Nicolas Sarkozy has transformed France from one-time vociferous pacifist to one of the West's eagerest warmongers. He says his actions are in the name of democracy, but political analysts believe those same actions could come back to haunt him.
Back to the article
i like sarkozy with my opinions his policy in libya is very good
The Globalists are having to use France and the UK to do their dirty work now. The Rebels are being run by Al Quaeda ( which is frn from the Pentagon and Langley)and if they win they will set up a puppet gov under the Muslim Brotherhood (also CIA run). This is our new fascist World Government in action.
Sarkozy, Cameron, Obama, Bush, Blair it does not matter. They have had special forces in Libya for months now. They have thousands of Marines sitting off shore ready to invade, sorry special advisors. When they have taken our Libya it will be Syria and the small gulf states.
After that they will have their war with Iran.
Sarkozy speaks of protecting civilians in Libya, but his approval of extreme use of force is most bestial,irrational and speaks to the contrary. Untold numbers of civilians have been killed by Sarkozy's air strikes since the beginning of the coalition assault on Libya. Who are the civilians he seeks to protect? The armed rebels? Sarkozy's ego and not reason is clearly playing out in Libya. Sarkozy a new "warmonger", "Camerone" a "stooge" in the making
I'm a french socialits and so a poplitical opponent of Sarkozy. But I support the french interventions in Libya and Ivory coast, under a UN mandate, to prevent two dictators to slaughter their own population. Of course, France tries also to preserve its own interests.
But how what can reasonably think that Sarkozy could improve his approval rate inFrance, thnaks to the french military interventions ? Nnonsense ! If Sarkozy is unpupular in France, it's becasue of his domestic policy on solial and economic issues !
The french diplomacy had a poor response about Tunisia, but I don't see why a national consensus could not be reached about Libya and Ivory Coast, two crisis that were correctly treated by the french government.
For once France starts to stand up for its own interests, and that makes Sarkozy a "warmonger?" When is the French pacifist left going to finally grow up?
I cannot bezlieve some of these posts. There would be no war in Ivory Coast if not for France. It backed the 2002 coup, intervened on the side of the rebels, help rig the elections and is now creating a situation where more civilians are being killed in a week than during the whole civil war and all of this for imperial and electoral goals.
All they ahd to do was recount the vote like in Haiti. We will also find that those Sarkozy is fighting for in Egypt are royalists and islamic fundamentalists even if Qaddafi is a screwball. It is not our fight.
As for the post on Rwanda, lets not forget that the genocide would not have happened if not for French policy in the country. It seems most of the commentators here are happy with the reporting which is biased in favor of France and its puppet, the UN but as soon as someone asks other questions, in typical conservative hypocrcy, they scream bias.
Stop the war. Start the talks. Gbagbo is an African hero.
Typical lefty pinko commie journalism from someone who does not live here in C.I. I will tell you after tonights broadcast at 8pm here in C.I. people are pissed at France24. They speak out of both sides of their mouth. Laurent Gbagbo is the lowest form of humanity on earth. Anyone who would say the French are warmongering in this situation is clearly showing their agenda.
France intervening in Ivory Coast and Libya is good as it relieves the people from a cruel dictatorship ,tyranny and unnecessary suffering.Better than going into Iraq.But go the full distance and remove the regimes and give the people achance to have a democratic leaders governing them
Pacific resolution is the best solution? What do you think?
compared to Bush and Obama. The last two US presidents are shills for the US military/corporate exploitation "complex". And I am a democratic socialist. I hope Sarkozy loses to the Socialists in France and I hope our government becomes a true social democracy. That means the defeat of both the US republican and democratic parties. Proportional Representation is true democracy. The US is a plutocracy run by bloody oligarchs.
[To call Sarkozy a "warmonger" and to wonder over the hypothetical afterward motives is preposterous and partisan to say the least. I fail to see journalism in any of that...]
I agree with this post I quoted. Sophie Pilgrim is simply biased. She fails to see that if a nation has great power, then they have a responsibility to help others in need... even through "just war" (e.g. U.S. helping France in WWII).
Dear Sophie, I find your "journalism" a bit amusing. When one chooses to run for leader of a free nation, there come responsibilities. I believe the France's involvement in both Lybia and Ivory Coast are both moral and necessary. I do find your statement of warmongering a bit insulting. Sometimes, a president must send troops in harms way. It is easier to judge and critize those from the sidelines. I have disagreed with the decision of IRAQ, but not "Desert Storm". Free nations must do what they must to protect countries when they can. You need to review your history.
Mr. Sarkozy is sometimes rude,he talks of other Presidents as if they are his pupils,he has made me have another image of the French.He has instigated his mates to start a dirty intervention in Libya and without cleaning up the mess,he starts another massive intervention in the Ivory Coast.He cannot be as smart as Bush,he will even be more unpopular after this.
Of course he has the 2012 presidential elections in mind. He has to make it possible, vis-à-vis the xenophobia and ultra-nationalist/vainglorious propaganda of Marine le Pen's Front National (FN), for the sub-Saharan Africans and North Africans to not have to flee to France, and for those already in France, to be able to return home and develop their homelands, for the better.
well his idol is G.W.Bush so ...
everyone knows that there are 78 countries in the world with the same situation like libya, having rulers that are ruling from 30 to 40 years. but why they select libya why they are not speaking about the civilians and for democracy in behrain.
this war is again for oil and after few days or weak we will have the results.
shame on your principals for democracy
Credit goes to the French military, they fulfill their objectives and reach their goals without collateral damages.
N.S and his mignon, to take credit for it, is disturbing unless they go on the front lines.
I do not even like Sarkozy and I am on his side in this!!!!
its better to be named a warmonger than let a dictator kill innocent people would they say the same if it was there family's kidafi was killing
What will "come back to haunt Sarkozy"? Option 1 -- Help NATO in removing Ghadaffi; Option 2 -- Do nothing and let Ghadaffi kills thousands of unarmed civilians using mercenaries, bombing, tanks, and other heavy equipment. Why is this called "warmongering"? Whoever wrote this article should ask the mothers in Libya who had their children bombed by Ghadaff. The use of the term "warmonger" is little more than tasteless propaganda.
i think it is time for french government to look its illegal procedure for keeping MAYOTTE in colonialism. instead of creating conflicts over borders for sake of being hero.
I will to death defend France policy.Honestly we do not want genocide of the Rwanda Magnitude while pple fold their hands
I can't believe that I am reading such a "thing" over France 24, to dare to compare Bush's Iraq (the whole WMD propaganda, the little fact that there was no democratic uprising nor massacre under way then) with Libya or Cote d'Ivoire situations is simply ludicrous. To call Sarkozy a "warmonger" and to wonder over the hypothetical afterward motives is preposterous and partisan to say the least. I fail to see journalism in any of that...
Whatever Mr. Sarkozy's possible ulterior motives in ordering French military interventions in Libya and Cote d"Ivoire, I must, with reluctance, express approval. In both cases France is acting in defense of civilians who have been at the mercy of forces over which they have no control. The case for intervention in Libya was clear and has garnered broad support. Would Mr. Sarkozy's critics be voicing approval for his inaction had he abstained from acting and Mr. Gaddafi had crushed the Libyan opposition, with thousands of casualties and a vicious dictatorship left in place? Similarly, the case for taking action against the murderous behavior of Gbagbo's troops was strong. Would the critics be cheering him had he responded negatively to the UN Secretary General's request for assistance in Abidjan?
I am no admirer of Mr. Sarkozy, and I have been highly critical of his rightist policies. However, when (i believe) he is doing the right thing, I think I should admit it and applaud his decisions.
After reading this I know I must be late for the Tea Party with Alice and the big rabbit.
IN THE WORLD PAPERS