posted on September 17, 2001 11:44:13 PM new
I was talking with the tom and he reminded me of one consideration that I had forgotten and y'all might not even know about-German law states specifically when their military may be used and that this little gig may not qualify under their law.
Think about it. How would America react if another country came in and asked us to change our law for them?
posted on September 17, 2001 11:59:22 PM newTwinsoft: Seems to me that the French signed an armistice with Nazi Germany *and* broke off relations with Britain in 1940. The Vichy régime were convinced that a favourable relationship with a Germany that was going to conquer Europe would be secured through collaboration. Yes, there were "Free French" forces fighting with the British (7,000 in 1940, about 400,000 by D-Day) and the Resistance operating inside France itself, but...out of a population of 41 million in 1940 that's a mere drop.
posted on September 18, 2001 12:38:46 AM new
What more from the commitment from France and Germany is wanted? They said they would join in military action, and they haven't withdrawn that support.
What is missing?
Is the only way some of you will be happy is for Europe to give you absolutely unqualified support, with not a murmur about what they see as acceptable? Not a hint of guidance or snippet of collectivity about what takes place?
Absolute domination by the U.S.?
Hmmmmm...
There are people in Europe who remember the reluctance of America to get involved in the last war. There are also many people who remember the warmth and the generosity of American people, unstintingly given at a time of need. They recognise America as a powerful nation, made up of individuals with a great capacity for love and caring for others.
I hope Americans never lose that quality. It is sometimes difficult to remember at times of pain and anger.
Without doubt Europeans have a different viewpoint from Americans. But they grieve with America, horrified at what has happened. Perhaps the distance they are from the catastrophe gives them a calmer perspective, and living among so many other nations makes it easier for them to identify with other nation's interests. For that reason, I would ask that you listen to their words carefully, and do not project your own interpretation on them precipitously.
Europeans want a safe world too. I doubt they want appeasement of the terrorists, with so many European countries having endured terrorist attacks themselves. But living so closely with Muslims from many nations, they are unlikely to have stomach for wholesale distruction of Islamic countries, and the lives of the people who live there.
This is not "quibbling" or "backing off" or "chickening out". It is simply a recognition of shared humanity with the vast majority of Muslims. They are us, in different colours and different clothes and different customs, with good and bad in them - just like us.
That is the source of the words suggesting a calm reaction.
posted on September 18, 2001 07:00:14 AM newBunnicula, it doesn't really matter who was at fault during WWII. It's their perception that counts. And while Americans feel we lead the free world, I guess most European nations figure they could get along just fine without us.
What is Bush after with his agreement? Are we planning a military takeover of the Middle East? We're basically asking for a blank check. It's understandable that European leaders urge caution.
Anyway, I guess Bush is more concerned with Russia's response than that of Germany or France.
posted on September 18, 2001 11:49:13 AM new
Indeed the perception is important. And in the case at hand, the perception of the French government is likely that they'd wind up in a better position in the long run by continuing their policies of appeasement and offering sanctuary to anyone with sufficient quantities of convertible currency.
And though from the perspective of this argument it "doesn't matter who was to blame for WWII", it doesn't entitle anyone, French foreign office official or AW poster, to their own distinct set of facts.
-gaffan- [email protected]
posted on September 18, 2001 12:36:07 PM new
Of course Europe remembers the role of the U.S. in the last world war, and is grateful for the helped it received. When I said Americans were generous in that time of need, I was referring to the military support received as well as the individual acts of kindness.
Europe does not see itself as isolationist, I do not believe. In creating the European Union it recognises the interdependence of nations, and strengthening the ties of European nations to each other as trading partners does not diminish the relationships they have with America.
I would like to ask Gaffan why he has the perception of France that he does. How are they "continuing their policies of appeasement and offering sanctuary to anyone with sufficient quantities of convertible currency"?
I haven't read the papers today, but haven't heard anything about France's current stance.
Edited to add:
I do not believe that European nations feel they would be better off without the U.S. It is clear they share many values with the U.S. - their basic commitment to democracy, their language (in at least part), a range of shared cultural influences - old and new.
There is nowhere that can really see itself in isolation anymore. The world is too small for that kind of thinking. While there is a great deal of America that is applauded and appreciated, there is also some of it that is not. It is really not so bad learning about your bad points - it offers possibilities of growth.
I really, really wish that American officials and sensitive American citizens could receive criticism in the heart that it is often given. With kindness, and with the hope for responsive change. Not always with condemnation. With hope that it will be heard with consideration, and not rejected out of hand.
It could help to alleviate much of the aggravation and animosity held towards the U.S. You may not agree with the criticism, you may choose not to adapt to it, but hearing the criticisms and acknowledging that there are grievances (legitimate or not) goes a very long way to unravelling them.
posted on September 18, 2001 12:51:18 PM new
about France's stance - French President Chirac is meeting today with President Bush. We should know, more accurately, soon.
