News Does the US administration owe an apology to the French ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter vanesch
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether the US administration should apologize to France for the organized "French bashing" that occurred during the Iraq war decision, largely driven by opposition from French leaders. Participants note that while many countries opposed the war, only France faced targeted hostility from the US, including the infamous renaming of French fries to "freedom fries." Some argue that acknowledging the validity of France's concerns could improve international relations, while others believe that the US should focus on broader apologies for its actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The conversation also touches on the motivations behind France's opposition, including alleged involvement in the Oil-for-Food scandal. Ultimately, the thread highlights the complexities of diplomatic relations and the lasting impact of political rhetoric.

Should the US administration appologize to the French?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 24 53.3%

  • No.

    Votes: 21 46.7%
  • Total voters
    45
  • Poll closed .
vanesch
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
5,109
Reaction score
20
Ok, provocative title. The point is that during and shortly after the decision to go to war in Iraq, there was an organized "French bashing" by the US administration, mainly because vile Chirac and De Villepin tried by all means to stop the brave US from going to war. Besides obvious different political and economical interests on both sides, the main french argument was that the war would cause a lot of trouble and not make the world safer.

With some hindsight, should the US administration offer some form of apologies for the "hate for everything French", and recognize that their viewpoint wasn't so silly after all (and maybe they should have taken it more into account), or stand by their initial statements ?

I know of course that not only the French were against the war, but also the Germans, Russians, Chinese and so on ; but only the French - to my understanding - were targetted in an organized hate campaign.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Damn, i wanted to vote yes, but i mistake the button! Sorry... :cry:
 
It might help international opinion. And the US could use any help as they can get in that area right now.
 
vanesch said:
Ok, provocative title. The point is that during and shortly after the decision to go to war in Iraq, there was an organized "French bashing" by the US administration, mainly because vile Chirac and De Villepin tried by all means to stop the brave US from going to war. Besides obvious different political and economical interests on both sides, the main french argument was that the war would cause a lot of trouble and not make the world safer.

With some hindsight, should the US administration offer some form of apologies for the "hate for everything French", and recognize that their viewpoint wasn't so silly after all (and maybe they should have taken it more into account), or stand by their initial statements ?

I know of course that not only the French were against the war, but also the Germans, Russians, Chinese and so on ; but only the French - to my understanding - were targetted in an organized hate campaign.
Is there any evidence that the French-bashing was triggered by the Bush administration? I'd have thought any contrary thinking to the infallible leader of the free world would be enough to drive a significant portion of the US public to foam at the mouth with frenzied hatred without any hinting from the government. The only thing I can think of was Rumsfeld's "I'm interested in new Europe, not old Europe" quote, but that hardly counts.
 
Hahahahahahaha!
 
Rather than a targeted apology a minute display of regret and the drift would start closing. Wouldn't mind a :cry: apology but since when has anyone been sorry for their doings in this day and age.
 
El Hombre Invisible said:
The only thing I can think of was Rumsfeld's "I'm interested in new Europe, not old Europe" quote, but that hardly counts.

There was also the famous "let's forgive the Russians, ignore the Germans, and punish the French" by miss Rice, no ?

And the famous "freedom fries"

And...

(ok, small hints from the Boss ?)
 
vanesch said:
And the famous "freedom fries"

that was patetic...
 
Burnsys said:
that was patetic...

patatic ? :-p
 
  • #10
I think he was going for Pathetic.
 
  • #11
PerennialII said:
Rather than a targeted apology a minute display of regret and the drift would start closing. Wouldn't mind a :cry: apology but since when has anyone been sorry for their doings in this day and age.
Is sepuku out of the question? :bugeye:
 
  • #12
vanesch said:
There was also the famous "let's forgive the Russians, ignore the Germans, and punish the French" by miss Rice, no ?

And the famous "freedom fries"

And...

(ok, small hints from the Boss ?)
Rice said that? What a cow! I never liked her after her whole "Your politics are yours, our politics are ours" response to Bush & co leaving the UK holding the WMD baby. Are you sure that's a valid quote? How the hell can a politician of her status get away with such blatent racism?

Was "freedom fries" an administration jibe? I thought it was the clever American people who thought that one up. (I read somewhere that French fries were named after a person whose surname was French, not France itself - I really hope that's true!)
 
  • #13
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
The Smoking Man said:
Is sepuku out of the question? :bugeye:

I think that apologies would be accepted over here :biggrin:
 
  • #15
El Hombre Invisible said:
Was "freedom fries" an administration jibe? I thought it was the clever American people who thought that one up. (I read somewhere that French fries were named after a person whose surname was French, not France itself - I really hope that's true!)
It is, but that wasn't the point. The former name of the Freedom Bird wasn't named after the country either. Fries are from Belgium, not France.
 
  • #16
vanesch said:
With some hindsight, should the US administration offer some form of apologies for the "hate for everything French", and recognize that their viewpoint wasn't so silly after all (and maybe they should have taken it more into account), or stand by their initial statements ?

I know of course that not only the French were against the war, but also the Germans, Russians, Chinese and so on ; but only the French - to my understanding - were targetted in an organized hate campaign.

No. The French were involved in illegal arms and illicit oil purchasing. This is why they were against the war. The Russians and Germans also had similar illegal contracts out. The Chinese are the Chinese, what can you say. The French government owes the world an appology for lieing to the world about its reasons to protest the war.
 
  • #18
Pengwuino said:
No. The French were involved in illegal arms and illicit oil purchasing. This is why they were against the war.

We went already a few times over this. Contrary to the obvious link between the oil industry and the US administration, there is no such link between the french policy makers and those contracts. Popularity was a much higher incentive for the French politicians than some obscure trades.

smurf said:
Fries are from Belgium, not France.

THIS is the real reason I'm so pissed with those freedom fries ! :smile:
 
  • #19
vanesch said:
Just after a bit of googling:
http://www.detnews.com/2004/politics/0411/16/-6184.htm
Yes, I found lots of news reports citing that quote as being 'widely reported' as one of Rice's. But I think the originator of that line was actually Washington Post's Jim Hoagland - the only person I've seen directly quoted (as opposed to 'widely reported to have said') - as describing Rice's 'mantra'. I wouldn't take that as a direct quote, more a chinese whisper of one man's impression of Rice.

vanesch said:
Other stuff from the good old days:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110003222
The bit about the "bill that would fund the repatriation of remains of U.S. servicemen who died in World Wars I or II and were buried in France" is bizarre, though again not attributable to Bush's gang. What this article, and many others, does demonstrate is the atrocious attitude Americans can have towards other nations, simply because of a disagreement over one policy (forget decades of allegiance, this is "with-us-or-against-us" America now). Even in an editorial, the fact that this kind of hate speech is propogated and accepted speaks volumes on the phenomenon of anti-Americanism that so many members of this very forum get so b***y about. The thing to remember is: so many Americans are anti-anti-Americans first that they should really shut their traps.

I'm going to vote 'no'. I think the Bush administration should apologise to bereaved families in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention America, and to those innocent people tortured, mentally or physically, in the name of the 'war on terror'. And I think Bush, Blair & co should apologise to the people of the world for making their world such a dangerous place to live in. The French won't lose any sleep about the renaming of a side-order in some retarded, in-bred hillbilly's piece-of-sh*t diner.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #20
Smurf said:
It is, but that wasn't the point. The former name of the Freedom Bird wasn't named after the country either. Fries are from Belgium, not France.
No, it is the point cos it's FUNNY! That it was supposed to be an insult to the French but had nothing to do with them is hilarious to me.
 
  • #21
The Smoking Man said:
Is sepuku out of the question? :bugeye:

Wasn't that done already :confused: ... the rest of the world was desperately gripping the handle but they still managed to carve themselves ... and now the festering wound is in need of cleaning in order for the healing to begin ...
 
  • #22
El Hombre Invisible said:
No, it is the point cos it's FUNNY! That it was supposed to be an insult to the French but had nothing to do with them is hilarious to me.
hehe, yeah that is pretty amusing I guess. But the turkey has nothing to do with Turkey either. Most of them have nothing to do with their names. I guess I was assuming Americans just don't care... or maybe they're just too stupid.
 
  • #23
Smurf said:
hehe, yeah that is pretty amusing I guess. But the turkey has nothing to do with Turkey either. Most of them have nothing to do with their names. I guess I was assuming Americans just don't care... or maybe they're just too stupid.
What amuses me is all the editorials from varying US newspapers I came across just now on Google, all praising the renaming as a defiant stance against those slimy French traitors. The owner of some crumby diner is one thing, but when the national press falls for it... well, it goes some way to perpetuate the image of Americans as ignorant. I mean, you work on a newspaper for Christ's sake... some research wouldn't hurt!
 
  • #24
Pengwuino said:
No. The French were involved in illegal arms and illicit oil purchasing. This is why they were against the war. The Russians and Germans also had similar illegal contracts out. The Chinese are the Chinese, what can you say. The French government owes the world an appology for lieing to the world about its reasons to protest the war.
You're wrong. Certain government officials had taken kickbacks for their own personal gain, but there is no evidence to suggest that the government itself had. (These were Oil-for-Food bribes, and had nothing to do with arms.) If you're going to make assertions such as this, please provide evidence that isn't FOX News speculation. The only reason that no bribes occurred in the U.S. is that Iraq didn't deal with the U.S. in the OFF programme. If they had, then people here would've taken bribes as well, like it or not.
 
  • #25
I voted yes...However, France did have a role in the Food for Oil scandal and questionable relations with Saddam...along with the rest of the world including the U.S. And more like who don't the Bushies owe an appology to?

Rice would think something like that, and has been known to slip and say things like that. I've never liked her either, if for no other reason then blatant brown-nosing.

Freedom fries definitely did not get started by Dems. Certain GOP politicians started that one (probably the same immature types as the one's who raised purple-inked fingers during the State of the Union speech?).
 
Last edited:
  • #26
SOS2008 said:
Freedom fries definitely did not get started by Dems. Certain GOP politicians started that one (probably the same immature types as the one's who raised purple-inked fingers during the State of the Union speech?).
Eh? I just saw this story in about 20 US editorials and they all say that some guy who owned a diner started this one. Which politicians do you think started it?
 
  • #27
Liberty cabbage (sauerkraut) and hot dogs (frankfurters) from WWI were way funnier. The fact that the name "hot dog" for a food item actually stuck might be even funnier.
 
  • #28
vanesch said:
Ok, provocative title. The point is that during and shortly after the decision to go to war in Iraq, there was an organized "French bashing" by the US administration, mainly because vile Chirac and De Villepin tried by all means to stop the brave US from going to war. Besides obvious different political and economical interests on both sides, the main french argument was that the war would cause a lot of trouble and not make the world safer.

With some hindsight, should the US administration offer some form of apologies for the "hate for everything French", and recognize that their viewpoint wasn't so silly after all (and maybe they should have taken it more into account), or stand by their initial statements ?

I know of course that not only the French were against the war, but also the Germans, Russians, Chinese and so on ; but only the French - to my understanding - were targetted in an organized hate campaign.
No. The UN resolution stating that Iraq was a threat to world peace was unanamously approved. If anything, that means the French owe the US an apology for not standing by their word.
 
  • #29
russ_watters said:
No. The UN resolution stating that Iraq was a threat to world peace was unanamously approved. If anything, that means the French owe the US an apology for not standing by their word.
Exactly which resolution are you talking about? The one from nearly 15 years ago? Or the one the UN refused to accept that would specify military action in the build up to Gulf War 2?
 
  • #30
This thread isn't about weather the French owe an appology to the US. That is completely irrelevant. If you want to talk about France owing an appology make another thread. If want to make an argument that France's actions make the insults justified and tolerable, then make such an argument already.
 
  • #31
loseyourname said:
Liberty cabbage (sauerkraut) and hot dogs (frankfurters) from WWI were way funnier. The fact that the name "hot dog" for a food item actually stuck might be even funnier.
And the fact that the name is now used all over the world from Americanization is even funnier. :smile: :biggrin: :-p
 
  • #32
It was Republican Walter B Jones, of North Carolina, that had french fries in the capitol cafeteria renamed to 'freedom fries'.

Jones was also the Congressman that introduced the bipartisan bill calling a plan for troop withdrawal from Iraq.

If not an apology, that's still a pretty strong acknowledgment that at least some members of Congress feel they were slightly misled about Iraq before they voted to authorize the invasion.
 
  • #33
Nah, he was just flip floppin'
 
  • #34
If you read between the lines of statements made by the administration, I think it's obvious that Bush plans to apologize. Of course, the bad news is that the apology will be delivered by John Bolton.

Of course, in order to read between the lines that well, I had to lay my head sideways on my desk, squint my eyes really hard, and hold the left fork of my tongue in my right cheek. :smile:
 
  • #35
Pengwuino said:
No. The French were involved in illegal arms and illicit oil purchasing. This is why they were against the war. The Russians and Germans also had similar illegal contracts out. The Chinese are the Chinese, what can you say. The French government owes the world an appology for lieing to the world about its reasons to protest the war.



SILENCE !
 
  • #36
El Hombre Invisible said:
Yes, I found lots of news reports citing that quote as being 'widely reported' as one of Rice's. But I think the originator of that line was actually Washington Post's Jim Hoagland - the only person I've seen directly quoted (as opposed to 'widely reported to have said') - as describing Rice's 'mantra'. I wouldn't take that as a direct quote, more a chinese whisper of one man's impression of Rice.

Ok, I found another one from the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4250701.stm

but I guess it falls in the same category. In fact, when I wrote it, I still had it clearly on my mind as having it read and heard several times. It was so universally repeated that I guess that if it weren't true I guess it would have been raining lawsuits!

What this article, and many others, does demonstrate is the atrocious attitude Americans can have towards other nations, simply because of a disagreement over one policy (forget decades of allegiance, this is "with-us-or-against-us" America now). Even in an editorial, the fact that this kind of hate speech is propogated and accepted...

Yes, that's the point I wanted to illustrate. I never had seen in my life such an organized hate campaign from one "civilized" democracy towards another one.

I'm going to vote 'no'. I think the Bush administration should apologise to bereaved families in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention America, and to those innocent people tortured, mentally or physically, in the name of the 'war on terror'.

Oh, those ...

yes, that's another category of course. Saying bad things about someone, or bombing them, is indeed not the same :-)
 
  • #37
El Hombre Invisible said:
Exactly which resolution are you talking about? The one from nearly 15 years ago? Or the one the UN refused to accept that would specify military action in the build up to Gulf War 2?
1441, November 8th, 2002. Essentially, a 'cooperate, or else' resolution. Iraq didn't cooperate, but the French (and others) didn't hold up their end of the deal.
Smurf said:
This thread isn't about weather the French owe an appology to the US. That is completely irrelevant. If you want to talk about France owing an appology make another thread. If want to make an argument that France's actions make the insults justified and tolerable, then make such an argument already.
:rolleyes: Great, so you don't want to know the reason for the "no" answer? The reason is exactly that:

Answer: No.
Reason: Its the French who owe the US an apology, not the other way around.
Why: The French owe the apology because they shirked their responsibility.

If you can think of another way to phrase that that doesn't include the French owing us an apology, by all means do it, but I don't see how you can separate that part without losing the meaning of the reason.
BobG said:
If you read between the lines of statements made by the administration, I think it's obvious that Bush plans to apologize.
Possibly, but what, exactly is he going to apologize for? My guess would be he'd only apologize for underestimating the difficulty of the aftermath.
 
  • #38
vanesch said:
Yes, that's the point I wanted to illustrate. I never had seen in my life such an organized hate campaign from one "civilized" democracy towards another one.
I have... :rolleyes:
 
  • #39
russ_watters said:
My guess would be he'd only apologize for underestimating the difficulty of the aftermath.

Which was of course the entire point of discussion about whether it was a good idea or not to go to war !

George: "I don't like that Saddam"
Jacques: "nor do I"
George: "let's write some nasty papers to make him scared"
Jacques: "sure, all you want"
George: "I'd like to bomb that guy, are you coming ?"
Jacques: "I think you underestimate the problem. You're going to make a mess"
George: "You worm, stinking cheese eating vile coyote of a motherf**er bastard..."

[2 1/2 years later]

Jacques: "Eh, george, told you so..."
George: "yeah, guess you weren't totally wrong... but only for the consequences. I was right about the need for action!"
Jacques: "if you say so George, whatever you want... but about that stinking cheese eating thing?"

...
 
Last edited:
  • #40
Behaviour of Americans (not all of course ) towards French peoples was shamefull and rude to the extreme. :redface: No wonder many Americans when traveling abroad are putting Canadian maple leaf stickers on their bagpacks.
 
  • #41
loseyourname said:
Liberty cabbage (sauerkraut) and hot dogs (frankfurters) from WWI were way funnier. The fact that the name "hot dog" for a food item actually stuck might be even funnier.

The other way around, do you happen to know where the name "Hamburger" came from ? I remember when I lived in Hamburg that there that you saw a lot of silly joke stickers on that.
 
  • #42
vanesch said:
The other way around, do you happen to know where the name "Hamburger" came from ? I remember when I lived in Hamburg that there that you saw a lot of silly joke stickers on that.

In the US, hamburger originally just meant ground or chopped beef. There was legislation passed in the early 20th century setting purity and content limits on "hamburger", so the butchers started calling it ground beef again. The name of the sandwich was transferred from the description of its meat as a "hamburger patty".

Perhaps there was a sausage associated with Hamburg that used beef instead of the common pork?
 
  • #43
selfAdjoint said:
Perhaps there was a sausage associated with Hamburg that used beef instead of the common pork?

I haven't gotten a clue. Someone in Hamburg told me he thought it had to do with the bombing of Hamburg during WWII, in that your "typical Hamburger" (inhabitant of Hamburg) was transformed into chopped beef, and I never figured out if he was making fun of me or not (guess he was...).
 
  • #44
russ_watters said:
Great, so you don't want to know the reason for the "no" answer? The reason is exactly that:

Answer: No.
Reason: Its the French who owe the US an apology, not the other way around.
Why: The French owe the apology because they shirked their responsibility.

If you can think of another way to phrase that that doesn't include the French owing us an apology, by all means do it, but I don't see how you can separate that part without losing the meaning of the reason.
Yes, everyone knows the same facts you do Russ. But there is no reason why this excuses the US from an dispitefull flame campgaign. You have yet to make an argument.
 
  • #45
vanesch said:
The other way around, do you happen to know where the name "Hamburger" came from ? I remember when I lived in Hamburg that there that you saw a lot of silly joke stickers on that.
Ich bin ein berliner.

I am a jelly donut!?

Gotta love the US knowledge of other languages.

... Like the French actually call 'fries' 'pommes frit'!
:biggrin:
 
  • #46
Everything is about oil or money in Iraq

France controls over 22.5 percent of Iraq’s imports.[1] French total trade with Iraq under the oil-for-food program is the third largest, totaling $3.1 billion since 1996, according to the United Nations.[2]
In 2001 France became Iraq’s largest European trading partner. Roughly 60 French companies did an estimated $1.5 billion in trade with Baghdad in 2001 under the U.N. oil-for-food program.[3]
France’s largest oil company, Total Fina Elf, has negotiated extensive oil contracts to develop the Majnoon and Nahr Umar oil fields in southern Iraq. Both the Majnoon and Nahr Umar fields are estimated to contain as much as 25 percent of the country’s oil reserves. The two fields purportedly contain an estimated 26 billion barrels of oil.[4] In 2002, the non-war price per barrel of oil was $25. Based on that average these two fields have the potential to provide a gross return near $650 billion

The French didn't want to lose the $650 billion. We would have done the same as they did.

Before the invasion, the USA was actually the largest importer of Iraqi oil, under the oil for food program.

The United States remains the largest importer of Iraqi oil under the UN Oil-for-Food program. However, U.S. companies can no longer deal directly with Iraq for its oil imports. U.S. companies are forced to deal with third party vendors as a result of a ban on all American companies imposed by Iraq. In 2002, the U.S. imported $3.5 billion worth of Iraqi oil

This means that the French were one of the third party vendors that we purchased Iraqi oil from. It ain't rocket science.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217.cfm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #47
one day in the future French going to get from Iraqi government more contracts to develop oil fields than they had ever lost, because they did not attack them . good move on behalf of French. actually USA has helped French a lot, they are highly respected everywhere, unlike American simpletons and imbeciles.
 
  • #48
stoned said:
American simpletons and imbeciles.

Nice generalization
 
  • #49
BobG said:
It was Republican Walter B Jones, of North Carolina, that had french fries in the capitol cafeteria renamed to 'freedom fries'.

Jones was also the Congressman that introduced the bipartisan bill calling a plan for troop withdrawal from Iraq.

If not an apology, that's still a pretty strong acknowledgment that at least some members of Congress feel they were slightly misled about Iraq before they voted to authorize the invasion.
Thank you BobG for remembering that Congressman's name. Still, I wouldn't confuse his regrets about the war with his dislike for the French. Unfortunately it is likely to be awhile before the negativity fades among many Americans, which I feel is a a shame.
 
  • #50
Townsend said:
Nice generalization
:smile: But he didn't generalize ... he just pointed out the simpletons and imbeciles!

I guess it's all a matter of if you include yourself in the Bush votors or not. :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

News Should the US intervene in world problems?
Replies
29
Views
10K
News Bush Administration: My Indictment
Replies
3
Views
3K
News THE CAUSES OF WAR What factors lead to the outbreak of war between nations?
Replies
39
Views
6K
News Is There Really a Difference Between Democrats and Republicans?
Replies
24
Views
5K
News The Roots of Terrorism and US Foreign Policy
Replies
31
Views
5K
News What Does It Take to be White House Press Secretary?
Replies
4
Views
5K
News Ahmadinejad's speech at Durban II
Replies
38
Views
7K
News Is the US Planting WMDs in Iraq to Divert Attention?
Replies
29
Views
5K
News A Scary Look at Past Work Experience of a US President
Replies
43
Views
6K
News Renaissance and reaction to Islam.
Replies
49
Views
7K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top