embargo vis a vis european moral authority).
as for the trade increases, there is no reason not to trade with france, as long as it is fair legal and profitable. i would be more interested in seeing a graph of franco-american trade from 2002-2005.

@phil: "First of all, regarding the oil-for-food scandal, around $21 million went missing thanks to oil-related smuggling and 'only' $5 million of this total was due to the oil-for-food programme..."

I think you mean billions, not millions. Second, this doesn't change my point that France was bribed by Saddam.


"But now for France: George Bush is still talking to Chirac, France is in the Nato, we have cooperations on Haiti and Kosovo, both countries are democracies, both are in Nato. I know that the French are arrogant but they are not enemies."


As a middle-sized power in the center of Europe, not speaking to France is not an option. Are the French doing for Haiti what they did for the Ivory Coast? WTF? Kosovo, oh yeah, the French Colonel gave information on Nato bombing attacks on Serbian. Kosovo, home of the UN "Food for Sex" scandals etc. Not a resume enhancer, eh?

"As for French weapons used to kill Americans... I wouldn't be surprised if there were American soldiers being killed by American weapons. After all the US had supported Saddam and the Taliban during the 80s. As for French weapons dealings during times of sanctions, I would love to see a credible source on your statement."

Why would you possibly want a "credible" source? Would any evidence be "credible" for you? Yeah, so-called US support for Saddam is often thrown up in the air, like chimpanzees throwing sand in the air. The US never supported the Taliban, that charge is a first. And no, I won't demand a "credible" source from you on that one.

What's more important Phil is what you didn't say. You said nothing in defense of France's actions at the UN in the run up to the Iraq Battle, much less explain how those actions can be described as actions of an ally. You said nothing about France being aligned with the terrorists and Baathists. I'm not trying to persuade you Phil, you are unpersuadable. Ask yourself, why you align with France, which is aligned with the killers. Tell us why, if you will.

@phil: You seem obsessed by the French weapon charge. First, it's not the weapons so much, as France breaking the arms embargo on Iraq that France voted FOR in the UN Security Council. Breaking the rules that they themselves voted for. Second, will credible information change your mind one whit? I suspect no, which is why I was hesitant to spend time looking this up.

Third, I guess .23 of one second was worth spending: From Google:
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,330,000 for french weapons in iraq. (0.23 seconds).

Sha Ka Ree: Poland finds French Weapons in Iraq... October 03, 2003. Poland finds French Weapons in Iraq. I suppose this is one
of the reasons France didn't want us to go into Iraq (Story). ...
www.shakaree.org/blog/archives/000111.html - 6k - Cached - Similar pages

No Weapons in Iraq? We'll Find Them in Iran... was held by the French who had agents in Iraq. ... why France wanted a longer extension

on the weapons inspections ... The French, the Germans and the Russians all knew ...
www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0601-02.htm - 27k - Cached - Similar pages

Photos Prove Iraq Violated UN Weapons Ban... 23, 2003. French Weapons Dated 2001. NewsMax has obtained exclusive photographs
proving that Iraq violated a UN Security Council ban on importing weapons. ...
www.newsmax.com/archives/ articles/2003/10/22/154815.shtml - 30k - Cached - Similar pages

French connection armed Saddam - The Washington Times: Nation ...... The French wanted Iraqi oil, and by establishing this friendship, Chirac would help
France replace the Soviet Union as Iraq's leading supplier of weapons and ...
www.washingtontimes.com/ national/20040908-123000-1796r.htm - 86k - Cached - Similar pages

Random Observations: Tierney: French Weapons Inspectors Helped ...... Last Friday, former weapons inspector Bill Tierney charged the French UN
weapons inspector had tipped Iraq off about future targets. ...
tim.2wgroup.com/blog/archives/000054.html - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

The Scotsman - Top Stories - Saddam and the French Connection... corps said they met with a "French parliamentarian" who ... asked the British public
to accept that Iraq would probably have acquired such weapons if he ...
thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1167592004 - 45k - Cached - Similar pages

Powell to Present Intelligence about Iraqi Weapons to Security ...... describes some of Iraq's weapons and weapons programs that ... secretary said the danger
presented by Iraq is such ... that a large majority of the French public is ...
tokyo.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20030130a4.html - 14k - Feb 6, 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

phil-

sorry i forget a thing or two-

generally american media is not anti-french...indeed a lot of credence is given to the european/anti-war position. you can point to cable's fox news if you like, but you'd be hard pressed to name another main stream media outlet, methinks
re: weapons sales- the last i read in defense news was that any stinger missiles given would have run out of batteries by now. anything else supplied in the 80's would surely have been replaced by modern and cheap russian/chinese exports. hell, one can buy old rpg's warheads for $20 a piece. of course we expect and practically condone THOSE weapons sales. so what are we to do with european weapons sales? the brits, french, swedes, germans, and belgians all have advanced, highly competant weapons industries...what's the only country that has a significant chance of going to war (defending western values/idealogy btw- an interest to us all) with communist china supposed to think and do? i understand that you don't endorse lifting the weapons embargo, but the case for european allies become markedly dilluted when confronted with this tripe.

Phil,

Guess what?

There is an American street and there is also American public opinion. Americans attitudes toward the french are something the french have managed to accomplish all on their own. They should be proud..

I asked the question earlier where would US Europe relations be if in the US we had the same media and political campaign that has been waged by “old Europe” toward the US. The percentage would not be 30%; it would be closer to 90%.

As for waiting, I can surely wait. More and more Americans are seeing france for what france is, a second rate power fully of envy which thinks it has something to offer all the while working against America. As the germans seem to like to carry water for the french, if I were you I would be concerned where germany comes down on this

As for french weapons in Iraq, these links are two examples.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1099272003

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040908-123000-1796r.htm

What was more interesting to me personally was during one of the reconnaissances in force or thunder runs made by the 3ID during the days before the fall of Baghdad, a M1A1 got hit and destroyed. It was the first combat loss ever for this tank. It was later learned it was hit from the rear by a french made ATM. The design of the ATM was from early 2000’s and represented the very best ATM technology the french could manufacture. The only consolation as an American is that while other french ATMs hit M1A1’s in both the front and sides they did not destroy them. It is only from the rear that this ATM is effective which also is the weakest point in the armor of this tank.

American weapons sales to Iraq were minor. In almost all cases regardless of what you will find on the web, most of these sales dealt with artillery. What survived the Iran Iraq war was taken out in Gulf 1. And you are talking about arms sales that were in most cases 15- 25 years old anyway.

http://www.parapundit.com/archives/001853.html

As for NATO, the lifting of the embargo will speed the ending of NATO. The US Congress will take firm action on this. GWB might want to prevent this from happening but he will have little choice. Besides he is only going to be in office for a little less than 4 years. Should this happen, the impact on trans Atlantic relations is going to be huge. It is going to make Iraq look like a hick up.

Ending NATO will have a much more positive effect on the US foreign policy than it will on the EU’s as it will give America more freedom to act in her own interest.

Besides after the action of the members of the "chocolate summit" as they related to defending Turkey, another NATO member, that was pretty the beginning of the end of NATO anyway. Right now there are some nations who are working hard to save NATO. I think the members of the "chocolate summit" are indifferent to these efforts.

Phil,

Oh by the way, if you for one minute think there is anyone in either the adminstration or the US Congress other than Kennedy, Kerry and a few other moonbats who trust the french you are either mindless, wacked out on drugs or both.

Phil,

Please note the vote total in the House. Do not fool yourself into thinking this is going to go away. While the EU and UN were directly mentioned what is also on the table be assured is the future of NATO as you now know it.


Hill anger grows at perfidious Europe By Peter Savodnik

Congressional anger with the European Union over strategic security issues is boiling over again after talk in Brussels that the EU might lift its arms embargo on China.

Lawmakers say this would put U.S. security interests directly at odds with those of the Europeans.

Sen. Jon Kyl, chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, circulated a paper last week saying that if “the EU ignores U.S. security concerns, the United States will once again be forced to reduce its reliance on collective institutions such as the EU” and the United Nations.

Should the EU lift the ban on the Beijing dictatorship, the Arizona senator added, it would force the United States “to redouble its efforts to build ad-hoc coalitions of the willing on key tests and issues in the U.S. national interest.

”Kyl’s use of the term “coalitions of the willing” was a reference to the Iraq war, which has pitted many European governments against the United States.The 10-page paper came after a House resolution passed 411-3 earlier in the week deploring a possible lifting of the arms embargo, which could happen as early as June.

The resolution stated, “Such a development … is inherently inconsistent” with U.S. policy and “would necessitate limitations and constraints” on U.S.-European relations.

Kyl’s memo and the House resolution come at the same time that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is visiting Europe and the Middle East — in part to help rebuild the transatlantic alliance.

One House Republican aide blamed European governments for playing domestic politics at the expense of international security interests.“The problem here is the Europeans,” he said. “How do we put this delicately? I’m not trying to be overly melodramatic here. European investment in the defense sector is declining. This is what happens when Europe fails to step up to the plate and invest in its own security. It results in mind-boggling decisions like this, which are made solely for crass commercial reasons.

“The Europeans are seeking to salvage some industrial base, and they’re going to arm the Chinese in the process.”

So with the disbanding of NATO think of how good this is going to be for the EU. You can have your own defense forces and your own foreign policy. These are two goals of both the french and germans. I am sure Eastern Europe will sleep well knowing that berlin and paris are ready to deploy their forces to protect them... oops the history of this is a bit disjointed.

Want to talk about cherry picking the EU?

I hope to live long enough to see both Germany and France burned to the ground by hate-filled Muslims. This I swear!

'What a warped and delusional sense of history. The French actively interfered with American diplomatic efforts at the UN and elsewhere"

"Diplomatic efforts"? You mean Colin Powell's totally fraudulent presentation before the General Assembly?

"They [the French] actively supported Saddam's oppressive and murderous regime."

Well, so did the U.S., at the same time it was selling weapons to Iran and using the profits to arm terrorists in Nicaragua with a documented record of slaughtering civilians.

Unfortunately for the Iraqi, Iranian, and Central American victims, all too many American voters know little or nothing about Central American or Middle Eastern politics or the long history of U.S. intervention in either region.

@Foozer

Your lack of historical context relating to the Great Powers' designs on South/Central America together with no mention of the Cold War makes me think you always preferred your Stammtisch over the study hall.

@Foozer,

Actually we know quite a bit about this period in our history.

You seen to have your time periods in our history a bit mixed up. I guess that is understandable as you are german. germans seem to have a problem with history in general. You never seem to get it quite right.

But if you want to have a history lession about each other's history. I am sure there are those here who would be glad to engage you in this topic.

Do you want to start this with a discussion about intervention or would you prefer the topic of racism?

As to SECSTATE Powell's presentation at the UN as both the french and germans also believed what he was saying to be true (each nation's respective intelligence services verified this to their national leaders) I challenge your both you logic and honesty in the statement you made.


@phil

"As for French weapons used to kill Americans... I wouldn't be surprised if there were American soldiers being killed by American weapons. After all the US had supported Saddam and the Taliban during the 80s."

This is a great demonstration of where fatuous-phil chooses to deliberately ignore any other country's intervention in either Iraq/Afghanistan (Taliban). Furthermore, his sources are so corrupted with German-think ( i.e. benevolent, benign, harmless, omnicious ) that he CHOOSES not to inform himself on the historic FACTS. In so doing, he has surrendered any honest attempt to look at global conflicts without the effects of the corrupting fallacies portrayed in German media.

1) Phil, the Taliban wasn't formed until AFTER the Soviet departure at END of the Afghan war in 1989, when CIA funding ceased. To understand more about this, I suggest that you read some history books, rather than quoting ad-infinitum German sources. I suggest Ahmed Rashid's book : Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. Yes, the USA supplied money and arms, as did the UK, Japan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

But, the connection is perverse. The USA/UK/Canada supported the Soviet Union in the Second World War. Since the Soviets were victorious, and later oppressed 100s of millions of people, are the allies to blame?

2) The USA only supported Saddam AFTER it looked like he could LOOSE the WAR HE STARTED against Iran. Would you have like Iran to have won against Iraq? This is simply known as a "balance of power" game. It was also supported by the Daton Peace Accords to stabilise Serbian aggression in Croatia and Bosnia. We and YOU provided arms to Bosnia, for them to defend themselves. And by the way, the USA wasn't the only one who supported Saddam, in order of precedence:

a) Most of Iraq's military, tanks, guns, SCUD missiles were sold to them by the Soviets and Chinese. This is why Gromyko (still trying to rescue the failed SU) wanted to save their client state Iraq from destruction in the Gulf War 1. After all, what else did the Soviets export?

b) The French were right up there with the sale of Mirage fighters, a nuclear reactor and radar systems.

c) Germans sold him chemicals, ballistics manufacturing equipment (tools) and a built him a world-class bunker system. Although, I don't think that Krupp and IG Farben were involved in these profitable sales.

d) USA did sell him chemicals and provided him with satellite information. As we did also supply the Brits with satellite data in their unofficial non-UN mandated war in the Falklands of '82.

Oh, I also forgot mention the 40+ billion dollars that was lent to Iraq under Saddam. Yep, the USA DOES NOT top that list either. That would be Russia and France... Germany is right up there as well...

"Give me sources." I don't respond to such childish antics as that. If you don't have the intellectual curiosity to investigate this yourself, I suppose you will remain misinformed. But I sense this is what you really want, you want to believe that the US is the cause for most of the world's problems and that paradise-Germany can do no wrong...

Wow, lots of posts for me. Thanks, will read them all and I'm always up for new information.

@ Joe
'generally american media is not anti-french...indeed a lot of credence is given to the european/anti-war position. you can point to cable's fox news if you like, but you'd be hard pressed to name another main stream media outlet, methinks'

I am pretty certain that the 30% who view France as an enemy, have enough access to anti-French media in the US. After all, you choose who to listen to, CNN or Fox and Rush Limbaugh. And I stand by by my point that France is not an enemy and they won't be in future.

@ Robert in Mexifornia,
'Your lack of historical context relating to the Great Powers' designs on South/Central America together with no mention of the Cold War makes me think you always preferred your Stammtisch over the study hall'.

you should go back to the study hall. The Cold War was fought in the name of freedom and democracy and the Americans supported dictatorships. Luckily, the current president is a lot more principled than earlier ones and makes sure that countries get on the path to democracies.

As I said before in an earlier post, I am not sure if I will ever go back to Germany and these floats confirmed my apprehension about going. Perhaps the trend will shift one day, but I am seeing no signs of that now.

That said, even though I feel uncomfortable with the anti-American hate in Germany, I would never want anything bad to happen to it or its people.

I still love Germany (the countryside, the culture, the "feel" of just being there and the like) deeply and most certainly my friends there.

Schakal said earlier that not everyone endorses the ideas the floats represent and that is indeed true. It absurd to judge the whole of Germany based on the float designers, those in the crowd who approved of these floats, or even the Mayor of Mainz.

Someone said here that I could still go to Germany, if I claimed to be Canadian. Well, I am an American and have never and will never shy away from saying so. I am not ashamed of my beliefs, my country, its intentions, the American people or the overall actions Bush has taken since 9-11 and I will not be cowed into acting as such.

Perhaps someday I will go back to Germany, but it will not be now or anytime in the near future. While the German MSM and those like-minded Germans engage in such childish, unfounded and purile hatered of the US, I will travel to less hostile regions.

@phil

"The Cold War was fought in the name of freedom and democracy and the Americans supported dictatorships.

I love the hypocrisy. Obviously, you responded before having read my post. Did not Germany also profit from sales, and lending to dictatorships? Before, during and AFTER the cold war?

The origin and complexities of the cold war as an issue probably would take more time to discuss than could be done in this blog. But the large origin of global oppression was the: Soviet Union, China, North Korea, and East Germany. One could argue, that the US should have been more aggressive in ensuring eastern European freedom in 1946. We had the bomb, we could have bombed them into destruction. But, 5 million red army stood ready to hold Europe hostage. Alas, the fruits of victory would have been only ashes in our mouths...

Oh, surely no Europeans EVER supported any dictatorships in their illustrious history. What about colonialism, Bonapartism and Nazism? What small microcosm of history do you need to support your argument? Did you ever notice how central America is now a democracy as well?

Whether or not you've read Bush's recent inaugural speech or not. But I think that the liberal democracy of the US Constitution is a timeless document. We are at a turning point in history. It embodies the desire of all oppressed people globally.

As Reagan once prophetically said : "The march of democracy and freedom will leave communism in the ash heap of history." To achieve this, he instituted strategies and took many risks, all of which succeeded. I don't see any reason why Bush cannot do the same to the remaining oppressed peoples. If it were not for sophomoric logic driven effete Europeans obfuscating every attempt.

Phil,

You are becoming a troll.

Provide the links........about the media in the US being anti-french.

What I want you to provide is pure anti french links not just links on policy disagreents. If you have trouble understanding what I mean ..check your own media on any day
]
Frankly Phil I do not really care what you chose to believe or not given you really do not count in American public opinion.

As I have stated and will state again, you do however need to be concerned about just what the American public thinks. Unlike you and your allies the french we tend to do things other than sit on the sidelines. We do not at all confuse words with actions.

I know that has to frustrate you........LOL

I suggest you read carefully my posting on the arms embargo. If you want germany to join france in leading this maddness so be it. You are not going to like either the short term or the long term reaction of the American people. This reaction will become part of future American policy toward your nation and it will become part of how Americans view you. Which it is obvious that you really do not care about that.

So be it!


Phil,

Your lack of knowledge about MSM in the US is stunning if you refer to CNN.

Next thing you are going to tell me is we all should read the NYT, LA Times, Boston Globe, IHT,
and the WashPo to find anti-european bias.

You are at times just an amazing poster. These are members of the MSM cartel which carry water for not only the french but for the germans.

LOL

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAh, so much Anti-Germanism here....

@ James,

where have I ever denied that Europeans also profitted from dictatorships. Don't accuse me of being hypocritical when I'm not. And I do know the history of the cold war. Of course the Americans could hardly have done more in Europe but my post was on Latin America.
And please read my post to the end, I stated that I was happy that current president seems a lot more principled on fighting for freedom and democracy.

@ Joe,

I do know the MSM in the US very well and you forget Fox, the Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal and hundreds of local papers. But when 30% of Americans (as you have stated) view France as an enemy (not just dislike of France but more), then there seems to be a substantial anti-French media coverage. People form their opinions on the basis of the information available to them so where else does such a percentage come from if not the media?

'I suggest you read carefully my posting on the arms embargo'.
You post a lot on that and I fully understand America's concerns so let me say it one more time: I am disgusted by French and German attempts to lift the weapons embargo on China. It's even more disgusting given that, at the same time, weapon sales to Israel are being opposed. I do however live in a democracy and if the democratically elected government decides to lift the embargo (the Greens are opposed as you surely know) then I have to accept it. At the next election this government has to be held accountable for irresponsible actions and don't worry: lifting an arms embargo on a country like China makes sure that my vote goes to someone else.

@phil,

"where have I ever denied that Europeans also profitted from dictatorships. Don't accuse me of being hypocritical when I'm not."

Well, to be fair Phil, you never mentioned it at all. That's just the point, not all of the information seems to get around in the one-sided German media. I recall watching a production on ARD just prior to the Gulf War II: just how they presented the whole issue as America domination like it was personal between Bush Sr. and Saddam. Not even a mention of UN approval, months of waiting, etc... Herein lies the crux. Unless you, the media, news-papers whoever, present information holistically, then you are doing the world a disfavour. In fact, I would say that it boarders on propaganda. If this attitude continues, it will corrupt young minds into thinking that America is the cause of the world's problems. American will be forced to act, alone whilst Europe is becoming complicit.

As for watching ARD, I have stopped watching German crap TV altogether. I've subscribed to SKY instead. As for the GEZ (TV) tax, they will only get it from my cold dead fingers.

"And I do know the history of the cold war. Of course the Americans could hardly have done more in Europe but my post was on Latin America."

Correct, Europe hasn't done anything for America since French assistance during the revolution. Bonus, thanks for the statue of liberty. Gee phil, who supported Daniel Ortega? Well, you KNOW the COLD WAR history, so you'll know that it was the Cubans and East Germans.

"And please read my post to the end, I stated that I was happy that current president seems a lot more principled on fighting for freedom and democracy."

1) All American Presidents stood for freedom, Carter included. He just wasn't pragmatic about it. Reagan was.
2) Why don't more Germans think like you as well? Stop the "volksverhetzung", the finger pointing, defined a common agenda and work with your historically biggest supporter: America. I find that most of what I hear from German: colleagues, the TV, radio, newspapers comes on the cheap. It sells well, but it rots the critical thinker...

Phil,

Actually Americans are very clever. They do things like watch closely when our nation is considering the expenditure of its treasure.

Most Americans formed their opinions of the french during the period right after the vote on UNSCR 1441 and the period of the second non UNSCR vote which did not occur.

Since then the objections of both the french and the germans about US foriegn policy have been reported in MSM with no anti bias at all. What has been reported is their respective positions. If anything MSM has tried to put a very positive spin on these positions, as if the US was some how wrong.

Kerry in fact made an issue of this in his failed run to be President.

From this Americans have formed their own opinions. As I told you if the American media and political establishment had operated in the same manner as has occured in franch and german over this same period, we would not be having this conversation.

As for your elected government, you are right it is the one you have. It will take what it considers to be in the best interest of the german people and germany.

What happens after that will be a results of these actions.

@phil: "I am pretty certain that the 30% who view France as an enemy, have enough access to anti-French media in the US. After all, you choose who to listen to, CNN or Fox and Rush Limbaugh. And I stand by by my point that France is not an enemy and they won't be in future."

Phil, what you don't get, is that Americans think for ourselves. We don't need to be feed anti-French propaganda to come to the conclusion that France has acted like an enemy. A charge by the way, you still haven't done one thing to refute. You just repeat your gratuitous assertions that France isn't an enemy. Several posters have cited actions taken by the French that can only be described as actions of an enemy.

So, when Americans see in the pro-French Mainstream Media, what the French do, we can read between the lines, connect the dots and think for ourselves. Americans have been force-fed liberalism/socialism for 13 years of public schooling, by continuous mainstream media bias, by 4 or more years of college indoctrination. So, to think differently takes tremendous strength and the vast majority of Americans have rejected the elitist, liberal crap. Only 20% of Americans self-identify as liberals. Of course, 90% of journalists are liberals, 95% of college professors are liberals, 90% of Hollywood are liberals, but they've lost the people.


So, Phil, once again, I ask you to explain, how the actions taken by the French cannot be classified as enemy actions.

@ Phil:

You write:

But when 30% of Americans (as you have stated) view France as an enemy (not just dislike of France but more), then there seems to be a substantial anti-French media coverage. People form their opinions on the basis of the information available to them so where else does such a percentage come from if not the media?

Where are you getting the 30% statistic (Americans who view France as an enemy) from? I'd love to know.

Anti-French media coverage...OH NO! Examples? Maybe you should start a blog about it if it is truly so widespread. I do know of an excellent blog, NO Pasaran! that deals exclusively with the French media. I suggest you have a look at that first Phil and then complain about how bad the US media supposedly is.

Ray D,

It was a poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports. Which is an opinion polling organization in the US. Their track record of capturing what Americans think is more accurate than the other better known polling organizations in the US.

It stated that 31% of Americans consider france to an enemy of the US on the war on terror.

@ Jabba,

'Phil, what you don't get, is that Americans think for ourselves.'
'So, when Americans see in the pro-French Mainstream Media, what the French do, we can read between the lines, connect the dots and think for ourselves.'

No you don't. Nobody does. You, like every other American or German, have access to countless sources of information and you have to choose which ones to believe. Are you telling me that you are anti-French because you watched the MSM and 'connected the dots'? No way, you probably read a newspaper, you talk to friends and collegues and you surf the net and have formed your opinion based on the informations that you thought were important.

@ Ray D.,
Why are you putting words in my mouth? I am not saying the US media is bad. I'm saying that this statistic does not just come from 'independent thinking' but there must have been an influence from the media (be it the 'MSM' or other sources). As for the French media, I will have a look at your link but I have read enough of 'le monde' to know that they are anti-American.

It's more remarkable that some in western europe can actually look at their statements and actiosn and think that we will believe thast Spain, France, and Germany are not trying to sabotage US efforts. They are at the point in the EU where they can't differenciate between press releases and actual events. It's more or less like a giant gossip-palooza.

@Joe N

"gossip-palooza"

I'm gonna use that one again... I'll footnote you wherever appropriate.

Ca fait mon plaisir.

Juxtaposed against this site of images from New Orleans Mardi Gras http://www.mardigrasneworleans.com/pictures.html(irony of the name of the photographer, Nitsche)

I was struck by the difference between American and German ideas of gaiety and fun. While there are a couple of pictures of anti-saddam signs, for the most part, the theme of Mardi Gras is light and gay and the only subliminal messages are those of eat, drink, and be merry. The German parade is all political messages and ponderous, which is not my idea of what Mardi Gras and Carnival is all about...might as well be watching a bunch of tanks and missiles and folks marching in goose step.

The article is fun. Interesting it was posted here.

The comments i´ve read here are the most
shallow "i-got-somtin-2-say" comments i´ve read in a while.

1. Karneval is not an american parade.
It´s a holiday-season where people make complete asses out of themselves, get pissed, screw anyone, fall over.....
and the motives of any carriages are of about the same seriousness.

2. Karneval is as representative of Germany, as New Orleans Mardi Gras is for NewJersey.
- not at all.-

3. Most germans are, like most americans, not even educated or interested enuff to be anti-american.

4 the attitude 2wards the guy americans elected is split. Some like, some dont, some dont even care.

5 Americans abroad are often perceived as loud, disrespectfully-ignorant ( cultural knwolegde ) and VERY friendly.

i could go on and on.
Been there, lived there, got a High School diploma....etc, and i´m german.
I dislike Karneval for it´s shallow happiness.
It would be a great success in the US, i guess.

Calm down, stop generalising about stuff most of u don´t know anything more than hear-say about, ...and if u advise your CiC
to not come to germany i would be greatly pleased. But for the sake of having a transatlantic pact, he can come.

- Weltregierung.

@welt
#5. You have obviously never been around a pack of German tourists in Italy or Spain. They are loud, disrespectful of the culture, and refuse to speak the language. And don't get me started about how they attack a buffet line...

The point about public opinion polls is that the questions asked are not always designed to elicit the most thoughtful answers from people.

I suspect that most people interpreted the question about France as being whether they thought France overall was being helpful as an ALLY typically would be. Not being political scientists or diplomatic historians, they said France was an "enemy" but meant "unfriendly neutral." I doubt that anyone in the US believes that we are at war with France in any formal sense or even that France is an imminent threat to the US as the USSR once was.

But there is very good reason for American citizens to believe that the German and French governments, apparently with overwhelming approval from their peoples, have been and continue to be unfriendly neutrals.

And there is certainly reason to believe that quite stupid anti-americanism is endemic in the European press. One need only look at the wierd logic in Weltregierung's post: he finds German Karneval to be "shallow" and so believes it more appropriate for America. Right, Germany has it, but, because it is so shallow, it really belongs in America although accidently absent there. If that is an example of the reasoning to be expected from world government, the world is not ready for it.

There are jerks in every culture. The question is whether jerks speak for the culture. Most Americans found the "freedom fries" episode pathetic, and it quickly disappeared. The Europeans have been demonizing Bush now for four years, with full approval of press and many governments. That is far worse than merely pathetic.

Jeff,

Wednesday November 17, 2004--Fifty-seven percent (57%) of American voters have an unfavorable view of France. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that just 25% have a favorable opinion of that nation.

In fact, more Americans believe France is our enemy (31%) in the War on Terror than believe Jacques Chirac's country is our ally (22%). A plurality, 43%, believe that France's role is somewhere in between ally and enemy.

Welty wrote

The article is fun. Interesting it was posted here.

The comments i´ve read here are the most
shallow "i-got-somtin-2-say" comments i´ve read in a while.

---------------------------------
YOU should certainly know if these are what pass for your thoughts on the matter ; )
-----------------------------------------


1. Karneval is not an american parade.
It´s a holiday-season where people make complete asses out of themselves, get pissed, screw anyone, fall over.....
and the motives of any carriages are of about the same seriousness.

-----------------------------------------
THATS Oktoberfest iirc - and if you don't see the political message in those floats perhaps you should look again I saw nothing like that at Oktoberfest btw - and that was in 2003!
--------------------------------------------


2. Karneval is as representative of Germany, as New Orleans Mardi Gras is for NewJersey.
- not at all.-

-------------------------------------
IF THAT observation is true, and I think it is, then Mardi Gras represents the excesses of the USA - drunken sex obsessed youth - while the Karneval represents the excesses of the Germans - most of which seem to involve a person who is not German and has no interest in Germany
------------------------------------------

3. Most germans are, like most americans, not even educated or interested enuff to be anti-american.

-----------------------------------
MOST people are not immune to a drum-beat of propaganda like the anti-US one coming from the Euro media these past years. Do you suggest most Germans have a positive opinion of Americans then?
----------------------------------------


4 the attitude 2wards the guy americans elected is split. Some like, some dont, some dont even care.

------------------------------------
YOU are either a moron or full of shit - although I am not counting out the exacta on that one
-----------------------------------------

5 Americans abroad are often perceived as loud, disrespectfully-ignorant ( cultural knwolegde ) and VERY friendly.

--------------------------------
A PERCEPTION that is echoed in the Euro media again and again and again Seems if you repeat something often enough, if the public officials all say similar things, if most people agree with that view of another group - well, it tends to grow and grow - but I don't need to explain this kind of thing to a German do I?
--------------------------------------

i could go on and on.
Been there, lived there, got a High School diploma....etc, and i´m german.

---------------------------------
YOU have a HS Diploma and are German and you think that the opinion on Bush in Germany is "some like him, some don't, some don't care"
Well I suppose - if its 10/80/10 in the breakdown
-------------------------------------

I dislike Karneval for it´s shallow happiness.
It would be a great success in the US, i guess.

------------------------------
IS THAT a subtle dig? Sorry, I am not nuanced enough to tell if that was an insult. On the off chance it was - let me assure you that were an event to spend so much effort mocking other countries leaders it would attract very little interest. I doubt 10% of American's know who Schroeder is - unless its the piano player in Peanuts
----------------------------------


Calm down, stop generalising about stuff most of u don´t know anything more than hear-say about,

---------------------------------------
YOU have no idea - I would say most of the folks here have a large knowledge of Germany and Europe
--------------------------------------------


...and if u advise your CiC
to not come to germany i would be greatly pleased. But for the sake of having a transatlantic pact, he can come.

- Weltregierung.

-----------------------------------------
THAT float was good for one thing - it demonstrates what all the OLD Europe pol's can do to GW Bush next week.
If you think it will be any other way - think again
------------------------------------------

It scares me to think that there are Germans who actually think that there is no widespread hatred of Bush and generally bad opinion of Americans in Germany

Pogue,

Have you met Phil?

Joe

I am not sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me.

I have no doubt that what you say people said is accurate, but I hope one third of the American people do not believe that French soldiers are generally shooting at our soldiers, that French warplanes are bombing US cities, etc. I hope that most of them do not believe that war between France and the US is imminent either. I suspect that most people who stated that the US and France were enemy states (meaning at war with each other) were simply speaking a bit loosely. (In an earlier post, you stated that France should be turned into a nuclear wasteland so, if that was intended seriously, you obviously do consider that France and the US are at war. I hope we warn all the US tourists to get out of France before we incinerate them along with the French.)

I suspect that most people who state that the US and France are enemy states, meaning at war or potentially at war with each other, really mean something much more sensible that I completely agree with: namely, that France is being profoundly unhelpful to the US and that France is an ally only in a technical legal sense, but not a real political sense. The technical term for what France is is an unfriendly neutral. So I think the American people are right, but some of them were a little careless in their vocabulary.

If you really believe that the US should employ nuclear weapons against every country that ever ventures to disagree with the US, vaporizing visiting Brits and Aussies, infants, grandmothers, etc, I suspect that an overwhelming number of Americans will find that a rather extreme position.

Jeff - I agree completely with your post -
--------------------------------------
I suspect that most people who state that the US and France are enemy states, meaning at war or potentially at war with each other, really mean something much more sensible that I completely agree with: namely, that France is being profoundly unhelpful to the US and that France is an ally only in a technical legal sense, but not a real political sense. The technical term for what France is is an unfriendly neutral. So I think the American people are right, but some of them were a little careless in their vocabulary.
-----------------------------------

I really dislike this kind of "lets nuke em" crap ( oh, and France has nukes too! ) - along with the "you germans are still Nazi's" stuff

Why can't we just discuss the 21st C realities

France is NOT an ally of the United States in any real way They are a nation with interests, like the US, and one of their interests is not supporting the US ( unlike Britian which does view this as a big interest )

France, in fact, has pursued a policy of antagonism toward the USA - I am just sorry to see Germany follow them down this path

Jeff,

I consider france to be an enemy of the US. I base this on the actions and statements of the french government. I believe that more and more Americans share this view.

.It would appear you have chosen to define an enemy as active armed conflict. So using your definition and only your definition then france is not an enemy of the US. I do not think my fellow Americans believe either the US or france are actively engaged in combat.

I tend to disagree with you rather strongly on this narrow definition of enemy. The US was never in an armed conflict with the USSR but most Americans would consider the USSR to be an enemy of the US. I would say most Americans would consider RNK as well as Iran to fit this category. These nations as well as Iraq were enemies of the US long before the election of GWB.

Now not limiting enemy to mean and only mean active arm conflict, france surely is an enemy of the US. It has actively worked against the national interested of the US. It has provided diplomatic, political and material support to the enemies of the US. It did so with both Iraq and Syria. It is now trying to do so with Iran and China. These are not actions of an ally nor are they actions of a neutral nation. They are actions that ones enemies take.

My point of turning france into a nuclear wasteland is related to the potential effects of the transfer of military technology to China once the arms embargo is lifted. This technology will not be used against either the french or the germans but will be used against Americans. I dare say some where in some dark corner of the french government this too is an acceptable outcome and while minor is least one more reason for lifting the embargo.

Neither of these two nations have any investment in protecting freedom in that part of the world. To them it is just another market to sell their weapons or cars or whatever.

More to the point, I said if a single American dies as result of this and there will surely be more than one American, then france should be turned into a nuclear wasteland because they have armed the combatants who will be trying to kill my fellow citizens. It is france and germany who are leading the charge to lift this embargo.

So please Jeff, keep or try to keep my comments within the context in which they were made.

BTW I did not say just disagreed. That is your term and that is again how decided to define my comment.


As an aside, I would like your reference for the technical term you used “unfriendly neutral”

@ Joe

From my original post: "I doubt that anyone in the US believes that we are at war with France in any formal sense or even that France is an imminent threat to the US as the USSR once was." So I included the sense of potential armed conflict in my definition of "enemy."

From my follow-up post: "I hope that most of them do not believe that war between France and the US is imminent either."

So I have no problem extending the word "enemy" to mean a state with which one may reasonably be expected to be at war.

You seem to include in the word "enemy" any state that disagrees with the US. You also seem to agree with Palestinian suicide bombers who blow up Israeli non-combatants in your acceptance of millions of dead French non-combatants in your advocacy of nuclear war against France if a single US soldier dies from a French-made weapon.

Funny, this was exactly the position of the German government in WWI: it was OK to kill US civilians because the Americans sold war materials to Germany's enemies. The US position at that time was that as a neutral we could trade with anyone we wanted.

I forgot to mention your comment about "Aryan genes." You are always asking people to define their terms. Someone who uses phrases like "Aryan genes" is a racist in my book. And since you are so casual about advocating killing non-combatants, which I originally thought was a foolish bit of hyperbole, but now that you have repeated it I must conclude is your considered thought, I guess I need a new term: a non-Islamic Islamofascist.

Would you define your term

“unfriendly neutral

Jeff,

While you are at it, would you mind listing those actions a nation must take short of armed combat to be considered an enemy.

What we may have here is a simple problem of defining terms.


@Pogue

You have to see where guys like Welti are coming from. To them, anti-Americanism and above all anti-Bush is "normal", it's everywhere here in the German media, classes at school, casual conversation at parties. One would have to go even beyond that level for somebody to notice it, let alone perceive it as wrong. So the sentiment of the majority here is sort of like "you know, that float represents the truth everybody knows, it's just that some people take offense that it has been represented in such a graphic way (blink, blink), it's just a matter of taste..."

Most Germans have grown so numb by the constant bombardment, they aren't aware of it anymore. And they wouldn't recognize anti-Bush propaganda even if it landed on their faces.

Besides that, check out Welti's blog - he's a kook!

@ Ray D and Carnaval:

Schroeder was dressed up as a popular superhero. Yeah, that's putting it to him. Not.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

June 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30