Statistics

Iraqis injured so far in war (as claimed by Iraq): 200
Iraqi children killed per week from sanctions in 2001 (as claimed by Iraq): 1615

Deserving Asterisks

Bush claims the support of 30 odd countries, though the media has been at pains to apply an asterisk to this, noting that only 2 or 3 are providing actual assault forces--as if some kind of reductive fraction should be applied to the votes of those who aren't.

But aren't Russia, China, France, and Germany merely stating a position from the sidelines as well? That they are not sending ground troops to defend the tyrant does not seem to be undercutting the weight with which their positions are reported by the media.

In other words why doesn't the media apply the same asterisk? Kind of an obvious point but I don't see that it's occurred to anyone.

(Though I suppose we should keep in mind that their rights to full "no" votes may become all too evident when Iraqi archives are opened post-war).

Interview with Chirac

Yesterday on CNN:

AMANPOUR: Can I ask you again about the nuclear reactor [built by Iraq with French assistance and destroyed in an Israeli air raid in 1981] at Osirak? You know, a lot of people called it "Os-Chirac", as you know. In retrospect, do you regret that it was destroyed, given that it could have been used to form nuclear weapons?

CHIRAC: Well, this reactor was a civilian reactor. It was a civilian power plant and it was only going to produce energy. I don't think it could have been the link or the basis for nuclear technology or a military nuclear program. This being said, events such as we know them, it was destroyed, so the issue is no longer.

But in those days, all of the major democracies, all of them, each and every one of them, had contacts and trade and exchanges with Iraq, including on weapons. Even weapons of mass destruction sometimes, including bacteriological, biological weapons.

So we shouldn't come back to the past on these issues. But we shouldn't either pinpoint France or point the finger toward France, that had limited its actions to helping Iraq to produce the energy it needed to light the country.

Doesn't Iraq have the second largest oil reserves in the world?

Exchange

My responses to the letter to the editor he forwarded to our list, elicited this exchange between the Frenchman and me on a certain mailing list. (His remarks in italics).

All that is very nice but I don't see anywhere in that text that the League of Nations had the power to send inspectors check on Hitler. The UN has people combing the countryside trying to find weapons. Hitler had no one combing his country.

But that is just a detail.

And shortly thereafter this:

Let's say Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. Let's have it this way.

Pretend that you are Saddam. The United States has started the invasion of Iraq from Kuwait and Turkey. You know that you will not even have the chance of surviving and that you will be hunted and killed.

You have a few atomic bombs laying around. What would you do if you knew the end is near? 200'000 Americans in Kuwait ...

Wouldn't you leave with a Bang? I would.

My response:

You call our attention to the wonderful boon it is that we have inspectors in Iraq.

And you warn us that Saddam might use his WMD.

Methinks you are having your cake, while subjecting it to radiological dispersal devices too.

His:

So Iraq doesn't have it. Why bother with him? What a waste of money. Shouldn't we spend that money right here where I need a job?

"The director of Homeland Security has issued a red alert and he is asking every American receiving Christmas letters from Iraq to contact the FBI." - 12/24/2003

Mine:

Behold, the anti-war zealot!

One moment warning us we are about to unleash Armageddon. The next cheerfully telling us Saddam's got nothing and we should go home.

The only constant is that Bush is wrong from moment to moment in any argument. This is like c, the speed of light. Time and space themselves must warp to maintain this constant. Now isn't that "special" in both the Einstein and Church Lady senses?

Saddam was about to nuke the world when it made Bush look reckless. Now he's got nothing, if that makes Bush look alarmist.

If you could learn to live with the intellectual veering back and forth--the seasickness factor-- I bet it's extremely comforting to live in a world where all problems can be traced to American Republicans.

The fearless search for Truth continues among the beau monde of SF and Paris...

Response 4 to Letter to Editor

> > for a change played the biggest role with Russia and the UK. Germany
> > declared war on the US on Dec 11 1941 and not the other way around (the US
> > declaring war!). Please note that a depopulated and convalescent Francehad
> > already been at war since Sept 3rd 1939 or 2 years and 3 months before the
> > USwas finally forced to realize that Hitler was a threat!

September 2, 1939

Dear Mr. Roosevelt:

Our policy of appeasement has concluded.

I won't bore you with the diplomatic subtleties; they're probably incomprehensible to those who didn't grow up thinking in francais from childhood, the language of diplomacy.

But to summarize...

Until midnight last night, the correct policy for handling Germany was appeasement. We have valiantly pursued this course of action for the past six years, with zero American help in sharing the burdens it entailed: looking concerned (frown lines), wringing our hands (chafing), and signing our name to various pieces of paper (writer's cramp).

There is no question that this was the correct course of action, for that period of time. If you Americans in your naivete had attempted to come over here at any moment prior to midnight last night to "deal with" Hitler, we would have rightly cried bloody murder: you would have been stirring up a hornet's nest our whole policy was dedicated to keeping calm.

However, as of midnight last night, the powers that be (namely us) have determined that the optimal policy is now force--and this is where you come in.

Would you please reinstitute your draft and send over half a million American boys to reinforce our Maginot Line by, say, Christmas?

When I say "force", don't crudely misinterpret this to mean you will see headlines about some Franco-Anglo invasion of Germany next week. We are going to sit in a strategic and forceful posture behind our walls for the next 6-12 months, until you get here, or until Hitler invades, whichever comes first.

As time is of the essence, let me head off one possible objection that might be raised in your Congress (you will need their approval?).

Some may make the facile observation that, if we add up the number of troops and tanks possessed by France and Britain, they rather outnumber those of Germany. And that, moreover, much of the German Army is off conquering Poland at the moment.

That may be true, but numbers alone are deceptive.

What they don't take into account is how very *tired* we are of fighting. Do you hear that sound? It's a big world-weary sigh being uttered collectively by our entire nation. Do you hear the memory of the trenches in its mournful sound? The noble aspiration for peace in its overtones? Picture a very sensitive cow, being eaten by a wolf, while watching La Traviata, and you will have some idea of the plaintive and bosomy forces stirring deep in every French soul.

May I also draw your attention to those Nazi uniforms? Basic black, with grays for whimsy! Shiny jack boots. Vulgar and frightening simultaneously. You Americans with your jazz and money mania...well, no offense, but you must admit you may be more suited to dealing with such people than artists and philosophers such as ourselves?

I suggest you start drafting troops as soon as is practicable, for I cannot emphasize enough that time is of the essence.

I hesitate to bring this up, but 30 years hence, a gentleman named Claude will be born. And he will be the custodian of a Clock of Blame.

Picture this Clock of Blame as a giant hourglass. It was turned over as of midnight last night, and the sand is falling even as I write this, and even as you read it. Every falling grain of sand is another crystal of blame that will be borne by your nation through eternity, and Claude is the man who will deliver to you the final tally of shame.

I had lobbied for a three month grace period for you to organize your draft, gather ships, and get the troops over here, but prophecy indicates Claude will be implacable. And we think Hitler is uptight! Claude's clock will have started ticking immediately upon the invasion of Poland.

Try to imagine the shame your children's children will feel, 60 years from now, when Claude informs them exactly how long it took you to comply, after we had clearly and politely informed you we would again require your services.

Claude is well-versed in all types of calendars, and he will be merciless in adding up the numbers of years *and* months. Do not expect any "rounding down" to the nearest year. And if you liberate us "eventually", oh some year when you felt like it, don't expect some kind of credit from Claude reducing your delay shame. It most assuredly does not work that way, though again I'm not sure if you didn't grow up speaking Francais that you could entirely understand the raison.

Please keep these two sounds ever present in your mind until you have secured congressional approval for our military needs: the world-weary French sigh, and the tick tick tick of Claude's clock. Neither is getting any softer.

Yours,
Daladier