Blair Attacks Chirac

[onedomino]

Appearing in a newspaper that is further to the left than Pravda, we have this item:

PM attacks Chirac's 'pathetic' power vision
Nicholas Watt, European editor
Saturday January 29, 2005
The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1401217,00.html

Tony Blair yesterday risked a fresh row when he branded the policies of Jacques Chirac, the French president, as "dangerous" and "pathetic".
In a sign of cross-Channel tensions after the Iraq war, the prime minister showed contempt for two key elements of Mr. Chirac's presidency: his attempts to turn Europe into a centre of power rivaling Washington and his personal relations with George Bush.
Weeks before the prime minister joins Mr. Chirac in welcoming President Bush to Europe, Mr Blair told the Wall Street Journal: "I have spoken on many occasions [about] my disagreement with those who want to set up different poles of power in the world. I think this is very dangerous.
"I think we are best to congregate around one pole of common values. Europe and America should be an integral part of that together. They should not have separate and competing poles of power."
Mr Blair was careful not to name Mr. Chirac, whose once warm relations with Downing Street plummeted after the French leader pledged to veto the so-called second UN security council resolution that would have authorised the Iraq war in 2003.
But the prime minister's choice of words will leave nobody in any doubt that he was taking aim at Mr. Chirac who is deeply attached to a Gaullist vision of a "multipolar world".
The French president never tires of talking of his determination to challenge today's "unipolar world", dominated by the US, by creating a "multipolar world" with equal centres of powers encompassing the US, Europe, the Indian subcontinent and China.
Mr Blair has never shied away from criticising this vision because of his passionate belief that Europe and the US - with Britain acting as a bridge between the two - should work together. But the strength of his language in the Wall Street Journal may cause surprise.
"Ever since the Soviet Union thankfully collapsed, and Eastern Europe changed, there has been a question whether the world reunifies around a strong, common, global agenda, or whether it drifts off into these different poles of power," Mr. Blair said.
"I think the next few years is a very, very crucial moment of opportunity and of danger. It is an opportunity because I think it is possible to find a unifying agenda and it is a moment of danger because if you don't, and people split into their rival powers, then I think whatever people say, that competition will be unhelpful."
Warming to his theme, the prime minister was withering about Mr. Chirac's regular public denunciations of Washington.
Asked to defend his relations with President Bush, the prime minister said he would neither apologise nor engage in "grandstanding". He then added: "I think that is a pathetic form of leadership and I don't intend to indulge it."
Mr. Blair once again did not name Mr. Chirac. But it was clear that he had in mind the French president who became the champion of the anti-war movement with his contemptuous criticisms of America in the run-up to the war.
Mr. Blair's intervention may be seen as an attempt to stamp his vision of the world on Europe and America ahead of Mr. Bush's bridge-building trip to Europe next month when he will become the first US president to visit the institutions of the EU.
Mr. Bush is due to have dinner with Mr. Chirac in Brussels on the eve of his visit.

 

[Adam's Apple]

"Mr. Bush is due to have dinner with Mr. Chirac in Brussels on the eve of his visit."

What many politicians would give to have a plate at that dinner! The conversation between Bush and Chirac will probably be civil, but their private thoughts would be priceless to listen to!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

"Ever since the Soviet Union thankfully collapsed, and Eastern Europe changed, there has been a question whether the world reunifies around a strong, common, global agenda, or whether it drifts off into these different poles of power," Mr. Blair said.

"I think the next few years is a very, very crucial moment of opportunity and of danger. It is an opportunity because I think it is possible to find a unifying agenda and it is a moment of danger because if you don't, and people split into their rival powers, then I think whatever people say, that competition will be unhelpful."

What is this "unifying agenda" that would work to keep the French in line?

 

[musicman]

Does anyone have any thoughts on the progress (or lack of) of the Oil-for-Food investigation? Because, if it's done thoroughly and honestly, I've got a feeling that Chirac's "heroic" anti-war stance is going to take on a decidedly unappetizing stench.

Is this investigation going to do a Sandy Berger, or what?

 

[Adam's Apple]

It will be up to Fox News, talk radio and the bloggers to keep the heat turned up and not let "Oil for Food" fall through the cracks. I doubt that the NYT, Washington Post, CNN, CBS, etc., will spend any more journalistic energy on "Oil for Food" than is absolutely necessary, although it's one of the biggest stories to fall in their laps in years. If the culprit in the "Oil for Food" story was the Bush Administration, you can bet we would be barraged with articles daily.

 

[Comrade]

"Mr. Bush is due to have dinner with Mr. Chirac in Brussels on the eve of his visit."

What many politicians would give to have a plate at that dinner! The conversation between Bush and Chirac will probably be civil, but their private thoughts would be priceless to listen to!

Bush and Chirac at dinner as the first course is brought out:

Chirac: 'Mon duei, non, we did not order zis!'

Bush: 'Oh looksie, here, Frenchie. That there is a heapin' pile of crow, special order from Iraq.'

Chirac: 'Oooh La La!'


---SLOP---

Bush: 'Eat up, froggie'

 

[Comrade]

Does anyone have any thoughts on the progress (or lack of) of the Oil-for-Food investigation? Because, if it's done thoroughly and honestly, I've got a feeling that Chirac's "heroic" anti-war stance is going to take on a decidedly unappetizing stench.

Annan rolled a few expendable heads, and started talking about Sudan instead of Iraq. No word from the UN on the recent elections.

And NYC still lists members of the UN as having outstanding balance on parking tickets.

'And that's the way it is...'

Is this investigation going to do a Sandy Berger, or what?

Last I heard, the FBI is still looking for a volunteer to hunt around Bergers pants in search of the now rancid documents. :teeth:

 

[musicman]

Annan rolled a few expendable heads, and started talking about Sudan instead of Iraq. No word from the UN on the recent elections.

And NYC still lists members of the UN as having outstanding balance on parking tickets.

'And that's the way it is...'



Last I heard, the FBI is still looking for a volunteer to hunt around Bergers pants in search of the now rancid documents. :teeth:

LMAO!

According to Ann Coulter, the least important news story of 2004 (if mainstream media coverage is the determining factor) was the curious case of a Clintonite trying to get into his OWN pants!