billybob2002 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Sorry for being an ass... http://www.billoreilly.com/current....2972012 Quote[/b] ]No Brie for Me  By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com Thursday, Jul 01, 2004  Enough with France. That country is not a friend to the USA, or to peace-seeking Iraqis and Afghans. French President Chirac continues to block efforts by the USA and Britain to bring stability to former dictatorships and make it more difficult for homicidal terrorists to operate. Take a look at Chirac's recent resume: Last week, he blocked a newly created NATO strike force from going to Afghanistan to provide extra security for elections. Chirac said: "(the strike force) should not be used for troop shortages on routine operations." Chirac continues to insist that any NATO training of Iraqi forces be done outside that country. Of course that would create a logistical nightmare not to mention enormous extra cost. In Istanbul last week, Chirac again refused to consider Turkey as an allied partner. You may remember in February, 2003, France vetoed any NATO defense of Turkey in case it was attacked by Saddam. according to the London Times, and not denied by Ambassador Richard Holbrooke on my television program, France lied to Colin Powell in the run-up to the Iraq war. Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin apparently told Powell that France would support military action against a defiant Saddam, and then reneged at the last minute. Many analysts believe that action gave Saddam hope that war would not come, and led to his disastrous decision to continue violating UN weapons inspection procedures. Instead of attending the funeral of Ronald Reagan as Tony Blair and others did, Chirac passed on the event even though he was in Georgia 24 hours before the commemoration in Washington, just an hour plane ride away. Even if one opposes the war in Iraq, a humane, clear thinking person would have to want peace and freedom in that country. But time and time again, Jacques Chirac has made it more difficult for that to happen. Of course, he is doing it to spite President Bush. But he's also doing it because his approval rating in France now stands at 35%, according to a recent poll. Chirac apparently believes he can rebuild his support at home by being anti-American. The consequence of that strategy is that American lives are being lost and things are made easier for the terror killers. Iraq and Afghanistan will never be free of totalitarianism unless there is security in those countries. But Jacques doesn't care about that. Jacques cares only about Jacques and I've had enough. So no more brie for me. No more Evian, Air France, Provence and no more escargot, which I don't like anyway. As a free American, I am using my economic choice to send the French government a message. I am boycotting French goods and services and hope you will do the same. As they say in Brooklyn, which is not similar to Paris, Chirac is a bum. The big dog and pony D-Day show last month in Normandy was a cynical exercise. Bush and Chirac despise each other and Jacques' hope that W loses in November is driving his agenda. Meantime, innocent civilians get their heads chopped off by terrorists and Jacques can't help out. As his role model Marie Antoinette once said: "Let them eat cake." There is a slight chance that the oil-for-food scandal will expose France as being a corrupt enabler of Saddam. Remember, the bank where all the bribe money was stashed is in Paris, and some FOJ's (friends of Jacques) made millions dealing with Saddam and his sons. I have little confidence the United Nations will get to the bottom of this but I am praying for a miracle. In the meantime, I have another Brooklynism for the despicable Jacques Chirac: You know what you can do with your Eiffel Tower, pal. really sorry.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted July 2, 2004 Oh so that is the reason for going to war. I guess, wait isn't there something going on in Sudan that could use 140,000 US troops. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billybob2002 0 Posted July 2, 2004 It looks like Jordan is taking bold steps... http://www.yahoo.com/_ylh=X3....tp Quote[/b] ]Jordan Willing to Send Troops to Iraq 18 minutes ago By JANE WARDELL, Associated Press Writer LONDON - Jordan's King Abdullah II said Thursday his country would be willing to send troops to Iraq (news - web sites), potentially becoming the first Arab state to do so. Quote[/b] ]In an interview Thursday with the British Broadcasting Corp. television "Newsnight" program, Abdullah said he wanted to support Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's interim government, which recently assumed control from the U.S.-led coalition. Quote[/b] ]Abdullah said he was encouraged by improvements in Iraq's security, but he acknowledged it was still the greatest problem facing the new administration. Jordan is dependent on Iraqi oil. "I feel optimistic we have strong, courageous leaders in Iraq ... but the challenges that face them on security is going to be their major problem, and they are going to need everybody's help," he said. Quote[/b] ]Despite the promise of assistance, Abdullah said he perceived Iraq as a "sideshow." "The main problem that feeds on all the instabilities that we see in the Middle East is the Israeli-Palestinian problem," he said. "Until you solve that, then we'll never have the type of stability that the Middle East hopes for." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
python3 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Jordan is just looking for more money from the US. Besides the Iraqi's already said that they dont want any soldiers from nations bordering Iraq because they have their own agendas. Not to mention Jordan is primarily Sunni muslim, and the Shi'ites of Iraq would prob think that they are trying to geain more power for another sunni dominated Iraq. Regardless over 90% of Jordanians dont want the army in Iraq, so if there are any casualties the islamists and radicals in that country could possibly start a rebellion etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hellfish6 7 Posted July 2, 2004 Jordan does have a vested interest in a stable Iraq, but they're also very cozy with America. I think it's been mentioned that Jordan, and not actually Israel or Kuwait, is our closest ally in the Middle East, even if they've never directly supported us militarily (though they did allow SF to be staged out of Jordan for OIF). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
python3 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]think it's been mentioned that Jordan, and not actually Israel or Kuwait, is our closest ally in the Middle East I dunno about that, with all the aid israel gets and its pro israel lobby in congress, i would put israel as numero uno. Besides in any future conflict the US would dump the arabs and just support israel as in '73. Besides, Jordan as you mentioned never sent forces to Iraq in the 1st perisan gulf war like a few other arab states did. Also, Jordan has a relatively small military, so i doubt it will be deploying anyone to Iraq. Also, im sure most arab nations want democracy to fail, to lessen US influence in the region and to keep themselves in power. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
python3 0 Posted July 2, 2004 come to think of it, i do think all of Iraq's neighbors have a vested interest in a stable iraq, because a recent report said 7-8 million small arms and a hundred thousand SAM's have fallen into the hands of insurgents and terrorists. If they can keep Iraq destabilized and force the coalition out, they can then target the "apostate" regimes in neighboring countries. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Akira 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Sorry for being an ass...http://www.billoreilly.com/current....2972012 No Brie for Me By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com Thursday, Jul 01, 2004 Enough with blah blah blah.... I can't believe you used a Bill O'Reilly article as a source and no one called you on it.... People are getting lazy around here.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billybob2002 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]I can't believe you used a Bill O'Reilly article as a source and no one called you on it....People are getting lazy around here.... because the words that are bold is important.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralphwiggum 6 Posted July 2, 2004 so when a person says something he/she must be true to it for all eternity? WHERE IS WMD? I just got back from a nice 5 day vacation and have no idea why i decided to come back to this thread, only to increase my blood level up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theavonlady 2 Posted July 2, 2004 I just got back from a nice 5 day vacation and have no idea why i decided to come back to this thread, only to increase my blood level up. Â Â Maybe you're a gamma globulin junkie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
denoir 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]I can't believe you used a Bill O'Reilly article as a source and no one called you on it....People are getting lazy around here.... because the words that are bold is important.... LOL, what utter crap. As for you text in bold, could you explain what "last minute" means? France declared in October 2002 that it would not support a war without letting the UNMOVIC inspectors to their job. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billybob2002 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]LOL, what utter crap.As for you text in bold, could you explain what "last minute" means? France declared in October 2002 that it would not support a war without letting the UNMOVIC inspectors to their job. can you read....jk Quote[/b] ]according to the London Times, and not denied by Ambassador Richard Holbrooke on my television program, France lied to Colin Powell in the run-up to the Iraq war. Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin apparently told Powell that France would support military action against a defiant Saddam, and then reneged at the last minute. Rich did not deny that Villepin told Powell that France would support military action against a defiant Saddam ............ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
denoir 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Oooh.. he did not deny, wow. I do not deny that I'm Elvis Presley.. does that make me Elvis? This must be the silliest accusation ever. There's a perfect public record of France not supporting a military action without the support of the UN. And there is a perfect public record of France not supporting a UN war resolution without the inspectors finishing the job and without any WMD being found. I mean, this is just silly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billybob2002 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]This must be the silliest accusation ever. There's a perfect public record of France not supporting a military action without the support of the UN. And there is a perfect public record of France not supporting a UN war resolution without the inspectors finishing the job and without any WMD being found. notice the word....defiant Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
denoir 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Saddam wasn't defiant - he was cooperating with the inspectors.. according to the inspectors. So, what's your point? That France backed out from a hypothetical scenario that never materialized? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billybob2002 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]Saddam wasn't defiant - he was cooperating with the inspectors.. according to the inspectors. So, what's your point? That France backed out from a hypothetical scenario that never materialized? I was bored....wanted to start something..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joltan 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Thanks for wasting our time... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Longinius 1 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]I was bored....wanted to start something..... Or, you actually believed it, Denoir proved you wrong and you took the easy way out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theavonlady 2 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]I was bored....wanted to start something..... Or, you actually believed it, Denoir proved you wrong and you took the easy way out. I don't see how anyone proved anything. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Longinius 1 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]I don't see how anyone proved anything. No, but it seems as if felt that way. Otherwise, why give up if you think you are right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billybob2002 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]No, but it seems as if felt that way. Otherwise, why give up if you think you are right? If you notice the original post, I was not proving anything but pointing something out.....Denior called it BS and he stated why..bah...it is late....Richard (UN amb) did not deny that France told Powell that they would help if Saddam was acting like a ass (which is all the time).... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billybob2002 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]Germans, French Object to Saddam Execution Thu Jul 1, 2:16 PM ET  By PAMELA SAMPSON, Associated Press Writer PARIS - Baghdad's decision to re-establish the death penalty ahead of the war crimes trial of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) evoked a mixed reaction in Europe, recalling the split across the continent over the war that toppled the Iraqi leader. Germany and France, two of the most vocal anti-war opponents, strongly stated their opposition — without exception — to the death penalty and called on Iraqi authorities to ensure Saddam a fair trial. In Berlin, the government's top human rights official, Claudia Roth, criticized Baghdad's move to reinstate capital punishment, which was suspended during the U.S. occupation. "To start out this way does not send a good signal," Roth told The Associated Press. "I think it would have been a signal of democratic strength had they not reinstated the death penalty in Iraq (news - web sites)." France called on Iraqi justice officials to hold a trial that conforms to principles of international law, and the government reiterated its opposition to the execution of convicts. The 25-member European Union (news - web sites) intends to let Iraq know of its opposition to the death penalty, said Emma Udwin, external relations spokeswoman for the European Commission (news - web sites). But while capital punishment is outlawed across the continent, attitudes hardened farther east among the newer EU members, where support for the war was strong. Latvian Foreign Ministry spokesman Rets Plesums said that whatever happens to Saddam after his trial is a matter of concern for Iraq — not the Baltic state. "We are hoping that the new Iraqi courts will conduct the trial as fairly as possible, but I don't think our government will offer an opinion about what happens to Saddam Hussein," he said. "It's not our business." Latvia, a recent newcomer also to NATO (news - web sites), ardently backed the U.S.-led invasion and contributed more than 100 soldiers to the coalition after fighting ended last year. Poland, another supporter of the war, offered a similar view. Poland just decided to extend its troop deployment of 2,400 soldiers in Iraq until Dec. 31. "Our reaction is obvious. This is a sovereign decision of an independent court and of the Iraqis themselves," said Boguslaw Majewski, spokesman for Poland's Foreign Ministry. Roman Kuzniar, a political scientist at the Warsaw University, said the list of crimes committed by Saddam Hussein "would justify the death penalty." Poland had capital punishment before ousting the Communist government in 1989, then eliminated it in order to join the EU. Turkey, a Muslim nation with aspirations to join the EU one day, formally ended executions as part of its bid for membership. But many Turks still feel capital punishment is justified in some cases. "The conscience of the people will not be satisfied if he doesn't face the death penalty," said Burhan Kuzu, a top lawmaker from Turkey's governing Justice and Development Party. "If they give the death penalty to him, this decision will not disturb me." Did not a certain person tell Bush not to meddle in EU....Chirac you are weird man....I wonder if Saddam has secrets about Chirac...people talk.... edit: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tm....nalty_1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quicksand 0 Posted July 2, 2004 Quote[/b] ]Did not a certain person tell Bush not to meddle in EU....Chirac you are weird man....I wonder if Saddam has secrets about Chirac...people talk.... That Chirac bastard!He wants Saddam to live so he won`t be able to tell all the devious secrets..Oh,uhm wait.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Badgerboy 0 Posted July 2, 2004 I think you will find that opinion all over Europe. The recent ban on a death penalty in Iraq had alot to do with British pressure. The British Government doesn't support executions, just as the French and Germans don't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
