Rating: 
Summary: When Lies ares from AEI jew sect........
Review: Timmerman books ares quite stunning, they all trun around one thing, arabianphobia!
Now this extrem right jew pro likud writer try to get somes "scoops" about a Saddam Chirac deal! lol!
his arguments ares so phamtasma that even a 12 years old boy could see Timmerman as biased and liar a la O'reilly and Richard Perle line..
Realities ares that Iraq debts to USA, russia france and others was so big while 90's, that they was ready to get promess on promess to remove it! the Total oil field was so undealing bid, because first they ares speculations, and that french oil compagnies + foreign ones can't explore a midieval iraqie oil system alonne, why french compagnies didn't had the lead if Saddam is chirac son, and same bid while iraq was USA friend!
Timmerman try to divert americans on francophobia, with lies or no arguments without proofs speculations about a country who fough in 1991 aggainst the dictator!
France selling weapons to iraq, yes, that was conventional weapons, and laser designators wasn't americans creation, plus that France have independent nuke program, and not carry his detterence on US asset as british do!
for a so called american "writers", the AEI jews sect 's timmerman is quite badly documented, about osiraq, the tiny french nuke experimentator, AEI was in charge and control of it!
why did Timmerman didn't tell about USA deal of Biochimical and Bacteriological to saddam? why he don't say that Bell helos and americans gas massacred the iraqies peoples? why he didn't release datas about Texan oil managers specials relations with Baath party, why he didn't point that CIA backed saddam to take power?
this book is from the numerous ones francophobian that neo cons sectarians ares releasing, because they ares angry about French UN inspectors backing! Lies in USA ares quite on the fame! isn't it!
Rating: 
Summary: Thought provoking and very timely!
Review: The book reads very well. For those open-minded people that believe there was probably more to the French opposition to the Iraq war than just principle will become enlightened to the new dangerous geopolitical situation that our world faces. REQUIRED READING... Share this book with a liberal friend (so as to have a real conversation about the issues of our day, instead of the hate-bush rantings that are soooo boring).
Rating:
Summary: Yeah, It's All The French's Fault
Review: That's what should be the tile of this latest Rightwing tract. Oh well, I shouldn't be concerned. Everyone knows wingnuts can't read. Hey Kenneth! Thank God for those bulk sales to "conservative" Book Clubs, eh??
Rating:
Summary: Distraction
Review: This is an obvious attempt at distracting the American public from the real problems facing America - such as the loss of jobs overseas and increasing and unbearable long term debt.It also ignores any other situation that goes against the author's one sided view:
That the US economic interests in Iraq are based on "money, oil, and guns" - the same as the author accuses France of.
The invasion of Iraq had no ties with the war on terrorism, and has been taking away resources better spent fighting the real war on terrorism.
That the US has greater enemies than Hussein such as North Korea not to mention Saudi Arabia and Pakistan who, while their non-democratic governments are US 'allies', their people are tought to hate Americans - the source of the 9/11 terrorists. Never mind that Bush makes more money when oil prices are high, giving him no personal motivation to avoid confrontation in the middle-east. Read the book, but think about who the real allies of America are; don't be blinded by politics.
Rating: 
Summary: An excellent book
Review: I was outraged by the actions of Chirac and others during the months leading to the Second War with Iraq, and after having finished reading this book, I am even more outraged. This book presents a factual account of France's relationship with Iraq since at least 1975 and exposes the real reasons for the French opposition against American operations. I was particularly outraged by two items covered in the latter part of this book. The first was the amount of and the kind of trade carried out by France during the Oil for Food program, and the second was the amount of nuclear expertise and material support that the Iraq government received from 1994 from the French government. Make no mistake about it, "Betrayal" is the correct term.
Rating:
Summary: I actually read the book
Review: I actually read the book and found it revealing. As a criticism I wish the author addressed more the broader spectrum of French neo-imperial ambitions in Africa, and at "home" in the context of France's expectation that the European Union should reflexively follow France's interests. But mostly is a great read, foremostly because it is a catalog of truths about France in the Near East. France has its own business interests in the Near East and these were bolstered not so much by opposition to the US and UK, but reliance on US and UK enforcement of UN "containment" policy and the lucrative French-dominated Oil for Food program containment ironically enabled. I recommend this book. And it's sorely needed given the ill-informed and credulous statements posing as reviews here at Amazon. There can be Francophilic arguments made, but reflexive anti-American arguments do nothing but deflect examination of French conduct, objectives and interests.
Rating:
Summary: Flipside of the coin
Review: I find this kind of propaganda rather obnoxious. Even though the theme of the book clearly is of France and its late opposition of US in certain matters of foreign affairs, it is quite hypocritical to point a finger on Chirac when at the same time (or more accurately, in the 80's) US themselves supported Saddam Hussein and his warriors with money and equipment against Russia. For a healthy balance, please read for example Noam Chomsky's Rogue States after you've read Timmerman's book.
Rating:
Summary: American Betrayal of France?
Review: ...and we wonder why the French hate us... "The French president lied to Bush and to the public about the war in Iraq.
President Jacques Chirac had personally told President George W. Bush well ahead of time that France would be at America's side." On September 18, 2001, Jacques Chirac met with President George W. Bush to convey France's emotions in reaction to the events of 9/11. President Chirac added that he "also wanted to say that we [France] are completely determined to fight by your side this new type of evil, of absolute evil, which is terrorism." Currently, as part of the "Enduring Freedom" project, French troops are stationed in Afghanistan to help America fight the war on terror, just as Chirac promised. On November 16, 2001, two months after the devastating attacks on America, French troops began to pour into Afghanistan. There are an estimated two hundred French troops currently stationed there. On May 26, 2002, President Bush thanked Chirac and the French for being at America's side, saying, "And I want to thank the French people for not only the sympathy shown for my country after September the 11th, but the strong support in the war against terror. " Clearly, Chirac did indeed tell President George W. Bush well ahead of time that France would be at America's side, and he delivered on this. However, when America decided to invade Iraq, citing them as a threat due to their "weapons of mass destruction," France refused to engage in pointless warfare. After all, who lied to the public about the war in Iraq? The man who said that there were no weapons of mass destruction and refused to go to war over nonexistent objects, or the man who caused us to suffer incalculable human and political costs for, as Michael Moore would put it, a "fictitious war?"
Rating:
Summary: Not as incendiary as it's title
Review: The reviewer below didn't read the book. Timmerman presents a fairly balanced account. The crux of his argument is that the "French" betrayal is in many ways more of a "Chirac" betrayal, and Chirac really does seem like a cad. I found the narrative about the U.S./Mitterand (a Socialist) relationship to be saddening; how even when our two countries were deeply at odds the bond created by our shared values held fast. The "balance" in this book comes out during these parts. Germany, France, and to a much lesser degree, the US, were guilty of hardcore realpolitik in their support of Iraq over Iran. The French were frustrated by our lack of "sophistication" in our approach to the Arab world, but at the end of the day France, especially Mitterand would come out on the side of "freedom"(their words). Chirac's personal corruption and disturbingly close, personal relationship with Saddam Hussein and Tariq Aziz, the French Arm's industry's utter dependence on Iraqi purchases (which amounted to more than Frances own military), and abundant "oil" bribery left France under Chirac no choice but to betray its old friend in the US. It was pleasing to read that though many of the French have been completely steeped in anti-Americanism to justify this betrayal, ther are still many Frenchmen who find this knife in the back to be appalling. This book could have used a bit more in the way of personal interviews and quotes (this is when it is best) and a little less in the way of historic footnotes, but in the end its an important read.
Rating:
Summary: History to suite!
Review: Okay... major problems I had with this book. France is supposedly the criminal for supporting Iraq in the past. So what the hell was the US doing during the Iran Iraq war???? And for all you warmongers out there, no body really wants to go to war, not for a cause that they don't feel is their concern, at least not those who actually have to fight it. Being a soldier and infantryman I should know. For all you armchair generals sitting at home all comfortable and safe it may seem easy, blame France. I say, if they, or anyone doesn't want to fight, then good. France would be under more of a threat if it became involved. If they want to let their young men grow old and have families then it's fine with me. In Europe, war is a last resort, not a tool of foreign policy! They're just looking after their own interests, after all, that's exactly what the US always does, it's what everyone does. 9/11 was a great tragedy, but wake up America, it was not the first nor the last terrorist attack. So why should everyone come running to help when perhaps America has not recognized their struggles and helped as much as they could? "But we saved their arses in WW2 and 1!" ... besides this grossly ignorant overstatement does anyone remember Suez, Vietnam, to name a few examples... the USA certainly wasn't being the honest innocent ally the book claims. They forced the French and Brits out of Suez, after they defeated a coup, and aided the Viet Ming. In short, this book is doing no one any favors. This book does contain a few interesting interpretations, but I fear they may be misinterpreted by ignorance. It perpetuates the black and white, us an them outlook that seems so incredibly common in the US, no matter how naive it is. There is no "Axis of Evil" good guys n bad guys, this is not a John Wayne movie. Don't get me wrong. I love my country, and serve proudly. I supported liberating Iraq from Suddam, to rule itself. I just detest the ignorant arrogant slant many politicians put, their polarized elitist outlook that always results in lads like me beind sent to die for stupid s#@t. Lastly, in studying history, if one goes hunting for an answers, then you will find it!
|
