I think your points are very thoughtful and well-taken.

I am sure that the majority of the French people, the British people, other Europeans and for that matter my fellow countrymen who opposed the Iraq war did so because they really believed it was a bad idea.

But as a very pro-French American, I was very disappointed (though not tremedously surprised) by the actions of the Chirac government. I believe Chiracs desire to not just stay out of the war, but to oppose American pressure on Saddam and to work actively for the lifting of sanctions was not only ill-advised, but heavily influenced by political contributors who were profiting wildly from breaking the sanctions and the oil for food program and who had very lucrative contracts in the wings once the sanctions were lifted.

Chirac goes back a long way with Saddam's government and I am afraid there were a lot of economic motives for wanting him to stay in power.

That being said, the US has certainly done business in the same way in many places. ( we often used our military as the militia of the United Fruit Company ).

But this was too dangerous a game in the Middle East. Lifting the sanctions with Saddam in power would inevitably lead to a catastrophic war in the middle east in a matter of a few years. The Israelis could not and would not have permitted the inevitable beviour of an un-restrained Saddam.


>Hi dean,
>
>>Why don't give what their motives were then?
>
>I won't answer for Russia. But for France i have to...
>
>Here In France and a sizable part of continental Europe, there are quite a number of people to believe that Bush went for the "oil money". But of course THIS IS WRONG. And those who try to make us believe that are foolish. Bush went there to protect America from terrorism. And for this he should be respected.
>
>But there is an organised press campaign in the states as well to let you, US citizens, believe, that our continental governments did not support Bush for the very same reason, money (either for oil, weapons and what not). THIS IS HIGH-END MANIPULATION. France supported saddam, sure very highly, at a time the US did, from 19975 to 1990. The war did change everything. History will provide evidence for this. Too late alas.
>
>Call us cowards. But our govenment decided not to go this time (remember that we were on your side in 1990) in order to avoid getting trapped into the kind of quadmire our country has suffered in its long colonial history (Vietnam, Algeria to name a few of those mournful experiences). Concerning those events, we're talking big figures for a country whose population accounts for one fifth of the US.
>
>Figures for the "Guerre d'Algérie" (we finally retreated from the country):
>- 1,343,000 young French guys enrolled (conscription),
>- over 400,000 professional military
>- 25,000 deaths on the French military side,
>- 400,000 civil victims (at least shared between local algerian people and French civilians),
>
>I could mention the use of torture on both sides and massive destruction of the infrastructure. This can not be forgotten.
>
>I feel grief at some of the argumentation i found on this thread concerning our country.
>
>François