Yeah, Kate, we restored freedom of opinion and political autonomy to the French; the least they could do in return is suspend their right to exercise either one for at least 60 years. Or do you think they are obliged to support us regardless of how they perceive the merits for longer than that? Forever?
By the way, why stop with threatening to punish the French? About the same majority of UK citizens oppose the war: why should they get a free ride just because the PM may not listen to them? And, if you plan to loot the Louvre to get back at the French, what are your plans for that half of the US population that's opposed to the war under current circumstances?
Let's get this straight: the US has advanced serious arguments for why this war is necessary. Most of the world rejects them, based on other serious arguments. Each side has its cranks motivated by prejudice and the like, but each side has a legitimate point of view that should be respected by thoughtful people in opposition. If you consign all anti-war types to the "pro-Saddam" heap, then are you "pro-Kim" if you don't support immediate military action against N. Korea? And even if you do support that, there must be some despotic state you don't want to invade just now. Does that make you a supporter of the tyrant there?
In a message dated 2/21/2003 2:36:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, Kate Troy <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>Those countries who are allegedly our allies and who do not support us now
>most definitely will pay for it later. By the way, If I was a member of the
>French Government, I would start hiding the paintings in the Louvre now.