Was Chirac any more noble than Bush?

[Bush loves Jiang]

They were both acting in the interests of their cronies: Chirac, from our persepctive, just had cronies who happened to support the same side as us, albeit for the wrong reasons.

(BTW, Chirac is a conservative too.)

[madrchsod]

1. history is still

out on chirac..history is already forming it`s opinion on bush

[saltpoint]

2. Chirac is conservative and France has its --

-- shortcoings on foreign policy (See: Rainbow Warrior, explosion).

But Bush knew he was lying when he lied. Bush saw millions of people on several continents marching against war and ignored them. Bush lied to the United Nations. Bush's Secretary of State lied to the United Nations. Bush and his Secretary of Defense lied to our European allies, including Chirac.

Chirac is no angel, but he's intelligent and runs a coherent government, unlike the Bush administration.

[Dirk39]

3. One european says no,

he wasn't and he isn't - same is true for Schroeder and Fischer.
During the prior gulf war, Chiraq was attacking the french socialists - who were governing France then - for not using ABC weapons.
Same is true for Germany, having huge interests in the Balkan regions.
The conflict between France and the USA began much earlier. France has an interesting colonial history in that region, not to mention Nazi-Germany and the Balkans.

In a way it seems to me that sometimes, we can profit from different unnoble regimes and leaders having different interests.
If the people in France wouldn't have voted for Chiraq out of the most noble reasons I can imagine: preventing the fashist and racist Le Pen from playing a mayor role in french politics, Chiraq might sit in prison now.

Hello from Germany,
Dirk

[FrankBooth]

10. Le Pen

One thing that I've always found interesting about the Le Pen fiasco in France, was the reaction by the French after their apathy allowed him into the final election - the country was in an uproar! If I recall correctly, voter turnout was incredibly high. Once the general populace realized that this racist, neo-fascist guy could actually could President, they all turned out to make sure he didn't!

God how I would love that kind of public reaction here in the USA, where we face an incumbent Le Pen.

[Dirk39]

12. You're right...

IIRC it wasn't even about Le Pen having the chance to become the president...
And in a way, whatever you (and I, if I'm allowed to say so...:-)) might think about Bush, the situation in France could be rather compared to one minor fashist party in the USA starts to play a mayor role. Bush is in a way legitimated coming out of the center of the U.S.A. , not being an outsider trying to enter the stage.

But in a way: hey France, what about another 1789? What about at least reminding us a bit of Robbespierre, if nothing else is of help?

And what about this liaison with Germany? O.K. I appreciate that not every single german is still a Nazi for you, but do you think it will do us some good, if France combines it's dreams of the colonial empire, it was, with Germany's desperate attempt(s) to make up for it's shortcomings in colonialism? Wasn't too funny the last two times, we were about to do this.
You know better than this...
Savoir vivre,
Dirk

[Cleita]

4. Perhaps the difference is that some conservatives are

not nut case ideologues, like the looney tunes situation we have in our White House.

[Serenity-NOW]

5. Noble? Spare me.

Nobility is lost. Once upon a time we had a thing: Noblesse Oblige. That's all gone. There is no more nobility.

Now it's class warfare but only the upper class is participating.

[Dirk39]

7. Agree...

many U.S. people, esp. the liberals, seem to think that Europe would still be a kind of working example of a "third way" welfare state, some U.S. people even call Europe socialist - haven't heard anyone in Europe ever doing this. It's even cynical when some populistic european politicians oppose Europe and it's "social-state" to the cruel brutalo-capitalism in the U.S.A., while at the same time destroying this social state. It was nearly pervert and obscene, when the same government, forcing the privatisation and deregulation of everything, including the energy sector, were making jokes about the energy collapse in parts of the U.S.A. a few weeks ago.
Dirk

[ButterflyBlood]

6. yes, Chiraq is a conservative

not a fascist neocon.

[sweetheart]

8. The real question is: "Was Blair any more noble than Bush?"

Chiraq can't be compared... plus he goes way back with iraq, just like rumsfeld does... its too long and complex to paint black and white.

I would say that blair is the one who has failed his constituents... whos government was incapable of even the remotest intelligence capability... as even I, a private citizen knew bush was lying, but blair claims to remain convinced about those WMD's.. as if, even today, by repeating it over and over, he can call his actions "guided by intelligence" and noble.... when the facts show him to be not of that ilk.

Chiraq at least has not sold his own people out to die in an illegal war... whereas folks in these parts have had their sons killed, pay extra taxes for military waste and criminal government... all the while blair claims righteousness with his head up bush's bum.

Hell, we should get bush a plexiglass bellybutton so blair can see out!

I agree with dirk, that european socialism is no panacea, yet in that same thought, i think that germany does not have the poverty that america has, and that he does not know the downside of the american race to the bottom... and in this regard, europe is thankfully ignorant of the extreme destruction of the middle classes taking place stateside.

[dansolo]

9. Chirac didn't violate international law

I don't care that he may have been concerned about his own interests. That is basically a right-wing anti-French talking point anyway. Chirac may not have been more noble, but Bush was definitely less noble. If it makes you feel better to think of Chirac as a lesser of two evils, fine. There is a line that shouldn't be crossed, and Bush was the one who crossed it, not Chirac.

[Blue_Chill]

11. Yes but he actually wanted this monster to stay in power

because he owed money to French business!!

Is the spirit of international law really about allowing nations to keep monsters in power under the guise of following the law? That is disgusting! If that is the result of international law then scrap it.

Bush was wrong for lying to the American people, invading a nation with no real plan in place, and now giving away the spoils of war to his donors. International law isn't a blip on the radar screen as to why this war was wrong.

Chirac was wrong for attempting to steer the UN from doing what it should have done LONG AGO to keep the big business in his country happy. If anything this dumb ass showed the world that the UN has been corrupted. International law was hijacked for corporate interests.