Does the U.S. need to make a new global organization with like minded nations?

[Dauphin]

I find it amusing that on the one hand a lot of Americans are berating the French as useless has-beens who can't defend themselves and on the other ***** and moan about them not providing military support and standing up against the US view on the subject.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Frogger
I'm not trying to make Canada look high and mighty; I'm saying that I don't feel that the French owe us anything more concrete than a thank you. And neither do they owe you any more than that.

France, Germany, Belgium, Denmark etc. owe Canada a debt of thanks for helping free them from internal and external oppressors, and no more. They don't owe us a subservient foreign policy, and they certainly don't owe you one.

i dont think the others are so frustrated about not getting a thanks, but rather, of France and others seemingly actilvely trying to undercut the US, almost like a political enemy. To them and others, France et al are doing this for no really giid reason, which can be argued eternally. In other words, they think is just being unfairly disagreeable for their own political gain and to hurt the US... and they should be more greatful than to try and hurt our foreign policy like an enemy or somethn

[Ned]

Originally posted by Big Crunch
I find it amusing that on the one hand a lot of Americans are berating the French as useless has-beens who can't defend themselves and on the other ***** and moan about them not providing military support and standing up against the US view on the subject.

We don't need their military support.

This is about their veto in both the UN and NATO. They have the power to obstruct and they are obstructing.

[KrazyHorse]

You've placed yourself in a position that is directly opposed to the beliefs of the European public. They don't want war in Iraq, and are willing to do something diplomatically about it.

If you hate the disagreement so much, stop pushing for a war.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ned


We don't need their military support.

This is about their veto in both the UN and NATO. They have the power to obstruct and they are obstructing.

Too bad. Their veto power isn't ceremonial, you know. It's there for them to use when they feel it should be.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Ned


We don't need their military support.

This is about their veto in both the UN and NATO. They have the power to obstruct and they are obstructing.

NATO has no jurisdiction on the war in Iraq, and the French haven't vetoed anything at the UN.

[Kramerman]

If you hate the disagreement so much, stop pushing for a war.

*shruggs*

or go it alone...

[KrazyHorse]

Go for it, then. But don't act hurt when they work against you.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Frogger
Duncan, what you're saying is ridiculous. The French should just shut up if they don't agree with you? They should abstain instead of voting against you?

Whatever. You still want them to have a subservient foreign policy. Would you feel the US had the obligation to keep its mouth shut when the French went to war? If so, what about 1954ish in the Suez?

You know I'm not saying they should be subservient. I'm saying they shouldn't be combative. They are trying to enlist opposition to us. Why they hell can't they just stay out of it? It's not right for them to do this to an ally. They have no respect for the concept of alliance. And they act at their own peril.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Frogger
In other words, the American hawks here would do a lot better to actually argue for their case instead of sitting around whining that other people don't agree with them.

I'm not arguing for war. I'm arguing about France having an irresponsible diplomatic strategy.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Big Crunch
I find it amusing that on the one hand a lot of Americans are berating the French as useless has-beens who can't defend themselves and on the other ***** and moan about them not providing military support and standing up against the US view on the subject.

There are huge consequences. I'm not saying that we could ever depend on France militarily, but we made huge economic investments in that country. We trade with them significantly. The worst is that changes in the diplomatic structure of the world are dangerous.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Frogger
You've placed yourself in a position that is directly opposed to the beliefs of the European public. They don't want war in Iraq, and are willing to do something diplomatically about it.

If you hate the disagreement so much, stop pushing for a war.

Like we've been saying. Why the hell should they care? It seems that they just want to impede us.

[KrazyHorse]

Why did you care about Suez in 1954?

[DuncanK]

I personally wasn't alive then. I don't know that much about it. It's in the past. If we were at fault two wrongs don't make a right.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Frogger
Why did you care about Suez in 1954?

It was 1956. Eisenhower was certainly pissed because France, Britain and Israel attacked without consulting him.

Eisenhower believed in detente with the USSR. This is why he turned the other cheek with they took Hungary in '56 and their client Nassar took the Suez in the same year.