>



PARIS, March 18 (UPI) -- > French President Jacques Chirac on Tuesday condemned as "without justification" a 48-hour ultimatum delivered by Washington for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and his sons to leave Iraq or face war. >

"Iraq does not represent today an immediate threat that justifies an immediate war," Chirac said in remarks to the media delivered from the Elysee presidential palace. >

No justification exists for a unilateral declaration of war against Baghdad, Chirac added -- either for the purposes of disarming Iraq or for a regime change.

"Regardless of the evolution of events, this ultimatum threatens the idea we have of international relations," the French president said. "It impacts on the future of a people, the future of a region, the stability of the world." >

In an earlier communiqué Tuesday, Chirac warned U.S. President George W. Bush and his allies that going outside the U.N. Security Council and opting for force over international law, meant shouldering a heavy responsibility. >

His comments echoed criticism and concern aired in Germany, Russia and China, along with the Vatican against Bush's ultimatum to Saddam delivered Monday in an address to the United States.

France has been among the most vocal critics of Washington's tough stance on Iraq and Washington's push for military action if Baghdad did not disarm quickly.

But a final push by France, Germany and Russia for a non-military resolution to the crisis went nowhere last weekend. >

During an address to the nation Monday, Bush indirectly criticized France, saying the country shared Washington's assessment of the danger posed by Iraq but not the United States' resolve to meet it.

Chirac's anti-war stance has drawn widespread support at home. Analysts are comparing him to former French President and World War II hero Charles de Gaulle. De Gaulle also asserted French independence of U.S. policies, most notably by pulling out of NATO. >

Under Chirac's presidency, the country rejoined the alliance in 1995.

Recent polls find Chirac basking in unprecedented popularity. The latest, published Tuesday by France's leftist Liberation newspaper, gave the French president a 74-percent approval rating -- on par with de Gaulle's highest rating. >

Still, some pundits believe that score may drop following a series of unpopular new measures at home and possible retaliation overseas for France's anti-war position regarding Iraq.



###

Note: The links and text above are provided for your further research and education.

Le Frog's comments only reveal the ignorance of his "petite" brain(altho that would probably still be about ten times the size of W's).

UN Resolution 1441 does NOT authorize War. In fact, the language was changed specifically from "ALL NECESSARY MEANS" to "with serious consequences," a concession by the U.S. in order to get the unamimous Security Council approval back in November. Even more critical, unprovoked aggression on another member nation is against the UN Charter.

So, Monsieur LeFrog, crawl back into your ground hole and study some lessons in international law before you show the world how silly you sound.

As the old saying goes, "Better to shut up & let the world suspect your ignorance, than to open your trap & prove it."

...stipulates that legally ratified Treaties are the Supreme Law of the Land.

Your point about the U.N. Charter is valueless shit.

hey pro-war racist scum!! - - got eat your FREEDOM FRIES - you laughingstock!

VIVE LA FRANCE!!

The UN is valueless shit. They write resolutions and won't enforce them. They're worthless. Boot 'em out ASAP!!!!!

>..."with serious consequences"...

I would say that's getting ready to take place.

The French shot themselves in the foot. They'll have to live w/ it.

very interesting. you say: "The UN is valueless shit. They write resolutions and won't enforce them. They're worthless. Boot 'em out ASAP!!!!!"

"Boot 'em out" of WHAT????

this is the way you feel? the rest of the world is "valueless shit"? "worthless"? what separates your version of patriotism from Hitler's?

but the kicker is your last sentence: Boot 'em out ASAP!!!!

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??

Ok, you state that thUN is valuless shit because they write laws they don't enforce...

so then, I guess the US congress is shit because they write environmental laws that aren't enforced, labor laws that aren't enforced, health and safety laws that aren't enforced.

Are you then supporting the idea that the US congress and by extention the executive branch that write these laws are also worthless shit?

I would beg to differ.

USA should withdraw from the UN. Kick em out of NYC. Manhatten could use the office space.

"Nothing … shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations.”

There ya go. That says it all.

If the UN is collectively opposed to us invading Iraq, let those idiots on the security council sit around, debate about it for a while, come up with about a dozen resolutions as to why we can't do it, and then when France calls for a vote to stop us...

We'll just VETO.

Exactly. And after we Veto, we announce "the UN is adjourned forever, clean out your desks by tonight at 5:00pm, you're outta here", and move on.

the USA cannot veto a resolution in the General Assembly (i think).

if and when the USA does decide that it wants to leave the UN, the world will be that much closer to UNITY (against the supreme rogue state)

...are in their usual great form demonstrating their depth of understanding and stretching their Gray Cell to it's max.

Dur - "kill em' all and let God sort them out". Duh.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873)

>(i think).

Unsubstantiated allegation.

>if and when the USA does decide that it wants to leave the UN, the world will be that much closer to UNITY (against the supreme rogue state)

The UN without the US is nothing. We are the UN.

stop bluffing.

THE USA HAS NO VETO IN THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY!!

now you have to decide. do you want to be in the UN or not? just huffing and puffing about how you ARE the UN doesn't change anything. the reality is that you hate the idea of having to be on an equal playing field. that is because you know you are INFERIOR.

You kids following the news? The French now say they'll be happy to join a coalition if Iraq uses chemical weapons.

The backsliding begins...

>now you have to decide. do you want to be in the UN or not? just huffing and puffing about how you ARE the UN doesn't change anything. the reality is that you hate the idea of having to be on an equal playing field. that is because you know you are INFERIOR.

Clarify yourself. Who are you speaking to?

“The supreme excellence is not to win a hundred victories in a hundred battles. The supreme excellence is to subdue the armies of your enemies without having to fight them”.

- Sun Tzu

“Among the calamities of wars may be justly numbered the diminution of the love of truth by the falsehoods which interest dictates and credulity encourages.”

- Samuel Jonson

“There is no such thing as an inevitable war. If war comes it will be from failure of human wisdom.”

- Bonar Law

“War does not determine who is right - only who is left.” Anon.

“In peace, sons bury their fathers, in war, fathers bury their sons.” - Herodotus

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom, it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” - William Pitt (The Younger) 1783

“No Man is justified in doing evil on the ground of expediency.” - Theodore Roosevelt

"we are the UN...."

Um...are you aware that a lot of people outside of the USA think that Americans are very self centered and arrogant? Comments like this don't help the situation very much. I grew up in the US but now live in Canada, so I have seen both sides. I know that all Americans are not arrogant and aggressive. Only their leaders, apparently.

Here's a joke that you probably don't hear much down there:

Q: "why is the US called a melting pot?"

A: "because the scum rises to the top, and the ones on the bottom get burned."

In closing, I would urge everyone to keep voicing your opinions, but try not to be so insanely aggressive and nasty. Anonymity doesn't guarantee that you're not hurting anybody. And if your stance is for peace, you ought to be starting with yourself. OK, good luck everyone. Smash the State.

-alan

If ours was not a world ruled by the aggressive use of force, I would agree. But it's not. I live on Earth. It's been this way a really, really long time.

>Um...are you aware that a lot of people outside of the USA think that Americans are very self centered and arrogant?

Some people mistake "arrogance" with "courage of convictions". You anarchists/leftists especially have a problem understanding this. You see things and believe that you have an "open mind", and you reach your conclusion. Now if someone else views the same things and reachs a different conclusion, they don't have an "open mind", because (in your way of thinking) if they did they would have reached the same conclusion you did. If they continue to hold that point of view, dispite the effort you make to convince them otherwise, then to you they are "arrogant", when what it boils down to is they have "courage of their convictions."

So, there may be countries who call us "arrogant" because we have "courage of our convictions", but that's their problem.

courage of your convictions?

what convictions?!! look back at this thread to find out what you are referring to: the "conviction" that the usa IS the UN?! that's what this discussion is about in case you didn't notice....

"We ARE the UN" some fool said.... now is that arrogant or what?

If Americans are so offended by France's stand against the war, why don't they return the Statue of Liberty to France as the US seems to have little use for message of freedom. Of course that might be confusing to Americans since many might not even know Lady Liberty was given to America as a gift from France. Better to go with hitting "French" fries and other such nonsense. AMericans can than replace Lady Liberty with a statue of war criminal Ariel Sharon. It certainly would be a bigger, more portly statue and the representation of everything American today seems to stand for...war crimes, fantaticism, hatred and control over Arabs. WHo knows, Lady Liberty might surprise everyone in the end by coming to life and kicking that fat butt of Sharon and America's too!!!

>"We ARE the UN"

I said it!! And it's true. The USA pulls out of the UN and the UN loses all it legitimacy. You can either comprehend that or you can't. If you can't, I don't have all day to explain it to you. You'll just have to live in the dark, which according to how you sound, is where you already are.

--> "the US seems to have little use for message of freedom."

The US seems to me to be the one sending the message of freedom. The message is being directed to the Iraqi people and members of the Iraqi military. The message is that we're coming to set them free.

France's stand against the war has nothing to do with war and everything to do with money, namely what they will lose when they lose their partner Saddam in Iraq. Tough Shit!!!!!!!

Twelve year olds with low IQ's have a better idea of the devastation war will cause this earth than most righties. Is ignorance of what war is really about a pre-requisite for being conservative? 5 million in the city of Baghdad, half are children, half are children, half are children, nice way to raise them, "hating America," for any survivor surely will. UN Charters aside, we are going to kill enough Arabs to equal 1/6th of the amount of Jews killed in WWII. We are going to put a final bullet in the brain of peace between our Arab neighbors and ourselves. Israel will be attacked, more will die on all sides than if this never happened. Plus, Mossad (speaking of Jewish conspiracies) had Sadam in it's range several thousand times now, the Americans held them back, at the cost of all these lives. Why now? Why this way? What is democracy?

Answer me righties, what is democracy? When the vote can be thrown out if it doesn't go in your favor, is there ever really a democracy? Arabs don't have to kill Americans, we are already dead, those left are just slaves to the fascist regime in power now. We might as well call it KGB II instead.

Let me answer that in a way you might be able to grasp, but I doubt it.

It's NOT the UN. You got a bunch of coutries who are dictatorships themselves casting votes in a "democratic" setting. Freedom to vote in the UN but no freedom in their own countries. What a laugh.

And as far as your "estimates" of how many will die, that's a crock. You got no way of knowing what is in store. I'm just looking forward to all the lies that will be presented as "truth" here at indymedia regarding what actually happens. I'm sure you and your brainwashed minions will gladly participate.

Main Entry: de·moc·ra·cy

Pronunciation: di-'mä-kr&-sE

Function: noun

Inflected Form(s): plural -cies

Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy

Date: 1576

1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections



70% of the American people support Bush. That's a democracy.

Max, I don't think it could be spelled out any clearer, well maybe if you used a crayon! The Leftist just don't get or want to see that majority rules, yes we are the ones that vote!

to mr/mrs. 'vision':

do you have the slightest idea how 'arrogant' your comments are? heh heh. oh, the irony.

On another note, has anybody (and I'm sure they have) noticed parallels between the leading up to WWII and this party we are throwing in the desert?

I'll point out a few - the failure of the league of nations > the disregarding of the UN

Hitler's speeches about 'peace' whilst planning/or being at war >

dubya's 'we are a peaceful nation.' etc etc

I say to you, Bush II - IF you are so peaceful, then why are you having a WAR?

does anyone, and i mean anyone, fail to see the ridiculous contradiction that alone is?

when it all explodes in george w's face, i hope he realizes he lit the fuse.

but he won't. sigh

...the majority that does not make you right.

Illustration of Democracy:

Three people on a desert Isle; 2 men, 1 woman.

They have a referendum on whether to rape the woman.

Two Ayes. One No. The Ayes have it.

nothing damages the legitimacy of the UN nearly as badly as the disproportionate and unaccountable tyranny of the USA both in it's role within the UN and outside the UN.

i can't wait 'til the UN is free of this ball and chain.

again: stop threatening to leave and just leave already.

------------------------------------------------------

and concerning the war debate.... check this out:

hhhhmmmmm....

both sides claim to support "freedom"

both sides denounce Saddam Hussein as a monster

both sides say they "support" the troops

both sides say they want to prevent terror attacks on the USA

both sides say a war on Iraq will increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks against the USA

both sides condemn the attack on the WTC

both sides respect the "right to protest"

both sides say they want peace

both sides won't say they support a "war for oil"

both sides have never been attacked by Iraq

both sides say they want the UN to be "relevant"

one side has vioent contempt for the UN

one side is led by oil executives

one side supports curtailing civil liberties

one side used to be friends with Saddam Hussein

one side supports an attack on Iraq

one side opposes universal health care

one side used to be friends with Osama Bin Laden

one side was in business with the Bin Ladens

one side says we should stop "carping" and "get behind" the president

one side says we should go out and buy duct tape

prodosivix, I have courage of my convictions. If that bothers you that I am very confident in my beliefs, that's not my problem.

>Even if you were in the majority that does not make you right.

No kidding. So if you pro-Saddam types were the majority like you are in some countries, then that doesn't make you right.

>nothing damages the legitimacy of the UN .....

They did it to themselves by not enforcing their own resolutions. What good is a body of diplomats that are too scared to actually stand behind their own measures? Exactly. They're worthless. And w/out the US, they're history. And they know it.

>>nice way to raise them, "hating America,"

>>for any survivor surely will.

Japan backs the U.S.A.

http://abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s810103.htm

Mr. Koizumi is 60 years old. Wana bet he's a "Survivor" of WWII?

yeah, but we never occupied Japan-- creating a military state....

>yeah, but we never occupied Japan

Bullshit we didn't!!!!!

Do a Google search. Read. Learn.

no, your wrong. it never happened.

it's just more conspiracy crap

what does it mean to be courageous if you have hundreds times more firepower? i know what the anti-war people would say, but i have no idea how pro-war people would answer that question.

the USA did occupy Japan. Koizumi is a sellout. and someone in another thread made this good point: if not enforcing resolutions makes you irrelevant, then i guess the USA is totally irrelevant since it routinely doesn't enforce environmental and labor laws and trashes things like the ABM treaty which it signed, etc. etc.

Imagine Nazi Germany had nukes. what would we have done then?

American Occupation of Japan



The occupation of Japan was, from start to finish, an American

operation. General Douglans MacArthur, sole supreme

commander of the Allied Power was in charge. The Americans had

insufficient men to make a military government of Japan possible;

so they decided to act through the existing Japanese gobernment.

General MacArthur became, except in name, dictator of Japan.

He imposed his will on Japan. Demilitarization was speedily carried out,

demobilization of the former imperial forces was completed by early 1946...

More?

http://www.cyberessays.com/History/98.htm

What---Ever, MAdmaxim.

The Iraqi occupation plan is not based on

the Japan model, because it was all a big lie.

>someone in another thread made this good point:

No, it's not. It's an irrelevant point.

The ABM treaty was made with the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union doesn't exist. How can a treaty you made with a country that doesn't exist be enforcable? It can't. Thus, talks with a new treaty with Russia.

This "evironmental" and "labor" comment is another leftist propaghanda scheme making more of something than it actually is or making something into something it's not. Take it somewhere else.

>Koizumi is a sellout.

There's that arrogance we were discussing. We don't agree with you, so we're arrogant. Is that how it works? Yeah, I'm sure it does w/ youse guys.

>Imagine Nazi Germany had nukes. what would we have done then?

Probably same thing we did w/ the USSR. A Cold War standoff where their people lived starving in communist poverty for 70 years. Sorta like those poor people in North Korea.

(Mr./Ms) "Lord" to you

by vision • Tuesday March 18, 2003 Tuet 02:47 PM

“prodosivix, I have courage of my convictions. If that bothers you that I am very confident in my beliefs, that's not my problem.”

Invincible Ignorance is nothing to be proud of.

>Even if you were in the majority that does not make you right.

“No kidding. So if you pro-Saddam types were the majority like you are in some countries, then that doesn't make you right.”

And your LIES and distortions do nothing to prove your case. This Psyops PR line that all you Freak Republic Robots parrot that opposition to killing a couple MORE hundred thousand people is support for Saddam is Insane. You are either stupid, or paid to take that position. Which is it?

>nothing damages the legitimacy of the UN .....

“They did it to themselves by not enforcing their own resolutions. What good is a body of diplomats that are too scared to actually stand behind their own measures? Exactly. They're worthless. And w/out the US, they're history. And they know it.”

The Inspectors were on the ground and were withdrawn only because of the impending Mass Murder contemplated by the megalomaniacs of the Bush Junta. No U.S. Intelligence report resulted in the discovery of ANY banned weapons. None whatsover - one of the Inspectors characterized the “Intelligence” passed to them as “trash”.

The Bush Junta has been caught lying repeatedly. Despite that they still keep telling the same lies. So, who’s the bigger fool? The one telling the lies, or the one believing them?

That Saddam has Chem/bio weapons...

Why else would they be sending their NBC units to Kuwait to assist the U.S.A.? I notice France is also offering.

"GERMANY - Despite opposition to a war on Iraq, has chemical warfare decontamination specialists in Kuwait."

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L1846535

But Saddam has no chem bio weapons, right?

i was talking to this guy from Japan the other day who said that Koizumi was trying to be friends with Bush because Japan is a "colony" of the US and they always have to say "yes sir" to the "americans" etc. etc.

Koizumi is a sellout. USA OUT OF OKINAWA!! USA OUT OF KOREA!!!! USA OUT OF THE PHILIPPINES!! USA OUT OF SAUDI ARABIA!! USA OUT OF CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICA!! USA OUT OF NORTH AMERICA!! USA OFF THE PLANET!!!!

it is a very good idea for the people of the world to study the unraveling of the soviet union in order to learn how the discrediting, dismantling, and overthrowing of "superpower" states that have nuclear weapons CAN be accopmplished.

we're doing GREAT so far!! even after the USA was enjoying it's highest levels of international support, already the USA can't even take on Saddam Hussein without suffering massive worldwide protests and almost total alienation from the international community and a crisis of legitimacy at every level of it's government.

there are fairly moderate people who think the US government may fall soon. ask Gorbachev how easy it is to laugh these ideas off months before they become reality.