''Going to war without the French .....
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: Alicante
All right,
it's good to see, in, say, the last 5 or 6 messages, that every insult/F*CK/words were completely banned. It's good to see there are minds above these guts ! Thank YOU to all (and specially to Brantshali !).
Oh, Cubic Inch, about my screen name: yes it stands for "I" or "me" in French. I usually use "Zico" or something similar, but I didn't want to hide my nationality. Good guess then . It was quite easy though !
I live in Spain, where I work, and I'm in close contact with France, where all my family lives.
You see, to try to make it quick and simple, I would say that French public opinion on what is allready called "war of Irak" is perfectly summed up in Brantshali's last posts.
Of course we're all aware of Saddam's dictatorial madness and crualty.
No One in France would hesitate one second in urgingly support and defend it's allies, and first of all USA, which is considered as family, should USA be attacked.
But the whole thing is about the DOUBT concerning the existence - in the case of today's situation of Irak - of a 'War clear cut case', as an armed agression/invasion would be (Koweit 1990).
Face it: preventive war is based on the intention you consider the 'ennemy' has. And you can simply be wrong on this.
A long time ago, Rome wanted to end with Carthago's rivalty. Yet Rome's Senate had doubts about launching a new war against the other city.
One senator once took the floor and showed his fellows a fruit, still fresh, though collected few days/hours ago in Carthago: The fear that ennemy soldiers could reach Rome as quickly lead to the Senate's decision to attack.
Carthago was completely deleted, and Rome extended its control on what soon became the "corn-tank" of Italy.
If they want to get rid of the-man-Saddam, US Intellingence could do it (they did it with so many others).
But for many people in Europe (that is just a point of view), Oil control is not worthing a war. This is our "side" of "the big picture".
Have a nice week-end.
it's good to see, in, say, the last 5 or 6 messages, that every insult/F*CK/words were completely banned. It's good to see there are minds above these guts ! Thank YOU to all (and specially to Brantshali !).
Oh, Cubic Inch, about my screen name: yes it stands for "I" or "me" in French. I usually use "Zico" or something similar, but I didn't want to hide my nationality. Good guess then . It was quite easy though !
I live in Spain, where I work, and I'm in close contact with France, where all my family lives.
You see, to try to make it quick and simple, I would say that French public opinion on what is allready called "war of Irak" is perfectly summed up in Brantshali's last posts.
Of course we're all aware of Saddam's dictatorial madness and crualty.
No One in France would hesitate one second in urgingly support and defend it's allies, and first of all USA, which is considered as family, should USA be attacked.
But the whole thing is about the DOUBT concerning the existence - in the case of today's situation of Irak - of a 'War clear cut case', as an armed agression/invasion would be (Koweit 1990).
Face it: preventive war is based on the intention you consider the 'ennemy' has. And you can simply be wrong on this.
A long time ago, Rome wanted to end with Carthago's rivalty. Yet Rome's Senate had doubts about launching a new war against the other city.
One senator once took the floor and showed his fellows a fruit, still fresh, though collected few days/hours ago in Carthago: The fear that ennemy soldiers could reach Rome as quickly lead to the Senate's decision to attack.
Carthago was completely deleted, and Rome extended its control on what soon became the "corn-tank" of Italy.
If they want to get rid of the-man-Saddam, US Intellingence could do it (they did it with so many others).
But for many people in Europe (that is just a point of view), Oil control is not worthing a war. This is our "side" of "the big picture".
Have a nice week-end.