FactsOfIsrael.com News, Comments and Links

<- Back to Main page

November 30, 2002
 Send to Printer    Link to this page
France hesitates in backing up the free World in its war against Islamic terrorism

The National Post (www.nationalpost.com) has a good article that clearly shows it's time for France to choose sides:

Through much of the Cold War, the Soviet Union enjoyed some sympathy and support among French elites simply because it was not America. Many French intellectuals loved Stalin because he was not FDR. They supported Kim Il-sung in the Korean War because he was fighting the Americans. In Vietnam, they sided with the Vietcong because America was on the other side. They adored the Khmer Rouge for the same reason.

Today they have adopted Saddam Hussein as a cult figure in their latest quixotic attempt at stopping " the American giant." President Jacques Chirac has found himself a new popularity among Parisian elites by letting it be known that he would do all he can to prevent Washington from toppling Saddam Hussein. In a recent television program in Paris, I was astounded when retired Admiral Philippe Lacoste, a former head of the French secret service, suggested that Saddam Hussein should not be asked to disarm for as long as the United States did not sign a treaty banning anti-personnel land mines.

Anti-Americanism is not only a disease of the French left. Neo-fascist leader Jean-Marie Le Pen finds himself alongside the Trotskyite Arlette Laguiller in pulling faces at "the Yankee Imperialists." Anti-Americanism has become the last refuge of the scoundrel on all fronts.

I am also a French citizen and I'm very often discouraged by the hypocrisy shown by the French politicians. With 25% voting for the fascist extreme right (LePen), 25% voting for the fascist left (Communist), and another 15% of Muslim fanatics, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that France is completely screwed up. Like Golda Meir once said: "With friends like the French, who needs enemies?".

Thanks to Little Green Footballs for the link. I copy the full article below.

France must choose sides
Amir Taheri, National Post, Saturday, November 30, 2002
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/
story.html?id=911FD342-09BE
-41F0-9161-069376F0E1B5

PARIS - One evening in February 1778, Benjamin Franklin, the newly appointed envoy of the United States to France, was hosting a banquet at his Parisian residence. The guests were 18 Europeans and 18 Americans. Just before dessert, Franklin asked the guests to leave the table and stand against a wall. He wanted to measure them to see who was taller.

The shortest of the Americans proved to be taller than the tallest of the Europeans. Franklin had organized the exercise for the benefit of his guest of honour, the Abbe Reynal, who had just published a hefty tome arguing that, when transferred to America, all living creatures, including men, became diminutive. Thomas Jefferson, who succeeded Franklin at the Paris embassy, narrates the episode as an illustration of "the irrational in the European approach" to things American.

More than two centuries later, that irrational approach is still present. Only this time, its proponents, reversing Reynal's theory, are concerned about the "bigness" of things American. This is combined with the fear that, in Baudelaire's words, "The American night shall fall over the earth."

To underline America's " frightening bigness," Hubert Vedrine, France's former foreign minister, has coined the term hyperpuissance. The peasant firebrand Jose Bove laments the fact that the United States is "too bulky." France's three former prime ministers, Michel Rocard, Laurent Fabius and Pierre Mauroy, recently published a front-page article in Le Monde to urge the EU to stand up to "the American giant."

For some, anti-Americanism plays a useful role in filling the vacuum left by the evaporation of 19th century ideologies. Those too lazy to do their homework on any issue could still espouse an opinion simply by looking at what the United States says and then saying the opposite. How many of the people bashing the United States over Kyoto and the International Criminal Court have studied either? The arrangement is simple: Where America is, there I shall not be.

Through much of the Cold War, the Soviet Union enjoyed some sympathy and support among French elites simply because it was not America. Many French intellectuals loved Stalin because he was not FDR. They supported Kim Il-sung in the Korean War because he was fighting the Americans. In Vietnam, they sided with the Vietcong because America was on the other side. They adored the Khmer Rouge for the same reason.

Today they have adopted Saddam Hussein as a cult figure in their latest quixotic attempt at stopping " the American giant." President Jacques Chirac has found himself a new popularity among Parisian elites by letting it be known that he would do all he can to prevent Washington from toppling Saddam Hussein. In a recent television program in Paris, I was astounded when retired Admiral Philippe Lacoste, a former head of the French secret service, suggested that Saddam Hussein should not be asked to disarm for as long as the United States did not sign a treaty banning anti-personnel land mines.

Anti-Americanism is not only a disease of the French left. Neo-fascist leader Jean-Marie Le Pen finds himself alongside the Trotskyite Arlette Laguiller in pulling faces at "the Yankee Imperialists." Anti-Americanism has become the last refuge of the scoundrel on all fronts.

This bias blurs France's vision of the real world and undermines French national interests. It prevented France from playing its full role in the last Gulf War until the late stages. By then, France had been excluded from the real decision-making. The French ended up taking part in the fighting but secured no say in shaping the post-bellum shape of the region.

More recently, France had an even worse experience over the war to liberate Afghanistan. Having played the game of "yes-but" for too long, Paris ended up sending a few dozen troops after the Taliban had fled into their caves. The French troops had to stay in Uzbekistan, presumably playing cards for weeks before the Americans allowed them to enter Afghanistan. As a result, France's influence in shaping the future of Afghanistan, and beyond it Central Asia as a whole, is zero.

Politics, as Aristotle taught over 2000 years ago, is about making a choice, which means taking sides. The subject of ethics is the choice between right and wrong. That of aesthetics is about beauty and ugliness. In politics the choice is between friend and foe. Of course, there would be room for doubt if the United States were to invade Canada, or even Mexico, in pursuit of imperial designs. But a normal person living in an open democratic society should have little difficulty in choosing between the United States on the one hand and Stalin, Kim Il-sung, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Khomeini and Saddam Hussein on the other.

The same normal person would understand that some regimes must be defeated by force when no other option is available. Hitler had to be removed by force. Had the Vietnamese army not invaded Cambodia, the Pol Pot gang might still be in power. The Tanzanian army did the world a service by invading Uganda and driving Idi Amin into exile. And Slobodan Milosevic would not be in the dock had it not been for the American-led campaign to drive him out of Kosovo.

Last week, during the Nato summit in Prague, President George W. Bush called on all allies to provide support in case war becomes inevitable. France responded with a "we don't know, we shall see" gimmick, hoping to play it both ways for as long as possible. But, as the moment of decision approaches over Iraq, France has to take sides. Neutrality is no option. France is not Liechtenstein.

Amir Taheri is the author of The Cauldron: The Middle East Behind The Headlines

Posted by David Melle at November 30, 2002 02:40 PM
Comments

What makes me sick is the way you close your eyes and completely ignore the facts. I have no hate towards Palestinians that wish to live in peace and not murder Israeli babies.

The hate comes from the Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. These Palestinian terrorists wish to destroy the State of Israel and kill all of its citizens.

They are too stupid and stuck in the 14th century to have any real means of doing it, but they try their best by murdering women and children while blowing themselves up.

That's what they are all about: genocide.

As long as the Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Arafat's Al-Aksa brigades continue their genocide, Israel will react, whether you like it or not. That's what Zionism is all about: a political movement that allows a majority of Jews to have a country of their own and defend themselves against Jew haters and murderers.

Close your eyes and ignore this Palestinian hate, but it still exists. More and more Israelis now realise it - even people that were on the left and used to vote Meretz and Labor (like me).

Oh, by the way, Palestine as a country never did exist. Check out the histoy page at www.FactsOfIsrael.com/history2.html for details. If you can't even accept this, you are dumber than a French communist.

Stop closing your eyes and changing reality! This hate will get you nowhere!

Stop the hate! Stop the DELIBERATE murder of women and children! Accept peace.

Posted by: David Melle on December 1, 2002 09:42 AM

- British Leftist Coward Post removed -

Posted by: British Leftist Coward on December 6, 2002 12:54 PM

A coward (he doesn't leave a real email address) has been posting comments on this entry with links to a site that supports the deliberate murder of women and children.

I was able to trace back the IP address to an ISP in England, but since the coward does not leave a real email address there's no way for me to contact him/her.

So coward: stop publishing your hate, your comments will be deleted. If you continue I will not hesitate to contact your ISP.

Posted by: David Melle on December 6, 2002 02:59 PM

Wow, what a refreshing, concise and honest article. It's plain to see the only reason that Sadam is complying with U.N. inspections is because of the formidable amassment of U.S. forces. It's astonishing that people don't seem to connect this fact or realize that once troops are withdrawn, no doubt Sadam will also once again kick out U.N. inspectors. I'm upset with the U.N., they have gladly allowed the U.S. to become their scapegoat [as is evidenced by world opinion]. Oddly enough, just as OBL has seemingly become Islam's scapegoat. Hey, I'm for peace too, but on 9-11-01 America received an invitation to war that she could hardly ignor.

Posted by: RAIN on February 27, 2003 08:34 PM
Post a comment 
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?



Email this entry
Email this entry to (please enter email address):


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Referrers to this Page

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains some copyrighted materials the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.




(According to digits.com)