April 19, 2004
Good News & Bad News from France
Villepin
Just three weeks later, Chirac announced that he was replacing foreign minister Dominique de Villepin with the relatively unknown, but pro-American, Michel Barnier.
Barnier
Prancing around the world like an over-wound ballet dancer to line up votes against America at the United Nations, Villepin never lost an opportunity to blast America's "hegemony" in world affairs.
His replacement at the Quai d'Orsay, Michel Barnier, hosted a nongovernmental conference on transatlantic relations last November in Paris that was attended by U.S. Ambassador Dan Freed, the National Security Council director for European affairs.
Two participants at that conference — one French, one American — tell me that Barnier displayed a "pragmatic approach" toward U.S.-French relations in marked contrast to his predecessor.
"Michel Barnier is much less arrogant than Villepin, and will have a very different approach" when differences between the United States and France come up, a French participant said.
Full Story @ National Review Online
This is a real eye opener.
I was elated at the beginning of the article, then at the end horrified.
Villepin is a wanker, It was obvious last year and this just verifies all my assumptions.
I would be interested in other links to articles about him, if DF has any to share. :-)
Sure, replacing Villepin was surely a good thing to do. However bright, he's been to arrogant. Besides, whatever his qualities, there was no way he could have been the man of new improvement.
Next step in improving US - French relation ... and even US - Rest of the world relations will be... Replacing Rumsfeld by any man with some common sense. And having powell really in charge of foreign affairs.
It now becomes clear that he would never have fought this war. A war launched on a wrong basis, with no preparation of the peace to build hence after
A war whose main effect has been until now exactly what everyone was envisionning : more terrorism, more hate of the westernworld, and a public display of arrogance and weakness from the USA.
It must be clear now that WMD are nowhere to be found, that terrorism prospers in Iraq, that some humility is to be expected from the USA, because for one of the first time, they have acted as a destabilizing power, creating insecurity by their foolish illegal war policies.
Posted by: DF at April 19, 2004 12:39 PMI don't think you really understand how our government functions. Rumsfield and Powell (who has made statements completely contradicting what you just said about him) serve at the pleasure of the president. It's not rumsfield's function to be a diplomatic face. His function is to ensure our armed forces can do and do their jobs. Powell's function is more of a diplomatic one (though he has others.) Both of them are to serve out the president's orders.
As for WMDs: your statement is unfortunately proof that I maybe wrong about everything I'd said about ADD and ADHD not existing. If they are no where to be found, then where did they go? I'd have a hard time believing that they destroyed them, especially when their scientists who defected said they didn't. So where did they go? They don't just vanish.
Terrrism was prospering in Iraq before hand. It's on the run now. How can a war be illegal? It's a frigen war. Nationas launch wars and need no permission to do so.
Destabilizing power? You say that as if the middle east was a particularly stable region to begin with.
Let's look at the results of gulf war 2:
a hideous despot deposed
another despot in Iran is losing popularity
a group of terrorists destroyed (Answar Al-Islam)
several al-quaeda cells destroyed
a lessened possibility of chemical weapons being passed from hussein to terrorists or other nations (Though I believe it already happened)
78% of Iraqi's currently support US forces (this was a poll 2 weeks ago)
and Iraqi's aren't being tortured, murdered, maimed or raped by their central government anymore
At what cost:
alot of American lives, a few lives from other nations, millions of american dollars and a few power hungry terrorists popping out of the wood work
"I suggested that if President Chirac wanted to repair the damage done to U.S.-French relations by French behavior last year, he might start by "putting a new face on French diplomacy."
Just three weeks later, Chirac announced that he was replacing foreign minister Dominique de Villepin with the relatively unknown, but pro-American, Michel Barnier."
Is the guy telling that Chirac replaced De Villepin because he asked for ????
Funy !
You call arrogant a guy who said :
"The option of war might seem a priori to be the swiftest. But let us not forget that having won the war, one has to build peace. Let us not delude ourselves; this will be long and difficult because it will be necessary to preserve Iraq's unity and restore stability in a lasting way in a country and region harshly affected by the intrusion of force."........."No one can assert today that the path of war will be shorter than that of the inspections. No one can claim either that it might lead to a safer, more just and more stable world. "......"Such intervention could have incalculable consequences for the stability of this scarred and fragile region. It would compound the sense of injustice, increase tensions and risk paving the way to other conflicts."......."Ten days ago, the US Secretary of State, Mr. Powell, reported the alleged links between al-Qaeda and the regime in Baghdad. Given the present state of our research and intelligence, in liaison with our allies, nothing allows us to establish such links. "........"In any case, in such an eventuality, it is indeed the unity of the international community that would guarantee its effectiveness. Similarly, it is the United Nations that will be tomorrow at the center of the peace to be built whatever happens."
You call it arrogance ??? I call it 'Some one who tell the true'
Posted by: Marcel at June 22, 2004 09:09 PMI think Geoerge HW Bush put it best:
You think we're arrogant, and we think you are French.