The French are really an idiot.
-
Iraq built the Osirak nuclear facility near Baghdad with French assistance. When intelligence confirmed Iraq's intention of producing weapons there, the Israeli government decided to attack. However, the raid would have to occur before the reactor went “hot” so as not to endanger the surrounding community.
Every detail of the mission was planned meticulously. The target was distant: 1,100 km from Israel. Preparations included building target mockups and flying full scale dressÂrehearsal missions. The aircrews were selected from the cream of the Israel Air Force's (IAF) fighter corps.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ChiefÂofÂStaff, Lt. Gen. Rafael (Raful) Eitan, briefed the pilots personally. Displaying unusual emotion, he told them: “The alternative is our destruction.”
At 15:55 on June 7, the first FÂ15 and FÂ16's roared off the runway from Etzion Air Force Base in the south. After a tense but uneventful lowÂlevel navigation route, the fighters reached their target. They popped up at 17:35 and quickly identified the dome gleaming in the late afternoon sunlight.
Enemy defenses were caught by surprise and opened fire too late. In one minute and twenty seconds, the reactor lay in ruins.
The way home was quiet, bringing the mission to its successful completion. It was a perfectly orchestrated opera conducted by the IAF Commander, Maj. Gen. David Ivry. At least for the present, the atomic genie of Baghdad was put back into his bottle.
From: http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/Osirak.html -
Raise your hand if you like the French.
Raise both if you are French.
heh heh heh
-
The French has been known to take on an independent foreign policy to assert their own skewered principles in being totally different from all others, without considering the implications of their actions on the larger events that are developing.
Their present actions to take a separate alternate route from the US and UK initiative to disarm Iraq of its WMD, is completely idiotic.
The French has completely ignored the fact that at least FOUR United Nations Security Councils resolutions have been passed that demand Iraq to disarm, and that this four resolutions have occured over more then TWELVE Years.
Yet, the French is demanding to give the UN Inspectors more time to locate those WMD.
The French Government are behaving like spastic virgins in the world of politics, and playing into the hands of Saddam Hussein - in his masterful game of playing political brinkmanship, at the expense of the Iraqis who continue to suffer UN sanctions as a result of Saddam's action.
The world community should let the US and UK plough into Iraq with their armed forces - as they have done in Afghanistan - then let these large force of 250,000 PLUS soldiers do the job that the 100 PLUS Inspectors are now having problems trying to locate those WMD that Saddam has hidden.
The current situation is not unlike the time before the US invasion of Afghanistan, the Islamic world was sceptical that Osama Bin Laden was the cause of the WTC 9-11 dIsaster. However, the vast amount of evidence that was found strewn in the hastily abandoned safe houses of the Talebans and the Al-Qaeda personnels, became a treasure trove of evidence taken from these "thieves and murderers".
Do we wait for the "thieves and murderers" to make a self-confession, or do we smash into their homes and seize those evidence before they have any time to destroy the very evidence that we are seeking ? -
3rd choice... Open your mouth if you love to French.
-
Editorial: The end of diplomacy
The Jerusalem Post
March 14, 2003
The diplomatic endgame is turning into a farce, and farce is the opposite of what is necessary to defend the free world.
In a last-minute attempt to take seriously the French claim that they are serious about Iraqi disarmament, British Prime Minister Tony Blair put together a six-part ultimatum. The French reaction: "We cannot accept the British proposals as they are based on a logic of war, on a logic of an automatic recourse to force," said Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin on French television. Iraq immediately followed suit by rejecting the British proposal as well.
This French-Iraqi two-step brilliantly illustrates the double futility of any more last chances for Saddam. First, the premise that the French voted for Security Council Resolution 1441, and therefore care about what is says, has no basis. This is the "logic of war" and the French are simply not interested in it.
Second, there is no end in sight to the combination of French dithering and Saddam's ability to play into it. Saddam can indefinitely destroy a few missiles or otherwise throw bones to UN inspectors, who can be counted upon to declare that progress has been made and therefore inspections should continue.
Now France has said that it is open to negotiating some formula that will produce a consensus in the Security Council. Sounds nice, but the US should not fall for this either. If Blair's ultimatum was not good enough for the French, it is clear that their game is to buy time for opposition to the war to grow.
France's objective is not to disarm Iraq, which it does not believe is an immediate threat, but to beat the US. In this context, US President George W. Bush's wavering from his pledge to push for a Security Council vote Secretary of State Colin Powell now says this may or may not happen is a form of blinking in this test of wills between Paris and Washington.
That said, at this point, going to war without a vote would probably be a better option that forcing a vote and losing. The cards that Bush said should be put on the table are not just those of wavering Security Council members, but of the international system itself.
Regardless of whether there is a vote and how it turns out, the United Nations has revealed itself to be worse than the League of Nations it replaced. The league, after all, was a dead letter after it failed to stop Italy's invasion of Abyssinia in 1936. The UN is not just failing to stop an aggressor, but is actively thwarting the US insistence on doing so.
Every moment that the US continues to indulge the UN and grovel for the vote of such bastions of international legitimacy as Guinea and Cameroon serves only to further legitimize a corrupt system and give Saddam more time to plan ways to kill American troops.
At stake now is whether the Security Council is discredited for obstructing the United States, or the US is diplomatically bloodied for flouting the Security Council. The US can hardly afford to lose its diplomatic battle with France more than it can its military battle with Saddam Hussein.
Luckily, speaking of cards, the French seem to have overplayed their hand. For the indefinite future, it is hard to imagine the United States going to the Security Council again for its blessing. In the aftermath of this debacle, the US should simply rely upon "coalitions of the willing," leaving the UN isolated and not the United States.
But all this comes after the war. This war has become a test not only over whether the US will effectively defend itself and the world, but whether it will let divisions among democracies prevent it from doing so. The only way to pass this test is to put an end to the delays and last chances. The time of decision is now. -
Seriously, Chirac refers to Saddam as a "close friend".
The French petrol company, Elf, is said to have massive investments there.
Who knows what other kinds of things are going on with the French.
Seems that Germany has also invested heavily in Iraq.
Maybe it's not these 2 countries marching to a different drummer, but just plain vested interests? -
-
yea but the same can be said for the USA...who has no companies in the world's 2nd largest oil reserves and that is with half the country NOT yet explored!!!And they cannot get in on it either as the market there is mostly taken by Russian and French companies.Infact i think some US companies are already lined up to tender for oil with the new pro-USA goverment.Originally posted by the Bear:Seriously, Chirac refers to Saddam as a "close friend".
The French petrol company, Elf, is said to have massive investments there.
Who knows what other kinds of things are going on with the French.
Seems that Germany has also invested heavily in Iraq.
Maybe it's not these 2 countries marching to a different drummer, but just plain vested interests? -
hmmm. .. India and Japan are applying membership into UNSC, Singapore also once proposed having at least one member of ASEAN always on UNSCOriginally posted by airconlin:It's time to drive the loser like French out of
UN security council, let India replace French position
in the UN,
the French language, which is less than 100 millions
users, should not be a UN official language!
Thought about it and I also couldn't figure out why France should be in the UNSC in the first place. . . somehow, they don't seem very much like a world power. . ., but then again, neither does Britain, although Britain once was and still has alot of influence on world affairs, but Spain and Netherlands were also former world powers, and if you think about it, so was italy, when it was Rome. . .
. . .
I'm not even sure how the heads of govts decided which countries should be in the SC and which should not.
If i'm not wrong, i think the General Assembly can overrule the UNSC under some circumstances. . . I'm not very sure, someone care to check it out?
my two cents -
this would go the way of the league of nations my friend.......germany pulled out of it and look what happened? if the USA pulled out and started doing what it wanted...then it would go the way of german in pre ww2!Originally posted by airconlin:Another solution is US and Britain just simply pull out of UN,
without UN, how can those idiots like French to have influence
over world affairs? They have no enough money, no enough
army, all they have are selfish mind and mouths to fight each other
.
and the Security council was formed in the 50's i think or 1949 not to sure.German did not have a seat as it did not have an army till 1955.The permement seats of the council was given to the main allies during ww2.USA,Russia,France,Britan and China.This was because during the time of the San Francsico conference it was 1944 and germany was 12days away from surrendering.Now adding Japan and India.....well this would be fool hardy India well Pakistan will make alot of noise but well maybe.Japan on the other hand would be plain stupid.Why?because the Japanese army like the German army cannot be used in offensive operations!!!As written in the consitutions of boths countries.And if the USA were to place only countries friendly to it in the council well then what is the use of the council when the USA can already just attack who every it wants!!! -
oh and on the reason why India and if i may say so many other countries was not included in the UNSC is because most of them was not at the formation of the UNSC an independent country!!
Oh and about French and British military power? IMHO the French army is better funded and equip then the british army...i mean look the british forces in Kuwait are practically living off the American supplies!
Note:i mentioned the UNSC was formed in 1949 or the 50s' well i did some reading and i was wrong....sorry about that
-
The french are not...how shall i put it...a collection of idiots. The french govt has an agenda. So do the US. Clearly both agendas have opposite goals.
In order to convince the UN and win their backing for an invasion of iraq, the US shd have presented the UN with overwhelming evidence of the threat iraq poses...overwhelming evidence it is obvious they do not have.
The british, strongest allies of the bush administration, simply play along without offering evidence of their own...evidence their vaunted MI5 agency has failed to collect.
In a world where calm and reason with bucketloads of logic prevail, this unilateral action by the "nations of willing" is the first step in anarchy.
True, no other nation suffered more than the US had over the 9/11 attacks.
But that is no excuse to commence a crusade against an invisible enemy that may or not be in collaboration with the iraqi regime. Proof...and irrefutable proof should be the underlying reasons for an all-out invasion.
And that part is still sorely lacking... -
Certainly it will be unforgivable to collectively label a whole nation to be idiots, when only its Political Leaders are responsible for the idiotic behaviors – although some maybe tempted to make extensions in such judgement.
The US has an agenda of self-preservation to prevent Saddam’s WMD from falling into the hands of the likes of Osama Bin Laden – as both characters are not exactly great admirers of the US Government nor its way of life.
The French agenda is one to project themselves as an alternate force to counter the political dominance of the USA on the world stage.
The French has never gotten along with the US, despite the fact that it was with US industrial might and military strength that brought France out from Germany Occupation in WW2.
French pride was well displayed when they refused to accept US dominance and leadership in NATO, and decided to pull out from the Alliance for the defense of Europe.
The independent approach of the French can be seen in their build up of their own Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Delivery Platforms – with their own Nuclear Powered Submarines and Aircraft Carriers, and Planes are clear indication of their agenda to form an alternative to the US.
Even in the economic and industrial fields, the French has even gone to the extent of providing heavy State Funding to develop and market the Airbus Commercial Planes, in direct competition and independence from the dominance of BOEING from USA.
This obsession of the French to be different from the US has seldom allowed both sides to find any common ground.
The current French threat to veto ANY resolutions that allow FORCE to be used against Iraq for non-compliance, only serves to allow Iraq to prolonged the search for WMD, as Saddam will have the comfort of advanced assurance that no force will ever be used for non-compliance.
This is sheer idiocy on the part of the French Politicians, who do not seem to have any kind of game plan to handle SaddamÂ’s WMD problem, only to call for extended time, on a useless search for the hidden WMD products that have dubious accounting records kept by the henchmen of Saddam Hussein.
. -
I think someone in another board has analysed it like this when the French decided to ride on the Allies when the US delivered their ultimatum:
-------------------
I will say this only once more.
This war is probably mostly the fault of the French. Never mind their role in rearming Saddam after the 1991 war, certain other factors are painfully obvious.
From watching the numerous delays which the administration has suffered in diplomatic wrangling that Bush had to have known would be useless, it became clear that he very much wants to get rid of Saddam without recourse to war. The idea was most likely to engage the UN in the application of sufficient pressure to force him out of power.
In order to accomplish this, two things are necessary: a credible threat and an international consensus. The threat of war must be very real indeed. The threat, we have produced. However, French obstinacy prevented the necessary consensus from being reached. So long as we appeared divided, Saddam was encouraged to cling to power until it was too late to pull back from the brink.
Thanks for nothing, France. Now we are stuck fighting a war that may well have been unnecessary but for you, and it is entirely on your heads. You are no friends of the US, nor of peace. As usual, we are taking the risks and paying the cost. Maybe you should change your national motto to, "Don't pay to walk when you can ride for free."
--------------------------------
I think the writer was spot on. -
save israel... the hell with palestine... we were successful in afghanistan... taliban hide osama... but where is osama... the hell with him... now... attack iraq... we do not like saddam... kill em all kill em all... and singapore say yes to war...
-
Everyone has a right to some space on this planet.Originally posted by kyas:save israel... the hell with palestine... we were successful in afghanistan... taliban hide osama... but where is osama... the hell with him... now... attack iraq... we do not like saddam... kill em all kill em all... and singapore say yes to war...
Everyone is entitled to his right of existence, except for those who believe that they can snuff out the lives of the innocent with a massive display of drama - as in the 9-11 incident in New York City or the Bali Bombing - all for the purpose of achieving some twisted Political and Religious Ideologies.
Singapore say "yes to war" because "mad clowns" such as the Talebans and OSAMA have shown no scruples when dealing with human lives to advance their own perverted beliefs and interpretations of how Life on this earth should be.
If incidents such as 9-11 and Bali Bombings are accepted by the likes of Osama, then Singapore can easily be a target - as was proven when the J.I. members were exposed for their plots in bombing MRT Stations in the midst of innocent Singaporeans going to work.
If the USA is prepared to take the lead role, in "kicking down the door into Iraq", and arrest Saddam Hussein, so as to find the evidence of his WMD program, then YES - the majority of Singaporeans will support this.
Many non-Muslim Malaysians will also support this, just to prevent some fanatic fundamentalist practitioner(s) of the "Malaysian National Religion" from running amok, and perform a "Bali stunt" in Kuala Lumpur. -
It is just unbelievable...
No prove... no evidence... still they act...
No consent from UN... still they want to act...
They lied by producing many faked evidences including a plagiarized documents... still some countries support them to attack iraq to prove to the world that iraq still has weapons of massdestructions...
How can we be sure that they will not produce fake evidence again...
They claim that iraq does not comply to the UN resolution... what is the purpose of sending the UN inspectors...
Now the world can see they have breached the UN rule... the international rule... the democratic rule... who wil act on them... heheh...
they call it civilised... i prefer to call it barbaric... -
Who is next in the cross-hairs of Bush's axis of evil?
-
When the USA demanded that the Talebans in Afghanistan surrender Osama Bin Laden and his AL-Qaeda Team, or face being overthrown by the US Armed Forces, nearly all the Countries that practises Islam as a State Religion demanded proof from USA, and railed at the USA for their "undisguised ambitions" to take over Afghanistan, and suggested that the Afghanis are more then happy with the rule of the Talebans.Originally posted by kyas:It is just unbelievable...
No prove... no evidence... still they act...
No consent from UN... still they want to act...
They lied by producing many faked evidences including a plagiarized documents... still some countries support them to attack iraq to prove to the world that iraq still has weapons of massdestructions...
How can we be sure that they will not produce fake evidence again...
They claim that iraq does not comply to the UN resolution... what is the purpose of sending the UN inspectors...
Now the world can see they have breached the UN rule... the international rule... the democratic rule... who wil act on them... heheh...
they call it civilised... i prefer to call it barbaric...
Why did the same Countries that have Islam as the State Religion become so defeaningly silent, after the overthrow of the Talebans, and with happy Afghanis celebrating their new found freedom by dancing in the street, watching movies, flying kites, playing music at defeaning loud volumes, playing football, and Afghani Women openly working in hospitals, baking and distributing bread, and opening schools for girls and boys ?
Are these activities shown on CNN, FOX Channel, BBC, and ABC, and all western media - a fabrication of lies that the Afghanis are putting on a show to support the US liberation of Afghanistan ?
Why did those same Islamic Countries remain defeaningly silent, when the mass of evidence - (of terrorist plans, tape recordings, notes of discussions of the 9-11 attacks) - were found in hastily abandoned safe houses that were once occupied by leadership of the Talebans and the AL-Qaeda ?
When a thief refused to admit his role and his possession of the loot, and when the Law refused to fulfill their responsibility as expected by the more responsive members of the World Community; then the only option left is for those law abiding citizen who are prepared to take action, to go ahead and kick the door open into the home of the thief, and gather the evidence ourselves.
Do we wait around, and give the thief more time to hide his loot, and develop a cleverer way to kill us with his loot, while we go through a charade of rules and regulations that merely string out the process of law, that has been proven to be ineffective for the last TWELVE Years ?
In this early days of the Twenty First Century, the Terrorists have displayed a higher profile of audacity in their crime against the civilized world; and believe their god sanctioned mission despite their twisted religious interpretation of established teachings.
If the Terrorists twist logic to meet their own ends, then as members of the Civilized World, we should also stretch the logic on those same terms, so as to combat these same Terrorists and their supporters EFFECTIVELY.
One has to fight FIRE with FIRE, before we become engulfed in the fires that is unexpectedly started by some mad man, who does so in the name of God, and the mad man's twisted logic of Justice. -
haha got war in our hands liaoz, the heat is off the terrorists for now...
-
From my knowledge, many muslims in singapore still belive that they have been unjustly targeted by other races and I am not suprise to learn that actually, many feels that Osama's and his Jihad's are justified.
Why is that so? -
Think about this?
Iraq has had 10 years of ignoring the UN Resolutions.
10 YEARS!
Okay.. the timing for the US to try and make Iraq heed the resolutions stink... but they are there already... Iraq MUST disarm! So after much "negotiation" and a whole lot of "non!" by the Frogs, a watered down version of an "inspection team" is sent in headed by the supreme incompetent, Hans Blix. Blix has his head so far up his butt he sees through his own mouth.. there are "no weapons" to be found but there are missiles to be destroyed...
6 months pass.. he needs "more time" and so the Frogs try to water down the resolutions... they tried to push one which had no DEADLINE!! Iraq can "disarm" whenever they want???
Oh, for that matter, the Iraqis have 4,000 tanks waiting to be delivered when sanctions are lifted...
And Saddam's been praising the terrorists, ranting "Death to America".. look at the last invasion.. Israel did nothing and was attacked...
The other matter of them attacking their "Muslim Brethern" is not even addressed yet...
So, are they a threat?
The US are the world's power... with that power comes certain responsibility... if they were to just sit back and not do a thing, while Saddam went on his merry bloodthirsty way, would the same anti-war protestors march saying the US did nothing?
Where were they when Saddam used mustard gas on his own Kurdish citizens? Where were they when Saddam's army ate their way through the Kuwaiti Zoo? Where were they when Saddam presented cheques to the families of suicide bombers of the Palestinian terror groups?Originally posted by kyas:It is just unbelievable...
No prove... no evidence... still they act...
No consent from UN... still they want to act...
They lied by producing many faked evidences including a plagiarized documents... still some countries support them to attack iraq to prove to the world that iraq still has weapons of massdestructions...
How can we be sure that they will not produce fake evidence again...
They claim that iraq does not comply to the UN resolution... what is the purpose of sending the UN inspectors...
Now the world can see they have breached the UN rule... the international rule... the democratic rule... who wil act on them... heheh...
they call it civilised... i prefer to call it barbaric... -
I wonder also...
Reason will disappear when the religion card is played.
Look at Iraq now... the Mullahs in Indonesia are enraged... but where were they when Iraq attacked Iran? where were they when the Iraqi army waded into Kuwait? Where were they when Saddam ordered the Kurds to be gassed? These were their fellow-Muslims Saddam ordered to be slaughtered...
Now, they rant.. is it because their "Great Satan" is trying to rid the world of Saddam? Or is it a knee-jerk action and a vicious denial of something they wish they had the moral courage to do?Originally posted by rudyiskandar:From my knowledge, many muslims in singapore still belive that they have been unjustly targeted by other races and I am not suprise to learn that actually, many feels that Osama's and his Jihad's are justified.
Why is that so? -
Think about this as well... What about Israel and Palestine ... it has been more than 50 years... still unresolved... they keep supplying weapons for israel... and the palestine? zero... so many people were killed... why don't they just step in... and say " wey... enough la wey..." heheh... instead of the talks... the negotiations... 50 years man... 50 years... if i were a palestinian, my whole life is full with cries and sadness......Originally posted by the Bear:Think about this?
Iraq has had 10 years of ignoring the UN Resolutions.
10 YEARS! -
WHY CAN'T THEY JUST STOP THE KILLINGS... THE WARS... WHY MUST THERE BE ACTS OF TERRORIST... WHY CAN'T THEY JUST SIT TOGETHER... ENJOY THE PEACE... WE HAVE SEEN ALL THESE... THE CRIMES... THE MASSACRE... THE VICTIMS... THE JEWS .. THE BOSNIANS... THE CHECHEN... THE PALESTINE... KASHMIR... THE KURDISH... MANY INNOCENT PEOPLE BECOMES THE VICTIMS... WHAT IF ONE DAY SOMEBODY STEP INTO MY HOUSE AND SHOOT MY FAMILY BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT WE ARE POTENTIAL TERRORIST....
