they kiss and make up

this newsline today -

Attempting to mend fences, France's finance minister on Sunday took U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow on a tour of Normandy beaches and said differences between the two countries over Iraq cannot hurt traditional ties.

The visit to the beaches where thousands of American soldiers lost their lives to liberate France from Nazi occupiers followed a two-day Group of Eight meeting with monetary officials from the world's wealthiest countries and Russia.

The loss of life ``demonstrates that 50 years later, relations that are so tight cannot, and will not, ever be ruptured,'' French Finance Minister Francis Mer said.

Mer and Snow also sought to move beyond differences over Iraq to work together to spur global economic growth at the G8 meetings at the seaside resort of Deauville.

The two were regularly seen sharing warm handshakes, smiles and pats on the back - in contrast to the harsh exchange of words between Washington and Paris after France refused to back the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

credit to kim Housego, Associated Press, carried by AOL link




I'm gratified to see at least some genuine attempts to patch up this complex and important relationship. It might be said that there were matters of real import to both sides, but I prefer to see people get along rather than quarrel. For countries, it is an imperative.

JMHO

I still dont see Chirac coming out to the ranch anytime soon, if you know what i mean. ;)

Same thing happening with Germany as well.

I think France & Germany realised that the way they opposed the Iraq war gave extreme offence to the US, as it came across as very anti American, rather than as a matter of principle.

Some countries in Europe were in favour & some were against (about a 50/50 split).
Most of those who were against (e.g. Belguim) just said that they didn't agree, and left it at that. France, however, made it very clear that most of the reasons it had for opposing the war were because it was taking an anti American stance, which is very popular with the French electorate.

From a economic perspective France & Germany have to maintain good trading links with the US, which is why they are trying to rebuild relations. The same thing is not necessarily the case the other way round, as the US could shift a lot of its trade to other European countries.

I have a feeling there will be lingering resentment in Washington for some time - who knows how this will pan out?

Quote:

---

I have a feeling there will be lingering resentment in Washington for some time - who knows how this will pan out?

---

The only people in Washington who are showing any type of support (very little) for the French are the democrat's, to be more specific the liberal's. Even then it's scarce to see anyone who gives a damn about the French at the moment. It's one thing to not be for the war and to vote against it, it's another to go out of your way to make it difficult on us. Everytime the French are brought up in a conversation over here all you will get is scoff's and jokes. I think the French overplayed their hand in their opposition to the war, and American's have memories like elephant's and this will remain fresh in most American's minds for quite awhile. I can forgive fairly easily, but my brethren wont soon forget. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by FrameWork


The only people in Washington who are showing any type of support (very little) for the French are the democrat's, to be more specific the liberal's. Even then it's scarce to see anyone who gives a damn about the French at the moment. It's one thing to not be for the war and to vote against it, it's another to go out of your way to make it difficult on us. Everytime the French are brought up in a conversation over here all you will get is scoff's and jokes. I think the French overplayed their hand in their opposition to the war, and American's have memories like elephant's and this will remain fresh in most American's minds for quite awhile. I can forgive fairly easily, but my brethren wont soon forget. ;)

---

The attitude of the French to foreign affairs is not popular in the UK, as most people realise they are taking an untenable position on most issues. France is the only country in the EU not to have fully joined NATO.

France can still throw its weight arround, as due to a serious anomaly on the security council of the UN , France is still able to veto any resolution. One of the top 5 military/economic powers in the wrold? - No, I don't think so :D

Quote:

---

France is the only country in the EU not to have fully joined NATO.

---

Your right, but it's odd though, cause they chose not to. I wonder if they envisioned an EU down the road and forsaw some future commitments. :p

Look, we'll still be political friends, that as far as I can see was never in joepardy. But I happen to know that many American's have chosen not to do business with the French for whatever reason and that in the long will hurt France. So they can kiss and try to make up all they want but irregardless of those "gestures" I think many Americans feel that the French have a price to pay first.

I, on the other hand, am going to buy some stock in a very large French company because it has business merit and I'm not jaded by newly found patriotism. I know that we would do what we have to do with or without any help from anyone. That's just the way it's going to have to be sometimes.;)

The French are already feeling the heat though.

Quote:

---

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

How long did it take for what many see as France's diplomatic back-stabbing of the U.S. and Great Britain on Iraq to hurt the nation's tourism industry?

Not very long.

After 14 years in second place, Spain has replaced France as the United Kingdom's favorite holiday destination.

A loss of 300,000 visitors to France and a 25 percent drop in bookings in a month is the reason, reports the Scotsman.

The French president's anti-war stance and the "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" factor in the United States has also caused a decline in the number of U.S. tourists. Tension between the UK and France increased two weeks ago when protesters desecrated a cemetery in northern France, vandalizing memorials with graffiti.

Travelers are actively boycotting France, according to Holidaylets.net, which has 2,000 homes to rent.


Travel to Paris off sharply in recent months

Internet searches for France have dropped significantly, according to Ross Hugo, the managing director, who said his sales teams have indicated French attitudes, and the incident involving Second World War graves had hardened attitudes.

"Our understanding is that this [drop] is due to political tensions," he added.

Around 12.6 million Britons have visited Spain in the last year while visits to France fell to 11.7 million from more than 12 million. Owen Davies, the marketing director of the Individual Travelers' Company, said: "Spain has held up well but France is down."

A spokeswoman for the French tourist office in London admitted UK bookings were "sluggish" and that there had been a downturn in U.S. visitors.

But some British companies are describing the "downturn" as a drastic decline.

And Chez Nous, a leading seller of French accommodation, has had cancellations since the war began, where customers said French President Jacques Chirac's "obstruction" was the reason.

---

stock in a big french company? I'm curious now.

This is reminiscent of the bombing attack on Libya during Ronald Reagan's presidency. The planes flying from the UK had to fly around France and Spain and come in through Gibraltar.

People were pissed at the French for that too. However Francois Mitterand was a better statesman than Chirac, and was able to smooth things out.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by fourdc
This is reminiscent of the bombing attack on Libya during Ronald Reagan's presidency. The planes flying from the UK had to fly around France and Spain and come in through Gibraltar.

People were pissed at the French for that too. However Francois Mitterand was a better statesman than Chirac, and was able to smooth things out.

---

Very true - on this occasion France said it objected in principal to the attack on Libyia, which is fair enough. I, for one, don't expect the UK or any other European country to agree automatically with everything that the US says :p

However, at that time France didn't indulge in anti American rhetoric, and pointed out the moral & practical reasons for its refusal. Which is exactly how countries like Belguim responded to the latest Iraq war - a position that I respect, even though I might not agree with it.

In reply to FrameWorks comment about France's position in NATO, France does not want anything to do with the US at a military level, which is why it refuses to join, except as an observer. In fact in a French ideal world, they would rather not have any dealings with the US period, unless of course it is US tourists visiting France.

Mind you the French paid the price for that when they tried to block a NATO resolution on Iraq.
The president of NATO used an interesting constitutional ploy of putting it to a vote of the full members (i.e. all the countries in the EU except for France), and the resolution was duly passed.

Quote:

---

In reply to FrameWorks comment about France's position in NATO, France does not want anything to do with the US at a military level, which is why it refuses to join, except as an observer. In fact in a French ideal world, they would rather not have any dealings with the US period, unless of course it is US tourists visiting France.

---

In a perfect world with no war, France would thrive, but that's just not the way things are. All i can say is that i will always love the French for that great deal on the Louisiana Purchase. ;)

The key issue to the problem may be in addressing the French feeling of a better time gone by. They believe they were called for greatness and perhaps have trouble with reconciling their current minor power status with that image.

Something tell's me the French will have an even larger role to play in the EU over the next few years.

Louisiana purchase was a great deal but let's not forget that France was a motivated seller. Its was going broke supporting Napolean's empirical fantasies.

In similar vein, I'm sure Russia regrets selling Alaska :)

One interesting report coming out of the UN at the moment is that the UK is suggesting the permanent members of the security council are expanded to include Germany, Japan, and India. The British ambassador stated the reason was to "try and re-establish the credibility of the UN".

Seems logical to me, as the security council would then more or less reflect the makeup of the G8, who are the leading industrial democracies in the world, although of course it would dilute the power of the existing 5 members.

I expect France will veto that as well :D

Quote:

---

In similar vein, I'm sure Russia regrets selling Alaska

One interesting report coming out of the UN at the moment is that the UK is suggesting the permanent members of the security council are expanded to include Germany, Japan, and India. The British ambassador stated the reason was to "try and re-establish the credibility of the UN".

Seems logical to me, as the security council would then more or less reflect the makeup of the G8, who are the leading industrial democracies in the world, although of course it would dilute the power of the existing 5 members.

I expect France will veto that as well

---

Alaska was a great bargain. :p

I'm with you on that darkes, the French will probably veto that one. It wouldnt matter though if we(U.S.) had Japan and India anyway, because of the mighty "veto".

As for re-establishing the UN's credibility, that will never happen. The UN's credibility has gone straight out the window, and has landed on the lap of the EU :( (I'm no fan of the EU), but this is the reality of the situation.

<spelling edited>

Maybe we need a new international body then. The Eu won't suffice completely because it is continent specific. The UN was supposed to, in principle, respresent the world interest.

Ah, theory as opposed to practice... There are many things that in theory would be very beneficial to Man but in practice those same things do nothing but harm....

Religion being one of them. Great in principle, but when you leave it up to men/women to implement it, it makes almost everyone suffer.

Quote:

---

There are many things that in theory would be very beneficial to Man but in practice those same things do nothing but harm....

Religion being one of them. Great in principle, but when you leave it up to men/women to implement it, it makes almost everyone suffer.

---

I dont think religion does nothing but harm. It's only the fanatics that do most of the harm. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by FrameWork


I dont think religion does nothing but harm. It's only the fanatics that do most of the harm. ;)

---

You're just reitterating what I said. Religion, in theory, is good. In practice it's usually abused and corrupted, I'm sorry but that's what I get from "I kill in the name of God!" No matter if a Muslim is saying it or Christian. ;)

In theory religion does absolutely no harm but when men try to "practice" it, it becomes a horrible mess and all of the ideals truly do get thrown out the window.

Sorry about that KD, i must have misinterpreted your comments. My brain must have caught something in the phrasing i guess. Sorry about that. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by FrameWork


Alaska was a great bargain. :p

I'm with you on that darkes, the French will probably veto that one. It wouldnt matter though if we(U.S.) had Japan and India anyway, because of the mighty "veto".

As for re-establishing the UN's credibility, that will never happen. The UN's credibility has gone straight out the window, and has landed on the lap of the EU :( (I'm no fan of the EU), but this is the reality of the situation.

<spelling edited>

---

I'm not sure about this. The difference with a security council of 8 permanent members (more or less representing the G8) plus 10 other random states, would be to look at any votes it took. Even France would find it hard to dismiss a 17-1 vote.

I suppose it has sorted of landed in the EUs lap, but if you look at the NATO vote on Iraq you can see the difference when France is excluded. The whole of the rest of Europe (yes, this includes Germany, Belgium etc.) were able to come to a compromise proposal, which France was threatening to veto :mad: - only passed because of the constitutional ploy used by the president of NATO.

Even the EU itself agreed on a compromise proposal, as France couldn't veto that either, although France did complain very loudly about an open letter signed by 9 European states, stating they were in favour of the US position on Iraq, claiming this undermined the position of the EU.

Speaking from this side of the pond, what we need is an EU that represents the views of its member states, rather than pandering to France (and to a lesser extent Germany) all the time.

I see your point darkes, but with the way the French have been acting lately, it doesnt seem like they care very much even if they are indeed the minority.

maybe they subscribe to the maxim that a creaky hinge gets oiled.

Yeah, i just saw on the news where the French have rolled out a new video advertisement thingy called "let's fall in love again" aimed twoard's the American people. It's where they are wanting us to travel there again etc etc..... :p Pretty catchy i guess.

I'm finally over it, but the poll's still show that people are fairly upset with them. :)

Another visit to Paris is not on my schedule at this point. Let's see if they change ways and not just words.

I'm very curious of what you say. In France I never see Anti-American people, discourses, etc. If you have this in our News I think it's an invention of newspapers and TV. We have no boycott America or US product. American are always welcome.

Your right in a way Ghostdog, where i live, i don't see anyone pouring out any wine, but you do hear jokes.

I'm sure no american is dumb enough to show discourse while in another country surrounded by those he was upset with.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by KorpDeath
Look, we'll still be political friends, that as far as I can see was never in joepardy. But I happen to know that many American's have chosen not to do business with the French for whatever reason and that in the long will hurt France.

---

That seems like a typically "redneck" attitude....


<bubba accent>"Y'all don't agree with what we think so ya'll can go take a flying jump.....Think like us and believe what we tell ya all or we don't wanna play..."</bubba accent> :)

Quote:

---

That seems like a typically "redneck" attitude....

---

I don't think so, it's almost what i would call a natural reaction, or gut feeling ya know. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by FAQ



That seems like a typically "redneck" attitude....


<bubba accent>"Y'all don't agree with what we think so ya'll can go take a flying jump.....Think like us and believe what we tell ya all or we don't wanna play..."</bubba accent> :)

---

Cute, you selectively quote me out of context and call me redneck? You have no clue as to whom you address.

*with a southern drawl*
'Round these parts that means war, boy.

"Some men you just can't reach, so you get what we had here last week. Which is the way he wants it, well, he gets it. But I don't like it anymore than you men. -cool hand luke

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Ghostdog
I'm very curious of what you say. In France I never see Anti-American people, discourses, etc. If you have this in our News I think it's an invention of newspapers and TV. We have no boycott America or US product. American are always welcome.

---

"In France I never see Anti-American people, discourses, etc."
You have a point that some (perhaps even a majority) of French people are not anti-American.
However French foreign policy is, and has been for years, virulently anti-American, a stance that the vast majority of French people support. Not exactly encouraging is it?

"If you have this in our News I think it's an invention of newspapers and TV. We have no boycott America or US product. American are always welcome."

I don't think the US could give a toss whether or not France boycotts US products.
However it matters a lot to France to entice tourists from the US, and other places (e.g. the UK), a lot of which has been damaged by the French approach to Iraq, and international affairs in general.

Quote:

---

darkes said

However French foreign policy is, and has been for years, virulently anti-American, a stance that the vast majority of French people support. Not exactly encouraging is it?

---

France is not anti-American, France don't want that a single country gouvern the world. US knows that he is the more powerfull country. If we take Iraq as example. US said that they want to put democracy but they bypass a democratic vote of UN (UN has voted no to war)

Quote:

---

darkes said

I don't think the US could give a toss whether or not France boycotts US products.
However it matters a lot to France to entice tourists from the US, and other places (e.g. the UK), a lot of which has been damaged by the French approach to Iraq, and international affairs in general.

---

The USA are not the firsts tourists in France, there are more British, Dutch or Spanish. We have much money of the English because they buy houses in Normandy (it is less expensive than on their places).

What disturbs to me is that I have the impression that the USA do not understand the point of view of France. I understands the position of the USA with respect to Iraq even if I do not agree, is it a problem of mentality (blind patriotism)? Are we too complicated? Don't the USA like France in spite of what they say? I don't know what to think.

Quote:

---

France is not anti-American, France don't want that a single country gouvern the world.

---

Fair enough, but when is the last time you saw the U.S with imperialistic goal's....

We fight almost the same way everytime.... We freed Kuwait, we stopped Milosevic, we freed Afghanistan, we freed the Iraq'i people.... There is a pattern, and it's not hard to see.

We have no intention's of occupying another's country. If threatend we go in, kill the bad guy's and get out. In Iraq it will take a little time since most everyone overestimated there infrastructure. We will need to stay and help them rebuild, set up a democracy, and get their oil pumping again. Which mind you, will benefit the entire world, because Iraq could have just as much oil as Saudia Arabia, and we know for sure they have the second largest oil reserve on earth.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Ghostdog

France is not anti-American, France don't want that a single country gouvern the world. US knows that he is the more powerfull country. If we take Iraq as example. US said that they want to put democracy but they bypass a democratic vote of UN (UN has voted no to war)


The USA are not the firsts tourists in France, there are more British, Dutch or Spanish. We have much money of the English because they buy houses in Normandy (it is less expensive than on their places).

What disturbs to me is that I have the impression that the USA do not understand the point of view of France. I understands the position of the USA with respect to Iraq even if I do not agree, is it a problem of mentality (blind patriotism)? Are we too complicated? Don't the USA like France in spite of what they say? I don't know what to think.

---

Nothing wrong with taking a view that is opposed to the US. But France believes that the whole of Europe should support the French position on foreign policy - and to quote your presidents recent remarks "I am the state" - Louis XIV mean anything here?

And how many times to I have to state that the UN did not vote on the latest Iraq resolution, because the UN is not a democracy, and probably never will be. A democracy means by definition that the majority vote wins. So you get a vote that France disagrees with (say 14 -1), yet France still wins?

And let me stress another point - the UN did not vote against the war in Iraq.
The UN didn't vote on this proposal because France said it would veto it under any circumstances.

I think you will find that a lot of people understand the position of the French very clearly.
It isn't blind patriotism, but a fundamental distrust of what France is really up to.

you are right, the un is not a democracy. Especially the unsc, it is more like a club. Ok, a very exclusive club.

Quote:

---

FrameWork said

We fight almost the same way everytime.... We freed Kuwait, we stopped Milosevic, we freed Afghanistan, we freed the Iraq'i people.... There is a pattern, and it's not hard to see.

---

Kuwait was freed in 1991 NOT ONLY by US but also by UK, France, etc.
You don't stop Milosevic alone (have you heard about Dayton agreement)
Yes you have freed Afganistan but look at what this country is now. The people need everything. US came, put the talisban away and go back.
The UK have also freed Iraquis people but this is only one battle the war is not finish. All iraquis are armed, there is a lot of "Ali Baba", they need food, medecine, work, etc.

Quote:

---

darkes said

the UN is not a democracy, and probably never will be. A democracy means by definition that the majority vote wins.

---

That's no true. Here is the definition (found Here

democracy [dı'mɒkrəsı]
noun
(plural: -cies)
1 government by the people or their elected representatives
2 a political or social unit governed ultimately by all its members
3 the practice or spirit of social equality
4 a social condition of classlessness and equality
5 the common people, esp. as a political force
[ETYMOLOGY: 16th Century: from French démocratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek demokratia government by the people; see demo-, -cracy]

They never said that the majority win. UN IS a democracy because there is a vote of ALL his members. The only thing is that there is 5 permanents members and 10 are elected every 2 years. To adopt a resolution ALL THE 5 permanents MUST BE AGREE. Like all others democracies there is rules.

Quote:

---

Kuwait was freed in 1991 NOT ONLY by US but also by UK, France, etc.
You don't stop Milosevic alone (have you heard about Dayton agreement)
Yes you have freed Afganistan but look at what this country is now. The people need everything. US came, put the talisban away and go back.
The UK have also freed Iraquis people but this is only one battle the war is not finish. All iraquis are armed, there is a lot of "Ali Baba", they need food, medecine, work, etc.

---

Surely you arent suggesting that the people of Afghanistan are worse off than before are you? Because if you are then maybe you need to replay the video from when they were dancing in the street, playing music for the first time, and shaving their beards off that the Taliban made them wear.

Quote:

---

FrameWork said

Surely you arent suggesting that the people of Afghanistan are worse off than before are you? Because if you are then maybe you need to replay the video from when they were dancing in the street, playing music for the first time, and shaving their beards off that the Taliban made them wear.

---

That's not what I said. I said that you put the Taliban away and after you go back home. The problem is that they need food and medecine. Look at the hospital, they have nothing, they can't operate, 40% of the women die after having a baby due to the sanitary condition.