Is Europe really worth America's trouble?

Nevermind that France has been blocking American and British war efforts, and nevermind that the French thought it more important to send a message than to defend its friend and ally, Turkey. Nevermind that France has bullied Eastern European nations that support the US, basically stating that they should have kept quiet. And nevermind that the French, with its oil company (TotalFinaElf) poised to benefit intensely from extensive Iraqi oil contracts, have decided to put their economic interests at #1 on their list of priorities.

But France, in its infinite disregard for the peace and safety of the world, not only opposes war, but would have been perfectly content to do absolutely nothing about the Iraq situation. Consider this. France, Iraq's largest import partner, could have set the world's agenda. They could have told Iraq to disarm --pure and simple-- and banded with Austral0ia (Iraq's number two import partner) to threaten an economic embargo. Would Saddam not have to comply then, with 44% of their imports cut off? France could have done this. They could have been the ones leading this fight against the proliferation of WMD. Instead they chose to do nothing. Instead they chose to simply disagree with the US.

France could have been the hero here. Yet instead they did nothing.

The last time the French were heroes was in 732.

The editorial reproduced below, entitled was written by Mathias
Dvpfner, CEO of the large German publishing firm Axel Springer, and
published in the German periodical Die Welt on 20 November 2004.

**************************************

A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true.

Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements.

Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe where for decades, inhuman, suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities.

Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and, even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us.

Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians.

Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush... Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U. N. Oil-for-Food program.

And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement. How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany.

I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists.

One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolph Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time".

What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction.

It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness.

Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush.

His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed.

In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China.

On the contrary, we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those "arrogant Americans", as the World Champions of "tolerance", which even Otto Schily justifiably criticizes.

Why?

Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass.

For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy, because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything.

While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation, or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to "Reach out to terrorists, to understand and forgive".

These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house.

Appeasement? Europe, thy name is Cowardice.

Many people that support the invasion and occupation of Iraq seem to want to create the impression that there was a general consensus that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. There was no such consensus and I remember quite clearly the debate raging at the time. I myself had doubts, base don the evidence presented to me. Hans Blix and Scott Ritter, both on-the-ground senior weapons inspectors, found no evidence of reconstutued weapons of mass destruction.

Saying that there was worldwide consensus that Iraq had WMD is revisionist.

So France only has a right to an opinion only proportional to their military strength? You accuse the French of arrogance, but that's a rather arrogant attitude. Frankly, I'd take liberal democracy like France as an ally over an Islamic military dictatorship like Pakistan anyday, but that's just my opinion.

And it is doesn't change the fact that to say France, "in it's infinite disregard for peace ... opposes war" is an infinitely nonsensical supposition.