It's confirmed: France WILL veto no matter what!

[cmdavid]

Originally posted by: Sepen

Originally posted by: Cfour
Well I think Rumsfeld's quote is appropriate here:

"Going to war without France is like going duck hunting without an accordian."

Tony

LOL

hahaha..

 

[arod]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
For a few billion dollars in oil contracts I'd probably veto pretty much anything too.

France is in bed with Iraq, I was watching a show on sattelite photography on TLC last night and some CIA person came on and said France was selling Sat photos to Iraq and was rumored to be still selling them during the first gulf war.... probably our troop placements.

 

[Gaard]

Is it because France is a permanent member of the SC? Or is it because they are our ally? There are many countries who aren't going to vote for a war, but France is getting all of our hate. Why? Over in the Pakistan thread, it was mentioned that the reason Pakistan isn't going to go along with the war is that they are doing what every country should do...look out for it's own best interest. France doesn't get to do that? Or should they support our war, even though they don't wish to, out of a sense of obligation to us?

 

[freegeeks]

Quote

You could not be more wrong about Blair. He has been speaking out about the dangers of WMDs and Iraq for a *long* time, and he certainly was doing so long before Bush came around. Say what you will about Blair's disconnect with his party and people, but there is no cause to question the man's principles or sincerity.

so have Chiraq and Putin. Do you question their principles or sincerity???Way to side-step the issue. You know perfectly well that I have never posted anything about Chirac or Putin, because I do not feel the need to go around bad-mouthing leaders just because I disagree with their views. I was responding to your own attack on Blair and only that.

Of course I did not expect you to publicly admit that your opinion of Blair is mistaken, but hopefully you will learn from your error in judgment and in the future attack the argument, not the man.

Sorry but you are side stepping MY question.

It doesn't matter anyway. This whole "if you're not with us you're against us" will bite the USA right back in its a$$ and the US is going to attack no matter what.

Bunch of hypocrits. The US used its veto right 35 times to "protect" Israël and if France uses its veto they are cowards -- please

 

[NightTrain]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Is it because France is a permanent member of the SC? Or is it because they are our ally? There are many countries who aren't going to vote for a war, but France is getting all of our hate.

I feel no country should veto. Let the votes be counted and live with the result.

If the SC says no, then it's their problem. If Iraq goes back into Kuwait or anywhere else, let someone else die to liberate them. If the entire region blows up, we can always buy our oil from whomever survives.

But we get that SOB Bin Laden (and ANYONE who helped him) no matter what it takes.

 

[Rilescat]

You know ......the only reason Canada gets picked on so much in the US is that Canada has its foundings from France.

Leave Canada alone.....PICK ON A FRENCHMAN!

 

[freegeeks]

I feel no country should veto. Let the votes be counted and live with the result.

If the SC says no, then it's their problem. If Iraq goes back into Kuwait or anywhere else, let someone else die to liberate them. If the entire region blows up, we can always buy our oil from whomever survives.

But we get that SOB Bin Laden no matter what it takes.

Oh I agree. Let's go back to the UN to pass all the resolutions about Israël that the US blocked with its veto since the 70's . I'm pretty sure that the US and Israël can live with the result of the majority.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: NightTrain

Originally posted by: Gaard
Is it because France is a permanent member of the SC? Or is it because they are our ally? There are many countries who aren't going to vote for a war, but France is getting all of our hate.

I feel no country should veto. Let the votes be counted and live with the result.

If the SC says no, then it's their problem. If Iraq goes back into Kuwait or anywhere else, let someone else die to liberate them. If the entire region blows up, we can always buy our oil from whomever survives.

But we get that SOB Bin Laden (and ANYONE who helped him) no matter what it takes.

I wonder if it's just you who feels this way or if the majority who are criticizing France share your thoughts. So, it's really not a question of France not agreeing or not to this war...it's just that they say they will veto a vote. What if they abstained instead of voting to go to war? Would they still be called to the carpet?

 

[NightTrain]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

I feel no country should veto. Let the votes be counted and live with the result.

If the SC says no, then it's their problem. If Iraq goes back into Kuwait or anywhere else, let someone else die to liberate them. If the entire region blows up, we can always buy our oil from whomever survives.

But we get that SOB Bin Laden no matter what it takes.

Oh I agree. Let's go back to the UN to pass all the resolutions about Israël that the US blocked with its veto since the 70's . I'm pretty sure that the US and Israël can live with the result of the majority.

Ok...repeat "We condemn Israel for doing whatever they just did to the PLO" 37 times and that should about do it.

 

[NightTrain]

Originally posted by: Gaard
I wonder if it's just you who feels this way or if the majority who are criticizing France share your thoughts. So, it's really not a question of France not agreeing or not to this war...it's just that they say they will veto a vote. What if they abstained instead of voting to go to war? Would they still be called to carpet?

I can't speak for anyone else but yes I would view an abstention as almost as bad as a veto as it's gutless.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: NightTrain

Originally posted by: Gaard
I wonder if it's just you who feels this way or if the majority who are criticizing France share your thoughts. So, it's really not a question of France not agreeing or not to this war...it's just that they say they will veto a vote. What if they abstained instead of voting to go to war? Would they still be called to carpet?

I can't speak for anyone else but yes I would view an abstention as almost as bad as a veto as it's gutless.

Well if they don't agree that a war is warranted, and they can't veto nor abstain, that only leaves one choice...to vote 'no'. What if France was just a regular non-permanent member without veto power and they voted 'no'.?

I'm just trying to understand why all of the hatred for France for doing what a lot of other countries are doing.

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: NightTrain

Originally posted by: Gaard
Is it because France is a permanent member of the SC? Or is it because they are our ally? There are many countries who aren't going to vote for a war, but France is getting all of our hate.

I feel no country should veto. Let the votes be counted and live with the result.

If the SC says no, then it's their problem. If Iraq goes back into Kuwait or anywhere else, let someone else die to liberate them. If the entire region blows up, we can always buy our oil from whomever survives.

But we get that SOB Bin Laden (and ANYONE who helped him) no matter what it takes.

Hate to burst your bubble, but the US's resolution isn't going to pass the SC regardless of France's veto. There are not 9 yes votes for the resolution. Probably because 90% of the world is against this war.

 

[BigJelly]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: BigJelly
They call us narrow minded and we're the ones that went to the UN; they declare no matter what happens they'll veto. Fuc# them we should go after france after iraq and before korea. Bush shouldnt give france sh!t after iraq and force them to pay us back for the protection during the cold war and pay us back for WWII. I'm so pissed off i could kill them--as far as im concerned france is not an ally its more of an enemy. I will never buy any french product--boycott the frogs.

Gosh, you're such a patriot

I was pissed off when i wrote this but the argument still stands:
The french call us narrow-minded and not open to suggestion but they say NO MATTER WHAT they will veto. They aren't allowing the majority to rule, whos isw more narrow-minded?

I think I know why they are doing this--i think we'll find a lot of ILLEGAL french sh!t in iraq. Same with the germans. If this is the case, then the only way for the UN to have any standing/credit, they would have to remove france from the security council.

 

[Ioman]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Not allied with but both England and France sold out the Czechs with the Munich agreement in Sept/Oct of 1938...agreeing to give Hitler part of Czechoslovakia in hopes this would appease him and prevent war. In March of 1939, Hitler took the rest of Czechoslovakia and everyone involved with the Munich agreement was shown the door.

I know but the stupid moron said allied and then he starts talking about the NATO ????

Whoa, so I made a mistake. Why don't you knock off the personal attacks buddy. It is not appreciated around here.

 

[NightTrain]

Originally posted by: jahawkin
Hate to burst your bubble, but the US's resolution isn't going to pass the SC regardless of France's veto. There are not 9 yes votes for the resolution. Probably because 90% of the world is against this war.

There isn't any bubble to burst. I don't care which way they vote.

But if the resolution fails, I don't think we should attack Iraq.

 

[aswedc]

Quote BigJelly
The french call us narrow-minded and not open to suggestion but they say NO MATTER WHAT they will veto. They aren't allowing the majority to rule, whos isw more narrow-minded?

The majority? Nowhere in the world does the majority support war against Iraq except the US and possibly Britain, and that majority more or less dissapears as soon as the question is, "War without UN support?" The "vast right wing conspiracy" 😉 we have here on AT is in no way representative of the majority.

Besides, with Russia, Pakistan and Chile gone there is no way in hell the resolution will pass even if France were to abstain.

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: NightTrain

Originally posted by: jahawkin
Hate to burst your bubble, but the US's resolution isn't going to pass the SC regardless of France's veto. There are not 9 yes votes for the resolution. Probably because 90% of the world is against this war.

There isn't any bubble to burst. I don't care which way they vote.

But if the resolution fails, I don't think we should attack Iraq.

Unfortunately after the resolution fails we'll still go to war. 🙁

 

[Fencer128]

Here's a link to the BBC's coverage of the story:

France will veto

Here are some quotes from the above

French President Jacques Chirac said his country would vote against any resolution that contains an ultimatum leading to war.

"If they fail to agree on a common position and action is taken without the authority of the Security Council, the legitimacy and support for any such action would be seriously impaired," he [secretary general] said.

"If they were to veto...it would be, from a moral point, more than a disappointment. It would let down millions of people around the world, in this case Iraq, who deserve to be free and have a better life," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said.

Andy

 

[freegeeks]

Whoa, so I made a mistake. Why don't you knock off the personal attacks buddy. It is not appreciated around here.

well buddy

1)you were talking out of your ass
2)personal attacks are not appreciated here but bashing a whole nation in 5 different threads a day is OK

 

[freegeeks]

Quote
French President Jacques Chirac said his country would vote against any resolution that contains an ultimatum leading to war.

don't confuse the "vast right wing conspiracy" with facts

 

[spaceman]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Quote
French President Jacques Chirac said his country would vote against any resolution that contains an ultimatum leading to war.

don't confuse the "vast right wing conspiracy" with facts

I stopped buying zig zags.

BOYCOTT THE FROGS!!!
France=Judas

 

[xirtam]

I feel no country should veto. Let the votes be counted and live with the result.

Elighten me: did veto power get voted in, or was the resolution against it merely vetoed?

 

[MinorityReport]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: amdmang
if it wasnt for the US, they would be speaking german right now

they should be our puppet, just like the UK

that's soo wrong. the british are not puppets. their just smart. unlike the french they see that Germany is much more of a threat to their sovereignty than the US.

These american kids forget that Brits ruled them for a century and still do through their culture, language and every walk of American life.

In a sense US copies them .. not vice versa.. am I wrong ?

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: xirtam

I feel no country should veto. Let the votes be counted and live with the result.

Elighten me: did veto power get voted in, or was the resolution against it merely vetoed?

I *believe* that it has part of the UNSC process since day one. The big players in the world at that time only agreed to allow other countries to be part of the decision making process, and to work together - if they had a veto.

Andy

 

[Jmman]

It's confirmed: The US WILL ATTACK no matter what! 😛