There is an important difference between the French reaction and the US one. The eastern european countries are applying for the membership in the EU while at the same opposing two of the major countries that make up the EU. In a situation where their acceptance in the EU depends on positive reactions from every single country that makes up the EU, their opposition of those countries is not a very smart thing to do. France, as far as I know, is not applying for the membership in the US, so it can be allowed to have a different oppinion without consequences.

Also I don't think 95% of this forum is anti-US. Most here, however, are against Bush's ideas of governing foreign affairs.

___________________
1+1=10

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 There is an important difference between the French reaction and the US one. The eastern european countries are applying for the membership in the EU while at the same opposing two of the major countries that make up the EU. In a situation where their acceptance in the EU depends on positive reactions from every single country that makes up the EU, their opposition of those countries is not a very smart thing to do. France, as far as I know, is not applying for the membership in the US, so it can be allowed to have a different oppinion without consequences. Also I don't think 95% of this forum is anti-US. Most here, however, are against Bush's ideas of governing foreign affairs.

So countries applying for the EU can't have their own opinion and view on this matter? In order to get a vote from France you have to agree with them? It's absurd that an applicant nation should have to "keep their mouth shut" when it comes to an issue France supports. If this doesn't define bullying I don't know what does. Give me a break ... if Bush said anything REMOTELY like this you all would be jumping down his throat and crying havoc. I mean, Bush did call France and Germany old Europe but it's not like he said you can't join NATO if you disagree with me. Please explain to me how those countries are being "irresponsible." If ANYBODY feels strongly about democracy and free speech they should be pissed off. I'm curious drug tito ... do you think that Chirac's statements are acceptable? I especially like Chirac's statements as to why he wasn't critical of other EU states in support of a resolution on Iraq. Family my ass. He's picking on the countries that he can pick on. I also like how France and Germany banded together to exclude the countries that support the US from the summit meeting. What a joke.

First of all, if any country who wishes to join NATO would be acting against the US, there's no way it would ever become a member.

I agree though that the statement was somewhat bullying. But those countries supported the US only because they know sucking up to the americans is the best way to get into NATO. In that way they showed that for them NATO comes first, and then the EU.

___________________
1+1=10

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 First of all, if any country who wishes to join NATO would be acting against the US, there's no way it would ever become a member.

Well we don't know that because it hasn't happened yet. We sure as hell know that that holds true for the EU though ...

quote:

I agree though that the statement was somewhat bullying. But those countries supported the US only because they know sucking up to the americans is the best way to get into NATO. In that way they showed that for them NATO comes first, and then the EU.

I love how you can so easily discern what a country's intent is. Like it's impossible that these countries feel that Iraq is a danger to the world and that they need to disarm? No of course not ... since they are agreeing with the US they are OBVIOUSLY sucking up. So is every country that agrees with the US sucking up to them? Oh and fyi, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland are ALREADY in NATO. So if you follow your logic it would be more advantageous for these countries to side with the EU so they can gain membership. But I guess some countries just stand up for what they believe in. Much to Chirac's dismay ... and now he's gonna make them pay for voicing their opinions. And EVEN if these countries are sucking up to the US your statement implies that it's ok for Chirac to bully them. Like these countries can't adopt policies for their own self intersts? They have to follow the French hardline policy? Everybody throws around the word bully so freely and readily when it comes to Bush and now that we see a concrete example of France bullying other countries Chirac is only "somewhat" bullying. Why am I smelling a tinge of hypocrisy in the air.

Last edited by occrider on Feb-21-2003 at 03:53

^^

occrider..I do agree with ur statement that Chirac's outburst is taken likely. He is being a very horrible representation of the opposition to the war..in fact, i encourage someone to duct tape his mouth for "crying over spilt milk"

however...how does countries like Czech Republic, Hungary etc. have ANY concern of iraq?? they have never been bothered before, why are they now? I wouldnt be suprised that they are doing this for an easy NATO membership. This DOES NOT justify chirac's actions, but it does give these countries reason to back up the US...they reprsent their own country, and not EU as a whole, which is why chirac shouldnt be trying to put words in their mouths. But Im sure terrorism is the last time on Hungary's mind. Did they come forward right away and offer military assistance to the US for their episode 1-fight bin laden?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by King_Mack ^^ occrider..I do agree with ur statement that Chirac's outburst is taken likely. He is being a very horrible representation of the opposition to the war..in fact, i encourage someone to duct tape his mouth for "crying over spilt milk" however...how does countries like Czech Republic, Hungary etc. have ANY concern of iraq?? they have never been bothered before, why are they now? I wouldnt be suprised that they are doing this for an easy NATO membership. This DOES NOT justify chirac's actions, but it does give these countries reason to back up the US...they reprsent their own country, and not EU as a whole, which is why chirac shouldnt be trying to put words in their mouths. But Im sure terrorism is the last time on Hungary's mind. Did they come forward right away and offer military assistance to the US for their episode 1-fight bin laden?

Again, the Czech Republic and Hungary are ALREADY IN NATO. So if they're doing this to get membership into NATO then they're awfully stupid! Also they are not offering millitary assisstance to the US in Iraq. They signed a letter of support of the United States in achieving disarmament in Iraq. And I'm sure that during episode 1 - fight bin laden they did come forward and offer the US support in the war against terror. Remember however, they are not voting for war, it's a vote of achieving resolution. And you ask why they even have ANY concern over Iraq? Well I'm sure they get their oil the same place the rest of the world does. It benefits them to have STABLILITY in the region. And Saddam Huessein isn't one of the most stabilizing factors in the region. I'm sure they don't want to see a repeat of the Gulf war where Saddam invades Kuwait and threatens Saudi Arabia. Therefore a Saddam Hussein without vx gas and nuclear weapons makes for a safer middle east. You can easily ask that question with regards to the war on terrorism. Remember when ALL those countries pledged support to the US? Why would Belgium or Spain offer their support on the war on terrorism? It's very unlikely they would get attacked. The reason why is because by eliminating the roots of terrorism a safer world atmosphere that benefits everybody is created.

quote:

Well we don't know that because it hasn't happened yet. We sure as hell know that that holds true for the EU though

Those countries are soon to be admitted to the EU. Never has a country entered NATO which opposed the US.

quote:

Like it's impossible that these countries feel that Iraq is a danger to the world and that they need to disarm? No of course not ... since they are agreeing with the US they are OBVIOUSLY sucking up. So is every country that agrees with the US sucking up to them? Oh and fyi, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland are ALREADY in NATO. So if you follow your logic it would be more advantageous for these countries to side with the EU so they can gain membership. But I guess some countries just stand up for what they believe in.

If you lived in one of those countries like I do, you would see that the government reports are not filled with arguments why should Saddam be disarmed, but rather by the arguments that are saying we'll get financial aid from the US and easier access to NATO (for those like us that aren't already in it) if we support them now. Don't be too idealistic and think anyone is doing anything for the greater good and benefit of others.

___________________
1+1=10

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Those countries are soon to be admitted to the EU. Never has a country entered NATO which opposed the US.

Ok name one country that had their NATO membership revoked due to a disagreement with the US. What I'm saying is that there hasn't been a case where that has happened. However, we see a case today with the EU where that IS happening. I'm sure if France had their way there would be no way in hell Hungary and the Czech Republic are admitted into the EU.

quote:

If you lived in one of those countries like I do, you would see that the government reports are not filled with arguments why should Saddam be disarmed, but rather by the arguments that are saying we'll get financial aid from the US and easier access to NATO (for those like us that aren't already in it) if we support them now. Don't be too idealistic and think anyone is doing anything for the greater good and benefit of others.

And what government reports do you have exclusive access to in Serbia that outlines Czech, Hungarian, and Polish foreign policy? With regards to NATO admission, we were talking about the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland. You said they were doing it to gain access into NATO. THat's not true so what countries are you referring to? This whole debate has been in response to Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic not any other country. Also I was never idealistic in saying that they were absolutely, 100% doing it for the greater good. I was simply saying you can't EXCLUDE that they were doing what they believed was right as you seemed to be saying. If I recall, I remember you saying that they were all "sucking up" to the United States. My final point is, who is France to tell these countries that they can't voice their own opinion on the matter?? EVEN IF they were doing it for their own personal gain that doesn't give france the right to tell them to shut up. And if you read the article I posted on France's oil interests in Iraq, I think a lot of pro-France people are being too idealistic themselves with regards to France's motives in this affair.