![]() |
|
April 09, 2003
French Press Attacks US
Le Monde.fr : The Press and the War The attack against The Palestine Hotel testifies to the tactics used by the American army in Baghdad: a flood of fire against even the smallest threat or what is perceived as such: air bombing and shootings of tanks, gun and heavy machine gunning all around downtown. The civilian victims undoubtedly amount into the hundreds. It is this US military culture which is here in question: the massive force against the smallest of dangers, so much the worse for the civilians. Comments
Waaahhhhhhh! Posted by: steve at April 9, 2003 09:55 AMWhat world is Le Monde living on????? Posted by: Knitting a Conundrum at April 9, 2003 09:56 AMThey are trying to suck up to the English? Posted by: Knitting a Conundrum at April 9, 2003 09:57 AMAnd what civilians did LM think we hanging out aroound the hotel?? Oh, the ones dressed in civvies and carrying AKs and RPGs...those civilians Posted by: aham at April 9, 2003 09:58 AMThe war is over quickly. I wonder how long it would have taken them to do it and how many civilian casualties we would have seen? You could certainly multiply the number not just add to it. Posted by: alan powell at April 9, 2003 09:58 AMNo doubt we should've followed the French model and surrendered at the sounds of the first shots. Orion Posted by: Orion at April 9, 2003 09:59 AMalan- You've got that right! And not just from Coalition munitions, either. The Saddamites would have been lashing out in all directions as the noose tightened on them, no question. With the enemy wearing civilian clothes can you tell the difference between an spotter for mortar fire from someone looking through binoculars for something to report about? Try making out the difference between someone, in civilian clothes, with a shoulder camera and a RPG at 100 yards, with a split second to decide whether its your life or someone else's. The media was warned repeatedly to get out of Baghdad. They choose to stay literally on the fire line in a combat environment in a besieged city. They take their own chances. Tough. Maybe next time around they'll raise a moumental stink when one side decides to hid behind civilian clothing. Do they now understand the need to comply with the Geneva requirements for means to differ civilians from combatants? Posted by: Don at April 9, 2003 10:01 AMWell, if they were there perhaps they would have had input into our Rules of Engagement. Posted by: Phil Hornsey at April 9, 2003 10:01 AMThe biggest losers in this war are Saddam Hussein and Jaques Chirac. Talk about sour grapes. What a bunch of losers. We've got 23 million new friends who will beat your whinning ass with a shoe, Jacques. Have some dignity, and admit you were WRONG Posted by: phred at April 9, 2003 10:02 AMIt is about time the stupid French realise that there is a bond of centuries between Britain and the US. Right now, and for the past several months, the US and Britain - and the Auusies - have been marching to the same drum. Nothing Le Monde can say can cover up France's idiocy, and they have a snowball's chance in hell of driving a wedge between Bush and Blair. By contrast, there is an ocean of ill-will between Blair and Chirac, between Britain and the French. Don't mistake Blair's politeness for friendliness towards Chirac. Chirac now has the blood of British servicemen on his hands. Revenge is a dish best tasted cold. Posted by: JohninLondon at April 9, 2003 10:02 AMThe french prefer the slow, 'out of the news' killing of civilians like in the ivory coast Posted by: James at April 9, 2003 10:03 AMPish Posh, I say. That hotel story is ALREADY below the fold. Posted by: Der Blaue Engel at April 9, 2003 10:03 AMSure, I'll take tactical advice from the French. Can anyone say Dien Bien Phu? Well, maybe if the French were there they could show us how its done. But siince they decided to stay home they should STFU. Posted by: Mike Plaiss at April 9, 2003 10:05 AMIt seems like the French are determined to be pissants to the bitter end. Not that it matters much. But to hear them actually complimenting the British... maybe Blair really can be a bridge between the US and "old Europe". What are the Russians up to? Did they swipe secret files from Baghdad that we want? Are they harboring Saddam himself (as some rumors have it)? As things enter a new phase in Iraq, it seems like everyone is hedging their bets. Posted by: sgage at April 9, 2003 10:05 AMWhat's that? I think I hear the sound of Iraqi IOU's and contracts being shredded. Goodbye, 20% of france's GNP ... Posted by: TigerDriver at April 9, 2003 10:07 AMPS: The Brits have been making the point that we consider "Civil Affairs" a specialty, and that we are too risk averse once we get an area. The Brits play football with the locals and take off their body armor. They know it is a risk, but believe the benefit to public moral is worth the risk. As the people feel comfortable, they give up the bad guys and the whole thing works better. We are risk averse. Force protection is a virtual mania. We probably do take it a little too far. The Brits get to point this out. They are being helpful, their critics is constructive. They are brave friends, who have contributed a third of the combat troops. They've earned our consideration. The French haven't, and they detest the Brits as much as they hate us. They are the worst kind of gutless scum. Posted by: Phil Hornsey at April 9, 2003 10:07 AMHow long of a tank ride is it from Baghdad to Paris? Posted by: WaxFree at April 9, 2003 10:08 AMThe French economy is going to go to Hell in a handbasket. The Oil contracts are bad enough, but who wants to buy wine made from sour grapes? Posted by: phred at April 9, 2003 10:09 AMPhil I still don't think many Americans realise how deep is the emnity now in Britain towards Chirac and the perfidious French. Posted by: JohninLondon at April 9, 2003 10:10 AMMakes me want a nice hot super-size freedom fry and Coke(TM). Posted by: bullseye at April 9, 2003 10:11 AMTo the French commie/cowards....kiss my yankee ass you f****n' losers! Posted by: Gawdamman at April 9, 2003 10:12 AMThis bit of "analysis" is just another bullshit French anti-American stereotype. I don't want to give it credence but assume for one second that there is a kernel of truth to it. Might one also believe that the show of overwhelming force made the victory more rapid and more complete? If the fighting is over quickly, more lives are spared in the end. A drawn out seige of Baghdad or a Mogadishu-type street fight, which everyone was forecasting and dreading, never materialized as the Saddam's fighters were pummeled and pursued relentlessly. The result has been that Baghdad has been liberated in 3 days. Hundreds or thousands more possible casualties were spared and millions avoided the suffering of a drawn-out battle. The British did a great job in Basra, working gingerly and doing it patiently and doing it right. But they had the luxury of having a week or two and a more stable and isolated situation. Bottom line: Shut up you stupid French twit! You missed a good chance to remain silent! Posted by: Tokyo Taro at April 9, 2003 10:17 AM"To preserve the future." There's a telling phrase. Too bad the French have no future. What idiots: they expect us to fight "fair?" Posted by: Jeff Perkins at April 9, 2003 10:19 AMIs Le Monde still waiting for "Shock and Awe"? Posted by: Ankchank at April 9, 2003 10:22 AMLe Monde forgot to mention the third kind of army, of which three possibilities come to mind: 1) The absent one (the French) Our tactics are enough to make the French want to hit us with their purse. What a nation of useless eunuchs! Posted by: beachbum at April 9, 2003 10:32 AMYou have to give the French a break.Remember they surrendered to the Germans so that their beloved Paris would not be destroyed.They think that the answer to any conflict is to Surrender, drink wine ,eat snails and truffels,live under a brutal enemy's authority until the Americans come fight your war and lose their lifes to save their worthless butts.Then complain because no one thinks they are still a world power!Sacre bleu! Posted by: Randy at April 9, 2003 10:57 AMMemo: Le Monde Yawwwwwwwwwnnn Posted by: hudson at April 9, 2003 11:04 AMThat's right France! This is not a game! The civilians were warned numerous times about the seriousness of War consequences! They should take better cover someplace else. We are doing this for them. Maybe France should have made better plans for their own future, because as far as I'm concerned their future with Uncle Sam is or should be on thin ice! Posted by: stupik(putski) at April 9, 2003 11:05 AMHey you guy's,easy on the French, Chirac may become a hero after we get Saddam,s DNA out of his backside! Posted by: mark at April 9, 2003 11:10 AMThe Vichy have always advocated expending more American lives to accomplish their aims. Posted by: Tim at April 9, 2003 11:17 AMIf it were up to the French, everyone would be forced to DUEL! Posted by: Wilson at April 9, 2003 11:39 AM"How long of a tank ride is it from Baghdad to Paris?" Above ground - 3 days By tunnel - 3 hours Posted by: BWCASteve at April 9, 2003 12:04 PMLooks like the French STILL have no idea how to successfully fight a war. I'm reminded of some of Larry Niven's basic rules: 1. Don't throw shit at an armed man. I'm very sorry for the reporters and civilian who have lost their lives under these circumstances. At the same time, we should not provide those thugs who use civilians as cover any special advantage. If the advantage goes away, hopefully they will stop the behavior. I know it's harsh, but I don't see any other way to discourage this despicable behavior. I'm very proud of our troops and very very happy for the Iraqi people. Now it's time to roll up our sleeves and do the second half of this mission. I think it will be very difficult, but I am also very optimistic. Posted by: cjb at April 9, 2003 01:38 PMLatest reports are that it may have been done by the Iraqis. http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,932481,00.html Posted by: M. Simon at April 9, 2003 01:57 PMPost a comment
|