I was flattered to have a French visitor respond to my post about French strategic decisions in Yugoslavia. He's a bit off topic -- I expect he came in on my Cheese-eating surrender monkey post, which is #3 on certain Google searches for those keywords.

His main points:

1. France invented human rights
2. The U.S. used to keep the world stable
3. The U.S. now only acts out if its own interests
4. Attacking Iraq will destablize the world
5. France is taking a principled stand, and is not anti-American
6. The rest of the world agrees with France.

My responses:

1. Sure, no argument, but don't forget contribution from others, including the English, the Norsemen, and the Greeks.
2. We're still trying to do that; that's still our motive.
3. Sigh, when did containing Iraq become only the interest of the United States?
4. My evidence says the opposite, what's yours?
5. What principles is France standing on? I can't tell. It can't be that war is wrong, since France behaves like other nations in this regard. You can imagine that Americans might have ulterior motives, good. But why would you imagine the French can't have ulterior motives?
6. A lot of the world does agree with France. But who wants to look to the Saudis, Syria, Russia, and China for moral support and guidance?

I honestly hope he comes back again and answers my questions; sadly, he wasn't brave enough to leave his actual e-mail address.