Is it time to admit that Jacques Chirac was right?

Question

Jacques Chirac is about to retire. The US is bogged down in a hopeless attempt to influence the civil war in Iraq. Chirac was smart enough to see the folly of this invasion from the beginning, and kept his country clear of the train wreck. As he leaves office, wouldn't it be honorable to now say - Yes, monsieur, you were right?

Answer 1

Being French living in UK I must admit that his decision was brave and even if at that time we were considered as cowards after four years of a new "Vietnam" France can be proud of having protected its integrity by not interfering in what was just a personal issue of a son trying to revenge what his father could not do.
I'm not saying that....the entire world is seeing it now and UK doesn't know how to get out of the trap Bush put in place on evident lies.

Answer 2

On one hand, you are correct that Chirac was right that we should not have invaded Iraq, BUT...

I think you are too quick to credit Chirac. For one thing, his motives were not all positive. The fact is that France had lucrative dealings with the Hussein regime, some of which had dubious legality, and his motives for not wanting to get involved were largely economic. That brings into question whether his intentions overall in regards to Iraq. Second of all, it is not like his administration of France has been positive. The Chirac administration will go down in history primarily for the following:

1. Finance scandals.
2. Conservative partisan politics that resulted in a weak cohabitation government.
3. Failure to keep peace and unity within France.
4. A failed labor policy that resulted in riots and the disillusionment of the country's youth.
5. Racist attempts to segregate Islamic citizens that have caused widespread disharmony within France.

The fact of the matter is that he is retiring because no one wants him anymore. He would lose an election if he did run. He is a failure. Basically, you are right about Iraq. But you are wrong about Chirac.

Answer 3

Absolutely! I am an American and I love Jacques Chirac. He knew just what folly the war with Iraq would bring, and he refused to participate. Hooray for Chirac!

Answer 4

No, because apparently the French or maybe Chirac, felt a similar way. And what you say is inaccurate. The French did not have self assurance, as you recommend, that Saddam had no WMD software. truly, their intelligence amenities were between the various who provided options helping the conception that he did. on your preparation, i have provided a link decrease than. you received't ought to study a lot. His beliefs, which coincide with the presidents are in the 2d paragraph. heavily dude, seek for information. information is your buddy. lack of information isn't. Heavy sigh... "at present, distinct evidences may carry about imagine that, over the past 4 years, in the absence of international inspectors, this united states has persevered armament courses." Did you study the article or basically take issue with it? that's no diverse than what the president suggested in the lead as a lot because the Iraq conflict. you won't be able to win in this one Moonbeam. you've requested an unsubstatiated question that won't be able to be supported by ability of your twisted and inaccurate wondering and 'information'. you're grasping at straws, my buddy...or may 'splitting hairs' be more beneficial suited on your case. Regardless, my aspect thoroughly refutes your question. considering that Chirac 'idea' as Bush believed, no apology on the portion of the President is major. i imagine, per chance, that's advisable to bypass back and do a touch study into what France's real objections were. that they had no longer some thing to do with the presence or absence of WMD's. yet sturdy attempt. All you lack is information and that could nicely be remedied...in case you seek for it.

Answer 5

No, not at all. The only reason Chirac was against the war was because he was dealing trade with Saddam making money hand over fist with his regime when UN sanctions forbidding same were in place. He was actually a criminal, and France should be run out of the UN for blatant violations of UN sanctions. But then again, the UN is useless as well as spineless.

Answer 6

Being right in assessing the consequences of an action is not enough to get honors. This maybe just fluke prediction. More important is the courage and strength. France did not have these enough to deal with Saddam problem.

Answer 7

Well, I have ALWAYS agreed with Chirac, so I have no problem with saying to anyone that he was right - 110% CORRECT.
The lobotomized sheep over in Karl Rove's pasture, on the other hand, will make some flippant, knee jerk reply about "surrender", or "being French" and go on about their day, chewing the latest propaganda cud until tomorrow's talking points are fed to them in their slop buckets of ignorance.

Answer 8

Now THAT'S what I call a revisionist view of history!
Mr Chirac (along with ALL other nations in the Executive Council of the UN) voted FOR the Iraq invasion...only to renege and do an about-face (a natural maneuver for a Frenchman!) and stab us in the back.
Why?
Because Mr Chirac is a self-serving criminal who only stepped down after receiving guarantees from his successor that he would not be tried for his criminal acts while in office.
Can you say OIL FOR FOOD?
Lets not forget that had Chiac done the right thing and stood with us, Saddaam would have given up peacefully and we wouldn't even be there!
If your point is that Chirac did the EASY thing...no argument there. but to imply he did the RIGHT thing, is intellectually bankrupt.

Answer 9

You have got to be kidding me

The man is a weasel. He betrayed the US because of his secret deals with Saddam for cheap oil. All of which, let me remind you, aren't worth anything today.

The US government may be able to get past his despicable behavior but the vast majority of American citizens will never forgive the French Government for intentionally trying to undermine our country in Iraq.

There is nothing to be proud about where Chirac is concerned.

Not one thing.

Answer 10

Uh no. Although I do not believe in the war, I would never give that man the satisfaction, especially since France has the contract that supplies food to our armed forces over there. Isn't that a little hypocritical? He'll make money off the war, but wouldn't help us fight. If it wasn't for us Hitler would have swallowed France.