a French view

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Richard Jay Solomon <rsolomon () dsl cis upenn edu>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 12:54:11 -0500
To: farber () cis upenn edu (David Farber)
Subject: a French view -- correction

Correction about access. I didn't realize since I was accessing Le
Monde inside of a firewall which subscribes to the paper that some of
the articles require a paid subscription. Some are free, however, and
they have a lot of urls to other very handy sites that are free.

If you run this to IP, better send this disclaimer.

Richard


------ Forwarded Message
From: Richard Jay Solomon <rsolomon () dsl cis upenn edu>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 12:45:48 -0500
To: farber () cis upenn edu (David Farber)
Subject: a French view

Dave: Yesterday I sent you a German view. This is from Le Monde, a
slightly left-of-center, usually authoritative, French newspaper that
I used to read regularly when I was in Paris. Their web site contains
well-articulated English translations. Urls herein point to the full
articles with no charge for reading. Whether or not one agrees with
the views of the French, Germans, Russians, Indians, Brits, or just
about any other major country, it's really amazing how easy it is to
read directly their newspaper commentaries and opinions with just a
click.

For a comprehensive list we have Google to thank:
http://www.google.com/news/

Is this a big secret? Do not the "mainstream" gatekeepers know that a
growing sub-culture of keyboard ticklers can now read directly almost
anything in the warmth of their own living rooms, and go beyond the
filtered views found on their local newsstand or cable channel? And
if you can understand other languages (which, oddly enough, an awful
lot of Americans can do), an even larger world beckons.  Then there
is web radio...

Enough of my meandering, here is today's Le Monde special edition:

--Richard

> Status:  U
> X-Sympa-To: dispatch
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 16:53:44 +0100
> Subject: The US war on Iraq
> From: Le Monde diplomatique <dispatch () Monde-diplomatique fr>
> To: Le Monde diplomatique <dispatch () monde-diplomatique fr>
> X-Validation-by: english () monde-diplomatique fr
> X-Loop: dispatch () monde-diplomatique fr
> X-Sequence: 9
> X-no-archive: yes
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:dispatch-on () monde-diplomatique fr>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dispatch-off () monde-diplomatique fr>
> List-Id: <dispatch.monde-diplomatique.fr>
>
>
>
>                    Le Monde diplomatique
>
>                        A special focus
>
>    -----------------------------------------------------
>
>                      The US war on Iraq
>
>               http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/
>
>
>    Nothing seems capable of halting the American juggernaut. Now
>    in March 250,000 US soldiers, along with a few British
>    units, are gathered in the Gulf ready for the assault on
>    Baghdad. Soon after 11 September 2001 the Bush
>    administration decided that one component of their strategy
>    would be to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Men as high-placed as
>    Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld or Paul Wolfowitz had long
>    advocated such action, but George W Bush's questionable
>    election made it difficult to realise that objective. With
>    11 September it became feasible. From then on Washington's
>    ruling view of the world was stark: "Anyone who is not with
>    us is with the terrorists" Bush proclaimed. The September
>    2002 document entitled The National Security Strategy of the
>    United States, which for the first time included the notion
>    of preventive war, confirmed the new orientation of the
>    hyperpower, which was convinced that its own interests were
>    henceforth synonymous with justice. (see documents in Part One:
>    United States strategy).
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1456
>
>    This strategy was not a response to 11 September. It was
>    formulated in a document dating from September 2000, signed
>    by influential members of the current administration before
>    they took office, which claimed that terrorism had replaced
>    Nazism and communism as the new enemy of the United States.
>    But terrorism is not an ideology, nor is it a strategic
>    threat, since it does not originate from any state. It is a
>    useful bogeyman, adaptable to many situations and used to
>    discredit one's enemies. Especially when it can be
>    associated, in a triangle of evil, with weapons of mass
>    destruction and so-called "rogue states" (see documents in Part
>    Two: The threat of terrorism).
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1457
>
>    President Bush has warned that the "war on terrorism" will
>    be a long one. It began with the Afghan campaign and the
>    overthrow of the Taliban. It continued with the outlawing of
>    hundreds of organisations and individuals, on criteria that
>    are vague at best, corresponding more to American fantasies
>    than to any serious definition of the terrorist phenomenon -
>    if such a definition were possible. This war has also helped
>    a number of governments to justify their own repressive
>    policies: Russia in Chechnya, Israel in Palestine, India in
>    Kashmir, etc. In the countries of the North, an offensive is
>    mounting against an "enemy within", often identified with
>    Muslim immigrants, or radical protestors (see documents in
>    Third Part: The war against terrorism).
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1458
>
>    The United States decided on its attack on Saddam Hussein'
>    regime in order to destroy the weapons of mass destruction
>    held by Iraq. And yet, on this question, no evidence has
>    been offered, and certainly no proof that Iraq is such a
>    threat to world peace and security that war is unavoidable.
>    Washington's duplicity is obvious when we compare the US
>    attitude towards North Korea. The proliferation of weapons
>    of mass destruction is a very real problem, but it requires
>    a multilateral solution, through the enforcement of existing
>    treaties and stricter rules, especially on exports of
>    sensitive material. The United States, France, Great Britain
>    and Germany have much to answer for regarding Saddam's
>    armaments programme in the 1980s (See documents in Part Four:
>    Weapons of Mass Destruction).
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1459
>
>    The first victim of the war will be the Iraqi people,
>    already suffering from a bloodthirsty dictatorship and
>    criminal sanctions. Responsible for two wars - against Iran,
>    then against Kuwait - the Baghdad regime has been subject to
>    strict controls since 1991. The United Nations inspectors
>    were able greatly to reduce its capacity to inflict harm,
>    but this was accompanied by an embargo of unprecedented
>    severity. United Nations experts predict that another war
>    inflicted on a country whose population has reached the
>    limits of its endurance will bring about hundreds of
>    thousands of deaths. And the vision of a pacified and
>    democratic Iraq arising from the ruins of Saddam's
>    dictatorship, is a pipedream - or rather a piece of
>    propaganda - without any relation to reality (see documents
>    in Part Five: Toppling Saddam).
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1460
>
>    There are questions, too, about the broader consequences of
>    a new war on the situation in the Middle East, especially
>    the confrontation between Israelis and Palestinians (see
>    documents in Part Six: War in the heart of the Middle East)
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1461
>
>    This focus feature was prepared by Alain Gresh, Maria
>    Ierardi, Olivier Pironet and Philippe Rivière
>
>    We welcome your questions and comments, which should be
>    adressed to
>             Olivier.Pironet () Monde-diplomatique fr
>
>
>
>    >  US strategy
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1456
>
>    >  The threat of terrorism
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1457
>
>        / United Nations documents on terrorism / "Rogue
>        States"
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1462
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1466
>
>    >  The war against terrorism
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1458
>
>        / The US intervention in Afghanistan / Al-Qaida /
>        The "anti-terrorist" offensive against civil liberties
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1465
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1468
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1472
>
>    >  Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1459
>
>    >  Toppling Saddam
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1460
>
>        / A computerised war / Military intervention and
>        oil-related issues / UN Inspections: a painstaking
>        mission / War and post-war scenarios / Iraq in the
>        run-up to a military strike
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1467
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1463
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1473
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1475
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1476
>
>    >  War in the heart of the Middle East
>         http://mondediplo.com/focus/iraq/r1461
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
>               See the French version:
>
>               L'empire contre l'Irak
>     http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/cahier/irak/
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/