October 8, 2004

BEWARE THE ANGRY BACKSTABBERS?:

Report on Iraq Arms Deals Angers France and Others (STEVEN R. WEISMAN, 10/09/04, NY Times)

The Bush administration's handling this week of a report on Saddam Hussein's attempts to purchase weapons and buy influence has angered French officials and set back a year of American efforts to repair the rupture caused by the Iraq war, French and other European officials said Friday.

The anger of France and others is focused on the assertions in the report by Charles A. Duelfer, the top American arms inspector in Iraq, that French companies and individuals, some with close ties to the government, enriched themselves through Iraq's efforts to gain influence around the world in the years before the war.

Administration spokesmen said Friday that there was no intent in releasing the report to endorse its findings or blame France or any other country for corruption, or to link any alleged corruption to that country's subsequent opposition to the war in Iraq.

On the other hand, Vice President Dick Cheney and others in the administration are citing the Duelfer report as evidence that Mr. Hussein had sought to corrupt foreign countries in order to have sanctions on Iraq lifted. Although Mr. Cheney did not say so directly, French officials say it was obvious that he was referring to France and other countries that had opposed the war.


Is there a less formidable concept than "the anger of France"?

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 8, 2004 10:59 PM
Comments

"Is there a less formidable concept than "the anger of France"?"

1. The honesty of France

2. The integrity of France

3. The bravery of France

4. The humility of France

5. The courage of France

All of these are a less formidable concept -

Feel free to add to the list as you see fit.

Posted by: Oswald Booth Czolgosz at October 8, 2004 11:20 PM

Is there a less formidable concept than "the anger of France"?

The technological prowess of the Arab World?

The spirit of Humanitarianism in China?

Posted by: Eric Sivula at October 8, 2004 11:47 PM

I'm a pretty mellow guy but good lord F*ck France and they should be damn happy we haven't nuked them by now.

Posted by: AWW at October 9, 2004 12:01 AM

The French should feel flattered. Bush is simply following their highly nuanced political and diplomatic viewpoint that it is perfectly alright to slam your "allies" during a political campaign (wink, wink) and it really doesn't matter or affect the relationship.

Posted by: jd watson at October 9, 2004 1:39 AM

Oh please, the NY Times, that bastion of fair reporting, is telling us that the problem (right there in the first sentence, no less) is the administration's handling of the report??? I see, so as we know so well, it's Bush's fault... heck, France bears no responsibilty in the thing, that's clear. Would this be in keeping with the line of thinking that says it's the US's fault that 9/11 occured?

Posted by: at October 9, 2004 11:22 AM

Oh dear ... GWB will never persuade them to send troops to Iraq now.

Posted by: genecis at October 9, 2004 4:08 PM

Did the Times ask Bush if he regarded this as a setback?

Has the U.S. government really been trying to appease France for a whole year?

Posted by: Harry Eagar at October 9, 2004 5:43 PM
« SO MUCH FOR THE WHISPERING CAMPAIGN: | Main | BUTTERFLY EFFECT: »