Comments on: France http://www.davejustus.com/2004/07/28/france/ None Sine Causa Wed, 08 Oct 2008 02:16:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Dave Justus http://www.davejustus.com/2004/07/28/france/#comment-61 Dave Justus Fri, 30 Jul 2004 22:38:00 +0000 http://www.davejustus.com/2004/07/28/france/#comment-61 Aric, I'm not sure why anything you said refutes what Bill said. Does it really matter why France chose to divorce itself from U.S. interests? The fact is that they did at that time and have chosen to do so know. Even if you think the U.S. should have behaved differently in those situations (a strange position for a liberal to take) how does that change Bill's point? I don't think that France should automatically do what the U.S. wants anymore than I think we should automatically do what France wants. We should both do what is in our national best interest. I think France is making mistakes in their choices right now, but they certainly have the right to do so. Aric,

I’m not sure why anything you said refutes what Bill said. Does it really matter why France chose to divorce itself from U.S. interests? The fact is that they did at that time and have chosen to do so know.

Even if you think the U.S. should have behaved differently in those situations (a strange position for a liberal to take) how does that change Bill’s point?

I don’t think that France should automatically do what the U.S. wants anymore than I think we should automatically do what France wants. We should both do what is in our national best interest. I think France is making mistakes in their choices right now, but they certainly have the right to do so.

]]> By: Aric http://www.davejustus.com/2004/07/28/france/#comment-60 Aric Fri, 30 Jul 2004 01:57:00 +0000 http://www.davejustus.com/2004/07/28/france/#comment-60 That actually isn't a very good example, as France had some pretty solid reasons (at least for them) for distancing themselves from NATO and the U.S. By this time, the USSR an ICBM capable of reaching U.S. cities, and DeGaulle did not trust the U.S. to "trade New York for Paris." This was also before the Cuban Missile Crisis, and JFK was young and unproved. Also, we had blocked the attempt by France, England, and Israel to regain control of the Suez Canal, and refused to support French troops at Dien Bien Phu, resulting in a crushing French defeat and 10,000+ POWs (over half of which died.) That actually isn’t a very good example, as France had some pretty solid reasons (at least for them) for distancing themselves from NATO and the U.S. By this time, the USSR an ICBM capable of reaching U.S. cities, and DeGaulle did not trust the U.S. to “trade New York for Paris.” This was also before the Cuban Missile Crisis, and JFK was young and unproved. Also, we had blocked the attempt by France, England, and Israel to regain control of the Suez Canal, and refused to support French troops at Dien Bien Phu, resulting in a crushing French defeat and 10,000+ POWs (over half of which died.)

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.davejustus.com/2004/07/28/france/#comment-59 Anonymous Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:09:00 +0000 http://www.davejustus.com/2004/07/28/france/#comment-59 It isn't a difficult thing to deeply irritate France. France has a long history of feeling they must be the foil to the US going all the way back to De Gaul's withdrawal from NATO in 1966 to "restore France's prestige in world affairs." What astounds me, regularly, is the attempts by certain political groups in the US to appease France, as though there were any gains to be made by doing so. -- Bill It isn’t a difficult thing to deeply irritate France. France has a long history of feeling they must be the foil to the US going all the way back to De Gaul’s withdrawal from NATO in 1966 to “restore France’s prestige in world affairs.” What astounds me, regularly, is the attempts by certain political groups in the US to appease France, as though there were any gains to be made by doing so.

– Bill

]]>