France threatens “force” in Syria
Yeah, I know, I haven’t stopped laughing and it’s hard to type with tears running down my face, but France finally found something to get outraged about in the Middle East – namely Syria’s supposed use of chemical weapons yesterday. From CNN;
Hours after the closed-door meeting, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told CNN affiliate BFMTV that “a reaction of force must be taken” if the allegations are true.
“If the U.N. Security Council cannot do it, decisions will be made otherwise,” Fabius said. But, he said, sending ground troops to Syria is out of question.
I’m sure that Fabius is not threatening the use of French troops or armament – mostly likely some form of having someone else do something. Apparently, Russia and China have blocked the Security Council from doing anything which forces the UN to recognize it’s absolute uselessness in world affairs.
Yuval Steinitz, Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs, told Israel Radio Thursday morning that its intelligence assessments indicated that “chemical weapons were used, and they were not used for the first time.”
He accused the international community of “paying lip service” when it comes to Syria.
“Nothing practical, significant, has been done in the last two years in order to stop the continuing massacre of civilians carried out by the Assad regime,” he said. “I think that the investigation of the United Nations is a joke.”
Not to mention their inability to stop Iran from building a nuclear arsenal.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu called on the United Nations to act decisively, Turkey’s semi-official Anadolu news agency reported.
Davutoglu said “all red lines” have been crossed without the United Nations taking action in Syria and that the body “can’t assume an undecisive attitude about chemical weapon attacks” there.
Well, you guys made the UN a bloated bureaucracy that can’t get out of it’s own way, so live with it or dismantle it.
Category: Terror War, United Nations
I hear what you’re saying, Mustang. But Napolean got some shit done. Also Charles the Hammer was a force to be contended with. He created the very idea of knights and feudalism. Charlemagne was the first Holy Roman Emperor and a badass to boot.
I’m no big fan of the modern French (other than some food and hot women they export to the US), but medieval France was a place of power.
Nik, Napoleon lost to Wellington.
@51.
Battle of Tours (732).
Charles Martell. Charlemagne’s Great Grandfather I believe.
Good thing he won.
The world might be a very different place right now.
Same shit happened in Bosnia. Fundamentalist Muslims launched artillery into a marketplace, and NATO jumped at the UN’s beck and call. Testimony earlier this year at the Hague showed NATO intelligence assets had imagery of a mortar position in close proximity doing the firing- from a position held by the Islamists.
Dog and pony show. No one on the ground in Syria can definitively state who put the chem/bio weapons into play, and the sabers are getting rattled. Just a total mess whole way around.
Smart tack- for once, let them kill themselves without the rest of us getting involved.
@52
You’re right. But you gotta admit, he was a ballsy short fella.
@53
You’re absolutely right, GT. WTF would the world look like now if he’d lost?
Shortly after its opening Euro Disney was officially forbidden from shooting off fireworks. The reason? The French Military showed up to surrender every time they fired one off! Anyone seen the French Battle Flag? It’s a white cross on a white background!!
Yuh sister smokes corn silk and your brother drives a pickle wagon!!
@51. Napoleon was ethnically Italian and as I recall, Martel and his descendant Charlemagne were ethnically Germanic so I wouldn’t count theme as French. And Charlemagne couldn’t do squat against the Moors except keep them out of France. Pretty crappy considering he was the Holy Roman Emperor and he was supposed to be the foremost defender of the faith in Europe. Just sayin’ 🙂
@57.
Actually Charlemagne more or less unified Europe under his banner. It went to shit when he died. Although he was not the last Holy Roman Emperor, his coronation created “Christian” loyalty among many tribes, factions and religions.
As far a Germanic, that term could be applied to a large swarth of Europe at the time as France (Gaul) did not become “recognized” until Charles the Fat.(his son, I believe)
As for the Moors, he did keep them out of France while expanding the Empire in other geographical areas.
Unified can also be replaced with subjugated, depending on your viewpoint.
@57
Yah, they were ethnically diverse (Whoever has claimed to be ethnically French? What does that even look like?). That said, they did come outta France and they were some ballsy kids. Charlemagne did more than keep the Moors out of France (something the current government isn’t capable of doing…even Moors who hate them get in with regularity). He brought most of Western Europe under a single Christian banner, usually under the threat of “The Cross or the sword”.
I’m not romanticizing that behavior, in fact, I hate it. But it did have some testosterone behind it.