First of all, the figures you list talk about oil. Thanks, but that's not what I'm talking about. French have contracts with Iraq for construction, industry, etc, way beyond oil.
Furthermore, the French weren't the one's attacked on September 11 by terrorists who it is now confirmed are supported by IRAQ. For the French it is easiy to sit there and condem us for protecting our soil, but they have no right to have an opinion.
And then, to threaten other countries with economic hardship just because those countries happen to agree with the United States and many other countries? Sounds like a bunch of arrogant B@ll Sh!t to me!!
<strong>Furthermore, the French weren't the one's attacked on September 11 by terrorists who it is now confirmed are supported by IRAQ.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is still an arguable point, though I think there is probably indirect support at least.
[quote]<strong>For the French it is easiy to sit there and condem us for protecting our soil, but they have no right to have an opinion.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course they have a right to their opinion. You don't have to listen if you don't want to, but this is the sort of thing we're trying to protect isn't it?
First of all, the figures you list talk about oil. Thanks, but that's not what I'm talking about. French have contracts with Iraq for construction, industry, etc, way beyond oil.
Furthermore, the French weren't the one's attacked on September 11 by terrorists who it is now confirmed are supported by IRAQ. For the French it is easiy to sit there and condem us for protecting our soil, but they have no right to have an opinion.
And then, to threaten other countries with economic hardship just because those countries happen to agree with the United States and many other countries? Sounds like a bunch of arrogant B@ll Sh!t to me!!</strong><hr></blockquote>
No it talk of import and export. The only thing that can export Iraq is oil. US import a big amount of oil, but does not export anything to Iraq. France did some export at a level under 300 millions $ ( i am not an economist, but import include those contracts you spoke).
So your 100 billions of $ come out from nothing, and you did not provide any links.
and if you think that France or any other countrie has no right to have an opinion, then you should not ask an UNO approval : it's illogical.
For the link of Al Quaeda and Iraq, some members here, that agree for a war, do not think it's the case. The word confirmed is a bit too much.
For the Chirac thing i disaprooved here. I don't like this politic where the biggest guy clearly said to the weaker what he should face in case of disagreement. It can be said, but it have to stay internal for diplomatia.
<strong>Powerdoc, TotalFinaElf, Majnoon, Bin Umar, Google, $, Policy.
Abstain perhaps or maybe yes but definitely no veto. We aren't the world's only oil whore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes and i did not never said that, all industrialized nations need oil.
But when you said that there is 100 billions $ of contract between France and Iraq you have to proove it; The reality is far beyond this amount , less of one billion $.
France was a great partner of Iraq before 1991, not since the UNO resolutions.
[quote]and if you think that France or any other countrie has no right to have an opinion, then you should not ask an UNO approval : it's illogical. <hr></blockquote>
Could you show me where I said we should ask for a UN approval? I didn't say that anywhere. I don't think we need UN approval at all. And if I thought we did, that would be fine since we already have a UN resolution.
I didn't quote the 100 billion dollar figure so you'll have to talk to the other guy about that.
However my point was in response to your figures about trade with Iraq. I haven't looked at the trade figures but that isn't where it is at anyway. The big money and thus the political considerations are not related to present levels of trade but rather to issues of debt which was mostly accrued during the Iran war for weapons and also even more importantly for contracts for future development after the sanctions end. For instance as I alluded to before, TotalFinaElf, a French company has a huge contract to develop some massive oil fields in Iraq that are worth I dunno how much but certain tens of billions of dollars. Russia also has some oil contracts with Saddam as well. This sort of stuff is where the big money is at and the French and Russians are worried that they are gonna lose their claims. That's one big reason why they will want to take part in the coalition so that they can get theirs after the war.
<strong>I alluded to before, TotalFinaElf, a French company has a huge contract to develop some massive oil fields in Iraq that are worth I dunno how much but certain tens of billions of dollars. sniiiip. That's one big reason why they will want to take part in the coalition so that they can get theirs after the war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Strangely enough, UK and US oil companies are largely EXLCUDED from oil Iraq exploitation. And yet when you say "that's one big reason why they will want to take part in the coalition so that they can get theirs after the war" you tend a get a reply with a bunch of rolling eyes.
<strong>I didn't quote the 100 billion dollar figure so you'll have to talk to the other guy about that.
However my point was in response to your figures about trade with Iraq. I haven't looked at the trade figures but that isn't where it is at anyway. The big money and thus the political considerations are not related to present levels of trade but rather to issues of debt which was mostly accrued during the Iran war for weapons and also even more importantly for contracts for future development after the sanctions end. For instance as I alluded to before, TotalFinaElf, a French company has a huge contract to develop some massive oil fields in Iraq that are worth I dunno how much but certain tens of billions of dollars. Russia also has some oil contracts with Saddam as well. This sort of stuff is where the big money is at and the French and Russians are worried that they are gonna lose their claims. That's one big reason why they will want to take part in the coalition so that they can get theirs after the war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am happy to notice you did not quote the 100 billions $ thing.
For the debt it is true, Iraq has a huge debt with France : 20 billions $ (but i am not sure of the source) (total amount of iraq debt 38 billions $). I have no source to know the amount of debt of Iraq toward USA (probabily much less important). Personally i think this money is lost forever.
Oil is a factor to understand the war in Iraq (why some are for the war, and others against), but not the only one.
[quote] Chirac's comments were idiotic. Those contries do not forfeit their rights to a foreign policy just because they are applying to the EU. Their statements were not an attack on France or the EU, simply a position on a world issue. Many EU members like Britain, Spain, Italy etc hold the same position. Even Rumsfeld and Fleischer have never told the French or Germans to shut up, repeatedly stating that they have the rights to their opinions though the US disagrees and thinks that they are mistaken. Arrogance and unilateralism indeed. <hr></blockquote>
These positions will not prevent them to enter in EU. There is many more important issues with this. Their entry in EU will cost a tremendeous amount of money from the former member (the 15). EU is supposed or wants (even if it's a failure) to have a common foreign policy. Thus taking position in a way or another, is not a good sign for their future inclusion. The common foreign policy of EU currently sucks, but we should wait a bigger team spirit from the news members.
Personnaly i will prefer a common yes to this war (even if i disagree with it) than divergent opinions. Because if not unified the europeans countries have very little weight. I call this a team spirit. I see a total lack of team spirit this last times, nor i see good signs of team spirit coming from these eastern countries. If EU cannot work at 15 it's worthless to try to made it work at 25.
[quote]Strangely enough, UK and US oil companies are largely EXLCUDED from oil Iraq exploitation. <hr></blockquote>
I never said that the US and UK are presently involved with deals with Saddam over oil. I said France was and that the potential loss of those lucrative deals is one reason why France will go along with military action in the end. By participating militarily and in peacekeeping the French enable themselves politically to get a slice of the pie, or oil drum if you like, once it is cut up. Naturally the US and UK will get their spOILs as well.
You do realize that contracts with Saddam's regime are going to be null and void once he is whacked and so countries need to reposition themselves if they want part of the post-Saddam action?
<strong>Your post makes no sense to me. Explain please.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK i'll try again. EU will be strong and not a muppet, only when she'll have a team spirit, aka a common foreign policy. A common foreign policy imply that some members forget their own vue for the profit of the team. And this applie to every countries, France , Germany , UK ...
Sadly it's not the case. It does not work at least for the Iraq's war.
If it do not work at 15, is it a good idear to take new members that did not seems to present a good team spirit ?
This apply to every countrie. Personally i do not care that France is or is not the big guy of the block. All i want is that EU defend is own interest, and try to be a strong friendly and independant community. For my governenent my opinion represant almost nothing, so i prefer that my opinion represant even less, but that i am represented by a stronger community who has weight in the worlds issues.
You will be nice to powerdoc or I will stab you with a very large knife. The same knife I stab people with who suggest that an IBM PowerX processor is going into a Macintosh computer. It's a very sharp knife. You do not want to be stabbed with it.
powerdoc:
[quote]<strong> I see a total lack of team spirit this last times, nor i see good signs of team spirit coming from these eastern countries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't ever see good signs of team spirit coming from Western European countries.
I meant that Harald's post did not make sense, not powerdoc's. It just came out after powerdoc's post because he posted his in the interim while work was keeping me from finishing my post.
[quote]These positions will not prevent them to enter in EU. There is many more important issues with this. <hr></blockquote>
Naturally. But Chirac said otherwise, even if it was just a hissy fit. So I have no problem blaming him for that and bringing up the topic. He implied that he would be happy to try to scuttle their campaigns because they spoke out.
[quote]This apply to every countrie. Personally i do not care that France is or is not the big guy of the block. <hr></blockquote>
But Chirac and other prominent French politicians past and present do/have cared.
[quote]EU will be strong and not a muppet, only when she'll have a team spirit, aka a common foreign policy. A common foreign policy imply that some members forget their own vue for the profit of the team. And this applie to every countries, France , Germany , UK ...
Sadly it's not the case. It does not work at least for the Iraq's war.
If it do not work at 15, is it a good idear to take new members that did not seems to present a good team spirit <hr></blockquote>
Well we are getting a bit off topic. Frankly I'm not sure that it is possible. Cooperation on certain economic and military issues is historically possible because in those cases such action was on the whole good for each country. I'm not sure that the same can be said of some of the stronger integration that is being bandied about now. But we'll see.
[quote]You will be nice to powerdoc or I will stab you with a very large knife. The same knife I stab people with who suggest that an IBM PowerX processor is going into a Macintosh computer. It's a very sharp knife. You do not want to be stabbed with it.<hr></blockquote>
Firstly I haven't been cruel to powerdoc in any way. Secondly you and your knife will never see the light of day again. Remember the scene in A Clockwork Orange where his eyelids are being forced upon and he has to watch the violence. Well I'm gonna kidnap you, tie you up and make you watch Quentin Griffin highlights for all eternity. P|-|34R |\\/|3 Y0|_||\\|G GR0\\/4R47!
WTF is he to tell the Czech Republic and others (quoting the NYT - somewhat more reliable than Yahoo) that they "missed an opportunity to shut up."??</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good question. I mean, when Chamberlain sold out the Czechs Daladier was there too. It was Chamberlain, Hitler, Mussolini and Daladier but no Czechs.
You will be nice to powerdoc or I will stab you with a very large knife. The same knife I stab people with who suggest that an IBM PowerX processor is going into a Macintosh computer. It's a very sharp knife. You do not want to be stabbed with it.
powerdoc:
I don't ever see good signs of team spirit coming from Western European countries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks Groverat,
and for the team spirit of western european countries i agree at 100 %
And CoD : well i agree with most of the points of your last post aka :
- Chirac is more interested by is own personal influence than any other things
- a real Europe with common foreign policy, is not on the way for the moment. The future can only come from future generations ,who will feel more europeans.
Dont thank groverat too quickly. He's a cattle rustler type and once he gets you trusting him he will pull out his prison comb and stab you right in the gonads. And even then he won't stop using the QUOTE tag to try to disagree with everything that you say. Then he'll pour your fine French wine down the drain and pour some sorry ass dark beer all over you and then light you on fire. He is not to be trusted.
Comments
First of all, the figures you list talk about oil. Thanks, but that's not what I'm talking about. French have contracts with Iraq for construction, industry, etc, way beyond oil.
Furthermore, the French weren't the one's attacked on September 11 by terrorists who it is now confirmed are supported by IRAQ. For the French it is easiy to sit there and condem us for protecting our soil, but they have no right to have an opinion.
And then, to threaten other countries with economic hardship just because those countries happen to agree with the United States and many other countries? Sounds like a bunch of arrogant B@ll Sh!t to me!!
Abstain perhaps or maybe yes but definitely no veto. We aren't the world's only oil whore.
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2780881.stm"; target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2780881.stm</a>;
<strong>Furthermore, the French weren't the one's attacked on September 11 by terrorists who it is now confirmed are supported by IRAQ.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is still an arguable point, though I think there is probably indirect support at least.
[quote]<strong>For the French it is easiy to sit there and condem us for protecting our soil, but they have no right to have an opinion.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course they have a right to their opinion. You don't have to listen if you don't want to, but this is the sort of thing we're trying to protect isn't it?
<strong>Powerdoc,
First of all, the figures you list talk about oil. Thanks, but that's not what I'm talking about. French have contracts with Iraq for construction, industry, etc, way beyond oil.
Furthermore, the French weren't the one's attacked on September 11 by terrorists who it is now confirmed are supported by IRAQ. For the French it is easiy to sit there and condem us for protecting our soil, but they have no right to have an opinion.
And then, to threaten other countries with economic hardship just because those countries happen to agree with the United States and many other countries? Sounds like a bunch of arrogant B@ll Sh!t to me!!</strong><hr></blockquote>
No it talk of import and export. The only thing that can export Iraq is oil. US import a big amount of oil, but does not export anything to Iraq. France did some export at a level under 300 millions $ ( i am not an economist, but import include those contracts you spoke).
So your 100 billions of $ come out from nothing, and you did not provide any links.
and if you think that France or any other countrie has no right to have an opinion, then you should not ask an UNO approval : it's illogical.
For the link of Al Quaeda and Iraq, some members here, that agree for a war, do not think it's the case. The word confirmed is a bit too much.
For the Chirac thing i disaprooved here. I don't like this politic where the biggest guy clearly said to the weaker what he should face in case of disagreement. It can be said, but it have to stay internal for diplomatia.
<strong>Powerdoc, TotalFinaElf, Majnoon, Bin Umar, Google, $, Policy.
Abstain perhaps or maybe yes but definitely no veto. We aren't the world's only oil whore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes and i did not never said that, all industrialized nations need oil.
But when you said that there is 100 billions $ of contract between France and Iraq you have to proove it; The reality is far beyond this amount , less of one billion $.
France was a great partner of Iraq before 1991, not since the UNO resolutions.
Could you show me where I said we should ask for a UN approval? I didn't say that anywhere. I don't think we need UN approval at all. And if I thought we did, that would be fine since we already have a UN resolution.
However my point was in response to your figures about trade with Iraq. I haven't looked at the trade figures but that isn't where it is at anyway. The big money and thus the political considerations are not related to present levels of trade but rather to issues of debt which was mostly accrued during the Iran war for weapons and also even more importantly for contracts for future development after the sanctions end. For instance as I alluded to before, TotalFinaElf, a French company has a huge contract to develop some massive oil fields in Iraq that are worth I dunno how much but certain tens of billions of dollars. Russia also has some oil contracts with Saddam as well. This sort of stuff is where the big money is at and the French and Russians are worried that they are gonna lose their claims. That's one big reason why they will want to take part in the coalition so that they can get theirs after the war.
<strong>I alluded to before, TotalFinaElf, a French company has a huge contract to develop some massive oil fields in Iraq that are worth I dunno how much but certain tens of billions of dollars. sniiiip. That's one big reason why they will want to take part in the coalition so that they can get theirs after the war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Strangely enough, UK and US oil companies are largely EXLCUDED from oil Iraq exploitation. And yet when you say "that's one big reason why they will want to take part in the coalition so that they can get theirs after the war" you tend a get a reply with a bunch of rolling eyes.
<strong>I didn't quote the 100 billion dollar figure so you'll have to talk to the other guy about that.
However my point was in response to your figures about trade with Iraq. I haven't looked at the trade figures but that isn't where it is at anyway. The big money and thus the political considerations are not related to present levels of trade but rather to issues of debt which was mostly accrued during the Iran war for weapons and also even more importantly for contracts for future development after the sanctions end. For instance as I alluded to before, TotalFinaElf, a French company has a huge contract to develop some massive oil fields in Iraq that are worth I dunno how much but certain tens of billions of dollars. Russia also has some oil contracts with Saddam as well. This sort of stuff is where the big money is at and the French and Russians are worried that they are gonna lose their claims. That's one big reason why they will want to take part in the coalition so that they can get theirs after the war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am happy to notice you did not quote the 100 billions $ thing.
For the debt it is true, Iraq has a huge debt with France : 20 billions $ (but i am not sure of the source) (total amount of iraq debt 38 billions $). I have no source to know the amount of debt of Iraq toward USA (probabily much less important). Personally i think this money is lost forever.
Oil is a factor to understand the war in Iraq (why some are for the war, and others against), but not the only one.
[quote] Chirac's comments were idiotic. Those contries do not forfeit their rights to a foreign policy just because they are applying to the EU. Their statements were not an attack on France or the EU, simply a position on a world issue. Many EU members like Britain, Spain, Italy etc hold the same position. Even Rumsfeld and Fleischer have never told the French or Germans to shut up, repeatedly stating that they have the rights to their opinions though the US disagrees and thinks that they are mistaken. Arrogance and unilateralism indeed. <hr></blockquote>
These positions will not prevent them to enter in EU. There is many more important issues with this. Their entry in EU will cost a tremendeous amount of money from the former member (the 15). EU is supposed or wants (even if it's a failure) to have a common foreign policy. Thus taking position in a way or another, is not a good sign for their future inclusion. The common foreign policy of EU currently sucks, but we should wait a bigger team spirit from the news members.
Personnaly i will prefer a common yes to this war (even if i disagree with it) than divergent opinions. Because if not unified the europeans countries have very little weight. I call this a team spirit. I see a total lack of team spirit this last times, nor i see good signs of team spirit coming from these eastern countries. If EU cannot work at 15 it's worthless to try to made it work at 25.
[quote]Strangely enough, UK and US oil companies are largely EXLCUDED from oil Iraq exploitation. <hr></blockquote>
I never said that the US and UK are presently involved with deals with Saddam over oil. I said France was and that the potential loss of those lucrative deals is one reason why France will go along with military action in the end. By participating militarily and in peacekeeping the French enable themselves politically to get a slice of the pie, or oil drum if you like, once it is cut up. Naturally the US and UK will get their spOILs as well.
You do realize that contracts with Saddam's regime are going to be null and void once he is whacked and so countries need to reposition themselves if they want part of the post-Saddam action?
<strong>Your post makes no sense to me. Explain please.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK i'll try again. EU will be strong and not a muppet, only when she'll have a team spirit, aka a common foreign policy. A common foreign policy imply that some members forget their own vue for the profit of the team. And this applie to every countries, France , Germany , UK ...
Sadly it's not the case. It does not work at least for the Iraq's war.
If it do not work at 15, is it a good idear to take new members that did not seems to present a good team spirit ?
This apply to every countrie. Personally i do not care that France is or is not the big guy of the block. All i want is that EU defend is own interest, and try to be a strong friendly and independant community. For my governenent my opinion represant almost nothing, so i prefer that my opinion represant even less, but that i am represented by a stronger community who has weight in the worlds issues.
You will be nice to powerdoc or I will stab you with a very large knife. The same knife I stab people with who suggest that an IBM PowerX processor is going into a Macintosh computer. It's a very sharp knife. You do not want to be stabbed with it.
powerdoc:
[quote]<strong> I see a total lack of team spirit this last times, nor i see good signs of team spirit coming from these eastern countries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't ever see good signs of team spirit coming from Western European countries.
[quote]These positions will not prevent them to enter in EU. There is many more important issues with this. <hr></blockquote>
Naturally. But Chirac said otherwise, even if it was just a hissy fit. So I have no problem blaming him for that and bringing up the topic. He implied that he would be happy to try to scuttle their campaigns because they spoke out.
[quote]This apply to every countrie. Personally i do not care that France is or is not the big guy of the block. <hr></blockquote>
But Chirac and other prominent French politicians past and present do/have cared.
[quote]EU will be strong and not a muppet, only when she'll have a team spirit, aka a common foreign policy. A common foreign policy imply that some members forget their own vue for the profit of the team. And this applie to every countries, France , Germany , UK ...
Sadly it's not the case. It does not work at least for the Iraq's war.
If it do not work at 15, is it a good idear to take new members that did not seems to present a good team spirit <hr></blockquote>
Well we are getting a bit off topic. Frankly I'm not sure that it is possible. Cooperation on certain economic and military issues is historically possible because in those cases such action was on the whole good for each country. I'm not sure that the same can be said of some of the stronger integration that is being bandied about now. But we'll see.
[quote]You will be nice to powerdoc or I will stab you with a very large knife. The same knife I stab people with who suggest that an IBM PowerX processor is going into a Macintosh computer. It's a very sharp knife. You do not want to be stabbed with it.<hr></blockquote>
Firstly I haven't been cruel to powerdoc in any way. Secondly you and your knife will never see the light of day again. Remember the scene in A Clockwork Orange where his eyelids are being forced upon and he has to watch the violence. Well I'm gonna kidnap you, tie you up and make you watch Quentin Griffin highlights for all eternity. P|-|34R |\\/|3 Y0|_||\\|G GR0\\/4R47!
<strong>
WTF is he to tell the Czech Republic and others (quoting the NYT - somewhat more reliable than Yahoo) that they "missed an opportunity to shut up."??</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good question. I mean, when Chamberlain sold out the Czechs Daladier was there too. It was Chamberlain, Hitler, Mussolini and Daladier but no Czechs.
<strong>CoD:
You will be nice to powerdoc or I will stab you with a very large knife. The same knife I stab people with who suggest that an IBM PowerX processor is going into a Macintosh computer. It's a very sharp knife. You do not want to be stabbed with it.
powerdoc:
I don't ever see good signs of team spirit coming from Western European countries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks Groverat,
and for the team spirit of western european countries i agree at 100 %
And CoD : well i agree with most of the points of your last post aka :
- Chirac is more interested by is own personal influence than any other things
- a real Europe with common foreign policy, is not on the way for the moment. The future can only come from future generations ,who will feel more europeans.
[ 02-21-2003: Message edited by: Powerdoc ]</p>
g
[ 02-21-2003: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>