The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.
What goes around comes around:
: As Glenn Reynolds would say, HEHE:
BBC correspondent Emma Jane Kirby, in Paris, says that many French people, who believed this was an illegal and hot-headed war, have been stunned by the welcome American forces received in Baghdad on Wednesday.
The French newspaper, Liberation, has warned that President Chirac is now threatened with isolation on the international stage.
TSK, TSK, TSK. chirac has only confirmed the statement which mark twain made in ‘Letters from Earth’ when he was discussing who hates who in the world and the only thing that everyone can agree about is that the ‘frenchman is the lowest creature on earth’.
you’d think having had the americans and the british march into paris, liberating them, that at least some of the prominent french folks would remember the joy they felt and want that for the iraqis who have been treated far worse than the germans treated the french…. go figure.
Yabbut, any French gratitude for the summer of 1945 was completely forgotten by the fall of that same year, whereby they resumed their panache for exporting toxic obnoxiousness. It is their niche in the world order, and they fill it admirably.
Dear Cris
Please remember a few details :
about the Liberation of Paris : I (and the French in general) have no doubt that the Americans (and other allied countries such as Canada, who refused to follow the US in Irak, and Britain and Australia, who did follow them but whose populations made huge manifestations against this war) had truly humanitarian reasons to go to France, and we certainly are thankful for this help which was reallly providential. But the US had some vital interests too, a fact they seem to forget these days. To make it short, they had no choice. They could not survive alone in front of a Nazi Europe, and were already threatened by Japan (remember Pearl Harbour?) Making war to Japan meant making war to Germany. Making war to Germany meant going to France. 30.000 GIs died in Normandy, while 100.000 French died under the allied bombs. They died for freedom, too. And for the future of America!
2)You seem to imply that Saddam’s regime was worse than the Nazi occupation . Are you kidding? If you see any difference in the figures, it’s because the Nazis have occupied France for “only” a few years, while Saddam has been in power during several decades. A power he owed to and which was supported by many occidental nations (including France AND the United States).
3) The French did not support Saddam but a peaceful disarmement of Irak. After all, that’s what the 1441 resolution was about, no? The concern for the freedom and happiness of the Irakis came rather late in the negociations, when the anglo-americans realized that they had not convinced the UN. It should have come sooner, for instance when they blindly enforced a long-term embargo which has prooved useless and murderous for the iraki population.
3) The war is not over and may last many years under different forms. As you probably know, peace will be more difficult to win than a war between the most powerful nation in the world and a small country which had not recovered from a previous conflict and, in spite of the US/GB allegations, which had already lost the main part of its army and armement (to this day, there has been no chemical, secret or even up-to-date weapon used by Saddam’s soldiers, which could imply that they had none) . So, the main concern for the French was not the outcome of the war but its consequences (and of course long term consequences). It’s too early to know what will come out of this conflict. Sure, we have seen many Irakis rejoicing about the fall of Saddam on our TV screens. But we also see people in the street innocently asking “when will the Americans go home?”, people saying that Saddam was a nightmare but that what they live now is worse, people seeing no future for them or their family, people mourning or homeless or maimed and abandoned in deserted hospitals, a potential leader killed in a mosque by his fellow-citizens because he was considered too pro-american, an other future iraki leader complaining about the uncontrolled behaviour of some coalition soldiers who are triggering hostility even among those who felt some gratitude, and, believe it or not, many Irakis, including longtime opposants, who hate Saddam… and the Americans. And I shall spare you the description of the many dangers which loom in the whole area because of the anglo-american presence.
A precision : I was not anti-american… to this day. When Pt Bush first evoked the possibilty of disposing of Saddam Hussein, I thought, like many French, that it could be a good idea. But the way he and Blair have defended their case