- Messages
- 10,173
- Reaction score
- 3,596
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Lothier
- Country Flag
- Belgium - Brussels
- Ethnic group
- Italo-celto-germanic
Have a look at this article about France's foreign policy : Why France continues to annoy the United States
That's exactly why so many people hate Americans. They are so arrogant and contemptful towards every other nations. France is the world's 4th most powerful country but to Americans it's just a lesser power. Of course, there is no country economically or militarily more powerful than the US, so does that mean that America should not have to listen to anybody's opinion ? It's the jungle law, the stronger always wins; a tyranny lead by despotic America, who, far from being altruistic, only cares about their own narrow-minded concerns. They know France can veto their decision to attack Iraq and that power on them make them jealous and angry because they can't impose their tyranny freely anymore (wasn't the UN security council justly made to avoid abuse by superpowers ?). What is sure is that war in Iraq divides people both in Europe and America. It's only natural that their should be two "camps", but unfortunately the US only have one president. It's more a matter of personal opinion than of nationality. Blair supports Bush, but half the Brits and Americans disapprove their leader. Italy and Spain have decided to go with Britaina and the US though the vast majority of their population are opposed, as have shown anti-war demonstrations. I personally don't care. I just want haughty Americans to shut up and respect difference in opinions.
America is doing a lot to try to sabotage the EU further integration because they know they won't be No1 anymore. It's already a fact that the EU is stronger economically and politically (4 out of 6 members at the UN security council) than the US. An elected EU president would put him at the same level (or higher) than the US president. If that happens to be Chirac (not my wish, but not impossible), that picture might prove ridiculously shotr-sighted for the author of this article and the audience he wrote it for :
A second reason is that Mr Chirac, in common with virtually all French politicians, is uneasy with the concept of an American ?ghyperpower?h (the word was coined by the Socialists' foreign minister, Hubert Vedrine) that has no need or (in French eyes) no willingness to listen to the advice of lesser powers.
That's exactly why so many people hate Americans. They are so arrogant and contemptful towards every other nations. France is the world's 4th most powerful country but to Americans it's just a lesser power. Of course, there is no country economically or militarily more powerful than the US, so does that mean that America should not have to listen to anybody's opinion ? It's the jungle law, the stronger always wins; a tyranny lead by despotic America, who, far from being altruistic, only cares about their own narrow-minded concerns. They know France can veto their decision to attack Iraq and that power on them make them jealous and angry because they can't impose their tyranny freely anymore (wasn't the UN security council justly made to avoid abuse by superpowers ?). What is sure is that war in Iraq divides people both in Europe and America. It's only natural that their should be two "camps", but unfortunately the US only have one president. It's more a matter of personal opinion than of nationality. Blair supports Bush, but half the Brits and Americans disapprove their leader. Italy and Spain have decided to go with Britaina and the US though the vast majority of their population are opposed, as have shown anti-war demonstrations. I personally don't care. I just want haughty Americans to shut up and respect difference in opinions.
In their hearts, the French saw that accord, along with plans for an EU rapid-reaction force, as a step towards creating a Europe-only alternative to NATO. Britain, however, worried that such an alternative might weaken NATO and lead to American disengagement from Europe
America is doing a lot to try to sabotage the EU further integration because they know they won't be No1 anymore. It's already a fact that the EU is stronger economically and politically (4 out of 6 members at the UN security council) than the US. An elected EU president would put him at the same level (or higher) than the US president. If that happens to be Chirac (not my wish, but not impossible), that picture might prove ridiculously shotr-sighted for the author of this article and the audience he wrote it for :