Don't let the rhetoric fool you. The French position on this has very little to do with Iraq, but rather their perception that this administration is trying to take over the world. They honestly and sincerely believe we intend to take over the world. I'm serious.

They see this war as a chance to slow down or cripple our foreign policy designs to impose an American Empire.

Which is quite ironic really, because we Europeans have always been the ones with tendencies to 'colonialise' the rest of the world.

As far as I know (and it's not much I admit) the US has never been one to hang around more than neecessary. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

But yeah, sad but true, that's the general feeling here...

All such comments by French politicians, government officials, intellectuals, and other chattering magpies, share a common thread of "le ressentiment" (i.e., plain, old human resentment). They want the U.S. to be humbled as France has been humbled. They want us to decay, as France has decayed. They want us to know, as they know, how it feels to be a _former_ great power. Our turn to be a historical has-been will come someday, Raffarin, _but not yet_!

The French are really starting to bore me.

The French complaints is really that:
1) they immorally supported Saddam
2) they made the liberation more difficult
3) they don't lead the world

Fair enough!

Just Pitiful Riffraff: Thanks for finally letting your real objections to this war: this idea that today one country can lead the world.

Got $$, got arms, got values, got power - Lead the world. Gettit?

Now slide back into the hole and start scraping the slime off the frogs.

That's odd.

I didn't see any reference by the Frog Prime Minister to any sort of apology for the desecration of the British and Commonwealth war grave at Etaples earlier this week.

I suppose he was too busy telling the world how the French know everything.

He accuses the US (and by implication Britain and Australia) of making a moral, political and strategic mistake.

Maybe these words - especially made at this time - will come back to haunt him and France. Maybe it is FRANCE that has made a moral, political and strategic blunder.

Still, one should look on the bright side. At least he isn't trying to lecture the coalition on how to surrender !

Belgium and France have "jumped the shark"

Do these guys read anything other than their own media? Do they not have ANY intelligence assets in the region? I know they have their own agenda, but these kinds of statements are breathtakingly stupid. Obviously, they don't care and they hate us. So be it.

At least the Soviet Union released Tetris when they realized that they couldn't compete with the West -- they tried to distract our scientists and engineers away from technological progress and weapons production (and they almost succeeded). What have the French tried, apart from posturing?

One country can not, and should not, rule the world.

It is not a fact, and should never be.

The US is one of many nations in the world and should act as such.

It's people who think the US and it's citizens are better than all others that create war and stupidity - just as we're in the midst of right now.

The French remind me of the jealous kids in high school that hate the quarterback for dating the prom queen and driving a Corvette convertible too fast....the Americans are the winners-The French and their coward buddies are the losers in this game.

Ray nails it.

ally,

Most of the American West is the result of a war for Empire (SEE Mexican-American War). The Spanish-American war set up American colonies in the Phillipines, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the quasi-colony of Cuba (SEE Platt Amendment).

Yes, they know that region of the world very well, just as they were experts on Vietnam and Algeria.

If the French want to take a share of responsibility in world affairs, we could make it their job to look after Greenpeace.

JohninLondon: Your suggestion that the French PM should apologize for the grave desecration is ludicrous; such a statement implies that you think the French government had something to do with it. Be reasonable... Whoever did that was obviously some disturbed moron. For all you know, he/she could be from America or the UK.

kalle- the 'tetris' line was hilarious

tss- boo! i'm american! would you like a big mac and a coke? hahah now kneel!

I thought we were keeping the commentary off the front page or at least in the headlines section.

I applaud the French for sticking by their guns. If you want people to act on principle, then there you have it. They haven't tried to weasel out of their position. They are standing firm on it.

Actually, if you subtsitute "German occupied France" for "Iraq", and would attribute the statement to the German government, it would remain as plausible.

I don't see that the US has tried to rule the world. The message has been 1) We'd like to do business with our friends, and 2) if you support terrorism, we'll kick your a$$. It seems the French are the ones hung up on this colonialism and ruling BS, just as they've been for a thousand years. We need to keep a closer eye on these people. THEY are dangerous.

Since Lafayette asked to be buried in American soil (which he had imported in a large box) should one assume that he had something _against_ France?

I was wondering the same thing, Patrick.

Gary Gunnels,

I applaud the French for sticking by their guns. If you want people to act on principle, then there you have it.

Sure, if you ignore the 1441 dance. Or if you ignore their treatments of their Jewish and Arab minorities. Or if you ignore their colonialist history and pretend like Iraq has anything to do with that.

I think the French were motivated by not wanting to lose the record for fastest surrender.

France is a morally corrupt nation with an inferiority complex. While no one nation can rule the world, "someone" must show leadership sometimes. France is clearly not that "someone". Besides, why should the US feel compelled to ask permission from a bunch of losers to defend itself? The only thing France is good at, is NOT taking responsibility for anything. We really need to rethink France's value to world affairs, particularly since there are other nations out there that are more relevant economically (Japan) and militarily (India).

Can the French get any more absurd? Is it possible for them to become any more irrelevant, more surreal, more petulant, more pompous, less sophisticated and less regarded?

Can they sink any lower than they have this last week?

The "idea" that one nation leads the world is utterly false. It's actually a FACT. Name one other nation who leads on anything not related to the destruction of Israel.

And BTW, tss, you're right, it's stupid people who think the US and it's citizens are better than everyone else in the world that causes hatred, envy and war. However, those people are not Americans, they're muslims, french, russians, chinese... etc.

America would love nothing more than to just be left the hell alone so we wouldn't have to spend our money and blood cleaning up the rotten apples of the world. America is no saint, but compared to the rest of the world, she's mother teresa.

The only last firm thing (or really any firm thing) I say in France was Brigot Bardott's breasts.

French girls surrender nice and quick...

You got to wash 'em first.

What is going to be the next French announcment, "white night and pass the kool aid"?

The only mistake made by the US was to come to the rescue of those damn ungrateful frogs in WWII.

WW2 I agreed with...

Vietnam... that's a FU France!! Both fists pumping, mouth moving, voice yelling...

Ungreatful SoS

"One country can not, and should not, rule the world. That is why we French are willing to share with Germany, our friend for so many centuries."

I guess in the American dictionary gratitude = toadying and servility, despite contravention of international law?
Not in my book.
The reasons the French have for their behaviour are from altruistic and their interests will eventually suffer from their actions. This is where the German stance is different; it is much more, though not exclusively, motivated by principle. They HAVE learned the lessons of history.
But the French and some of the others who oppose this war (not the Birkenstock, Bob Marley-hat-wearing die in freaks but the ones who think about it and have taken the occasional PoliSci class) have correctly identified this as a situation that goes far beyond Iraq. Will the Iraqi people be better off in the short term? Definitely. The French and the Germans would have supported and participated in a military action under a UN mandate. WIll the world be worse off without an arbiter for situations like this one, like the UN, with it replaced by one country that follows solely its own interests? Most certainly. This is what the Thinking Man's European is resisting: the unipolar re-shaping of the world order from co-operative to confrontational--not the overthrow by force of Saddam Hussein.

Gary - --The Spanish-American war set up American colonies in the Phillipines, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the quasi-colony of Cuba (SEE Platt Amendment). --

The Philippines and Cuba are sovereign, Guam and PR can leave any time they wish. All they have to do is vote.

And while we got the Philippines in the S-A War 1898, when did we and the Philippines start planning to give them their sovereignty? The 30s, early 40s? Known before 12/7/41?

And tss, while we would just love to be one of the bunch, the bunch won't let us. They like our money too much.

You fund the UN and all its humanitarian programs for a start.

"One country can not, and should not, rule the world. That is why we French are willing to share with Germany, our friend for so many centuries."

Riiiiight... France has been trying to weaken Germany with varying degrees of success for almost 400 years now by interfering with any attempt by German states to unify lest Germany overshadow France. If that's sharing, maybe we need a one nation hegemony.

Competition = cooperation.

Think about it for a bit.

Just because the US is the lone 'Hyperpower' today, the world will not always look that way. With no competition, and, realistically, no-one can say there is any, the US power will eventually wane and others will take it's place.

If the French achieve their goal of providing an immediate counterweight to US power, they are, in reality, prolonging that power by giving the US incentive to actively increase it's military and diplomatic clout.

Dual Citizen,

What are you smoking? France has sandbagged ALL ACTION against Saddam for the last 11 years and they only entered GWI with the greatest reluctance after obvious aggression by Saddam. Chirac sold him breeder reactor technology (giving Hussein nuclear weapons capability) that the Soviets refused Iraq back in 1976! France has been an enemy of the West for years in thought and in deed.

ScoPi

You argue that Chirac should not apologise for the desecration of the Brit and Commonwealth cemetary at Etaples ? Just because it was some nutter(s) that committed the desecration, that doesn't excuse the fact that this happened in France.

If any such desecration had happened to a French cemetary in Britain or America, there would have been an immediate apology from Blair or Bush.

Maybe that is a measure of Chirac and the French political class.

ScoPi and JohninLondon, Chirac did speak out against the graffiti and called for trying to find out who did it.

Kids, of course, as witbess "Rosbeefs": the French call English "Rosbifs" - yhe change to "beef" looks like a kid trying out first-year English lessons.

"The French and the Germans would have supported and participated in a military action under a UN mandate."

Hmm, France and Germany supported using our military in Kosov and Bosnia, which had no, and would have not gotten a UN mandate.

So they are blowing hot air about the UN, they have been perfectly happy to ignore the UN in the use of force when their interests are served.

i know this might sound a little non-american....but why shouldn't the US run the world? If not in actual governing, but at least in ideology.
If any country's leaders have not been elected by it's people for a set number of years, I am beging to think we should take down that government.

Gary Gunnels,
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/26/1048653750482.html
March 27 2003 - France, Russia, China and Germany have opened new opposition with the United States over Iraq at the United Nations, baulking at a resolution to authorise emergency shipments of food and medicine to beleaguered Iraqi civilians.

War on Terrorism - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.

The question for any country silly enough to count on the French should not be "Can we count on the French?", but rather "How long until France surrenders?"

John Anderson

Chirac did NOT make any personal statement. One of his spokesmen said something - but that is NOT good enough, in my book.

In equivalent circumstances, Bush or Blair would not have delegated that to an underling.

Ernest:

Gauloises...

Mike:

one word: Florida...

"rss": you mistranslated one critical word: it's LEAD, not RULE.

We all agree: NO country should RULE the world, including the "virtual country"--the UN. But one country does indeed LEAD the world: the USA.

LEAD, as in leadership. Dig down deep and you might remember what it means.