The translation of Sarkozy's full remarks at the UN. Not much new, but as Jake Tapper Tweets, "*not sure he mocked Obama is accurate meme. Or, bluntly put, get real, dude! Aka How those Freedom Fries Tasting now, dope!
France fully supports your initiative to organize this meeting and the efforts you undertook with Russia to reduce nuclear arsenals. But let us speak frankly – we are here to guarantee peace.
We are right to speak of the future, but before the future there is the present, and at present we have two nuclear crises.
The people of the entire world are listening to what we’re saying, to our promises, our commitments and our speeches, but we live in a real world, not a virtual world.
We say: reductions must be made. And President Obama has even said, “I dream of a world without [nuclear weapons].” Yet before our very eyes, two countries are currently doing the exact opposite. Since 2005, Iran has violated five Security Council resolutions. Since 2005, Secretary-General, the international community has called on Iran to engage in dialogue. An offer of dialogue was made in 2005, an offer of dialogue was made in 2006, an offer of dialogue was made in 2007, an offer of dialogue was made in 2008, and another one was made in 2009. President Obama, I support the Americans’ outstretched hand. But what did the international community gain from these offers of dialogue? Nothing. More enriched uranium, more centrifuges, and on top of that, a statement by Iranian leaders proposing to wipe a UN member State off the map.
Updated at 3:57 pm


Looks like we can add the Leader of France to the "he's a raaaaaacist" list.
Posted by: x11b1p | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 02:15 PM
It's a sad day when a French leader has more balls than the U.S. President. But at least he stepped up.
Posted by: MTMN | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 02:51 PM
Also found The Telegraph's labeling Mr. Obama as "President Pantywaist" to be both funny and spot-on.
Posted by: Copper Quark | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 02:52 PM
Wish folks would stop using the word "meme" when they mean "idea", unless they're talking about the reproductive aspects of the idea, in the sense that Dawkins coined the term. Sorry pet peeve of mine.
Posted by: steve | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:18 PM
"An offer of dialogue was made in 2005, an offer of dialogue was made in 2006, an offer of dialogue was made in 2007, an offer of dialogue was made in 2008, and another one was made in 2009. President Obama, I support the Americans’ outstretched hand. But what did the international community gain from these offers of dialogue? Nothing."
Bull. We negotiated for the promise of future negotiations. Wahoo! Win-win.
Sigh. I really wish that, one day, I'll be allowed to use game theory against a proponent of soft "power".
I hope Israel has at least one nuke spun up for NYC. And a few for Europe and Russia. The enablers deserve to share in her fate.
Posted by: Fen | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:21 PM
Read the tweet again Tapper said "Not sure 'Sarkozy mocked Obama' is accurate meme."
I would say not mocking but bucket of cold water to the face. "Wake. Up!"
Posted by: Yehudit | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:26 PM
(What you link to has Tapper saying "NOT sure 'he mocked Obama' accurate meme." ?)
Posted by: tree hugging sister | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:26 PM
"I hope Israel has at least one nuke spun up for NYC. And a few for Europe and Russia. The enablers deserve to share in her fate.
Posted by: Fen | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:21 PM "
No, no, no! If they can only spare one for us, I encourage them to use it on D.C. And make it a
crowd pleaser!
Posted by: Pakvi Roti | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:27 PM
"I hope Israel has at least one nuke spun up for NYC. And a few for Europe and Russia. The enablers deserve to share in her fate.
Posted by: Fen | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:21 PM "
No, no, no! If they can only spare one for us, I encourage them to use it on D.C. And make it a
crowd pleaser!
**************
Disgusting.
Posted by: WPE | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:32 PM
"Disgusting"
No. Whats disgusting is enablers who let 7.5 million be killed while they "give peace a chance".
If there is Justice, the appeasers will share the fate of their victims.
Posted by: Fen | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 03:49 PM
Since you think nuking NYC and DC is such a great idea, why don't you join Al Qaeda?
Better yet, cash in your citizenship and get f*** out.
Posted by: WPE | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 04:03 PM
Fen wrote
==========
"Disgusting"
No. Whats disgusting is enablers who let 7.5 million be killed while they "give peace a chance".
If there is Justice, the appeasers will share the fate of their victims.
=====
Right, because every single new yorker is an enabler....
Idiot.
Posted by: A guy from brooklyn | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 04:07 PM
Didn't Nevil Chamberlan try the same approach with hitler?
Suspect it is going to work out the same way here too :-(.
Posted by: Fox3 | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 04:09 PM
Without Neville Chamberlain, people would still be debating the true intentions of Adolf Hitler. Chamberlain would be seen as a war criminal for invading Germany which had only profusely, and indeed sincerely, wished only to be on peaceful terms with her.
In fact, Chamberlain would be seen like Bush, had he used force against Germany to stop its eastward expansion.
Posted by: joel | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 05:51 PM
"Since you think nuking NYC and DC is such a great idea, why don't you join Al Qaeda?"
I'm a former Marine, and I don't think nuking NYC and DC is a great idea. But if we're going to betray Israel, its only fair that we're on her retaliatory short-list.
Posted by: Fen | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 06:10 PM
Too think that the French president is saying this rather than the American.
Posted by: Elise | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 06:13 PM
I seriously doubt Chamberlain would have invaded Germany an d become a "war criminal" - WTF? Besides, Germany was too busy making an easily dissolveable non-aggression pact with Stalin while preparing to invading and split-up Poland with the Soviets to be on peaceful terms with anybody. Would Chamberlain have gone into Afghanistan - or made a deal with the Taliban for morphine? Deal I think. Would Chamberalin have gone into Iraq??! No Chamberlain = Bush equation is at all possible.
Posted by: DirtCrashr | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 06:32 PM
Yeah, 2002 Iraq, 1938 Germany, exactly the same. Except Iraq didn't have the world's most powerful military with a huge tank core and air force like German did, no huge industrial base, not one of the most advanced nations technically, had no powerful allies, didn't have any great military thinkers. But Iraq did have foreign powers enforcing no-fly zones and doing inspections of it's military facilities. As a matter of fact, it didn't even have any WMDs.
Other than those minor points, yeah, the two countries are EXACTLY alike.
Posted by: WPE | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 06:38 PM
No one said the two were exactly alike. But nice rant.
Posted by: Fen | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 06:53 PM
As for Chamberlain, its not unreasonable to picture him neck deep in the Oil for Food scam. And I think the endgame for Obama/Iran will be the same - we'll trade away our hole-card for ineffective sanctions that will be breached by our "allies" anyway. Thats the most I expect from diplomacy re this. And its not like sanctions did anything to prevent N Korea from getting nukes.
Posted by: Fen | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 06:56 PM
Wow, is it possible Sarkozy may return France to salient power status? He is making the most concise and realistic defense of the West - those remarks are positively Thatcheriffic.
Posted by: MEC2 | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 07:29 PM
"I'm a former Marine, and I don't think nuking NYC and DC is a great idea. But if we're going to betray Israel, its only fair that we're on her retaliatory short-list. "
I guess you think it's just kindof a good idea then. With patriots like you guys, who needs any Al Qaeda.
Posted by: WPE | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 07:33 PM
You're not too bright, yes?
Posted by: Fen | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 07:42 PM
I'm pretty sure he means, 'conservatives get real' because in the first line he says the [conservative] meme is wrong and in the last he mocks the freedom fries thing. It wouldn't make sense for the line in between those to be about the Won when the others were not.
But, I think Tapper is wrong. When you consider [prosaic non confrontational] diplomacy speak, Sarko said quite a lot (re: did slap Obama upside the head... when context is considered)… alas in the low key way you have to say it at an international conference… and when you come from France (they’re big on following protocol…).
Posted by: Thomass | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 07:51 PM
It's a sad day when a French leader has more balls than the U.S. President. But at least he stepped up.
I'll raise you one.
It is a sad day when both the French and German leaders have more balls than a US President, AND when China is a better practitioner of free-market capitalism than the US.
Did you ever think you would be saying those words?
Posted by: Toads | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 08:12 PM
Dear Obambi,
A message from the late and largely unlamented (at least by decent people) Leon Trotsky, which was apparently channeled through Sarkozy. "You may not want war, but war may want you." Get ready and get real!
Mike Gallagher
Seoul, ROK
Posted by: Michael G. Gallagher | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 08:37 PM
Maybe, just maybe, one of Obama's objectives has been to smoke out the free riders. By making a big deal of the US no longer carrying the load of "Cop to the World" other countries like the ever-sniping French can be forced to man-up.
Or am I giving Obama too much credit?
Posted by: Whitehall | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 09:12 PM
You're giving Dumbama wayyy too much credit. All should read "The Obama Timeline" (see www.colony14.net )
Posted by: gmiller | Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 10:21 PM
All Sarkozy forgot to add at the end of the speech was "....,Bitch!"
Posted by: Robohobo | Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 12:04 AM
Actually, one crucial similarity between Nazi Germany in 1938 and Iraq 2003 is this:
Both countries were in blatant violation of treaties relating to previous armistices and both were recipients of numerous stern but ultimately toothless international sanctions.
The difference between the two is that Bush, as president, took his oath seriously enough to enforce the accords.
Funny how those never get mentioned. WMD this, Halliburton that, gas pipelines...
Shucks, next thing you know, we'll elect a Marxist buffoon and see how to screw things up from the Left.
Oops. Sorry. Forgot the date.
Posted by: TmjUtah | Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 12:30 AM
"Both countries were in blatant violation of treaties relating to previous armistices and both were recipients of numerous stern but ultimately toothless international sanctions."
Toothless? Hardly. We, under Bush 1, invaded Iraq, then enforced a no-fly zone, bombed whenever they did anything we remotely disliked, enforced economic sanctions that destroyed it's economy, controlled its oil industry, inspected its military installations toothless. Then invaded again.
And the point of all those UN resolutions? To get Iraq to destroy its WMD.
Guess, what - they didn't have any.
Obama's not a Marxist.
Posted by: WPE | Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 02:48 PM
The sanctions were indeed toothless. see: Oil for Food scam. And sanctions against Iran will do nothing to prevent their gaining nukes. Look at North Korea - their people are starving in the streets, yet their government still manages to produce nukes. Sanctions are the touchy-feel-good response of fools.
And the point of UN sanctions was not "to get Iraq to destroy its WMD". It was to get Iraq to provide *proof* it had destroyed its WMDs, as Iraq had promised it had done.
As for existence of WMDs, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And we already know that Iraq farmed out its WMD programs to Syria, Libya and the Sudan. Insisting that Iraq didn't have WMDs is naive and ignorant. Its like a police detective entering a busted meth lab - meth recipes and beakers and precursor chemicals, but no actual Meth. "Gee, I guess they weren't producing Meth". Idiot.
Posted by: Fen | Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 03:15 PM
Fen says: "I hope Israel has at least one nuke spun up for NYC. And a few for Europe and Russia. The enablers deserve to share in her fate."
Hoping for the death of millions of innocent American citizens. Some frigging patriot. There's no word in the English language for how despicable that is and you are.
Posted by: WPE | Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 07:22 PM
"Hoping for the death of millions of innocent American citizens. Some frigging patriot. There's no word in the English language for how despicable that is and you are."
Amazing, isn't it?
The Guantanamo prisoners and al-Qaeda daily hope for the same thing, and all WPE and his leftist ilk can do is to go on about how Americans deserve it, how they're all "little Eichmanns", "God damn America", and the like, making it clear that, if you are in the United States, you deserve to die.
Not a word from WPE.
Ahmadinejad, the rest of the Obama-supported Iranian government, Jimmy Carter's friends in Hamas, Hizbollah, Syria, Libya, and their other allied groups hope for the death of millions of innocent Israeli citizens daily, making it clear that, if you are in Israel, you deserve to die.
Not a word from WPE.
Spare us the faked outrage. Your main regret from the past week has been that the bomb didn't go off.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27592.html
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 08:59 PM
What's the matter NDT? Can't bring yourself to denounce posters supporting nuclear attacks on New York City and Washington DC? xCalling for Israel to nike millions of innocent Americans. Sounds like what Al Qaeda's trying to do. And Americans are dying to stop them. You're a dick. As is every other morons on this thread that think it's fine for Israel to nuke US cities.
Posted by: WPE | Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 09:56 PM
I said that if Israel is going down, I think its only fair they save a few nukes for the people that betrayed them.
You have an issue with that, you should be tearing the UN HQ down brick by brick, instead of trolling your faux outrage.
Those that enable the appeasement should share in their victim's fate. You're no different than the Germans who pretended not to know what was going on in the camps around them.
"Some frigging patriot"
Oh yeah? Get off your butt and enlist. Fricken parasite.
And its telling that when confronted with the fact that Obama will fail to stop Iran, you resort to ad hom.
Posted by: Fen | Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 11:52 PM
Sarkozy has a much bigger pair than Obama. Michelle cut his off and she keeps them in a lockbox.
Posted by: JB | Monday, September 28, 2009 at 12:45 AM
No reply from NDT. Guess he really is a supporter of terrorists.
No, you wrote:
"I'm a former Marine, and I don't think nuking NYC and DC is a great idea. But if we're going to betray Israel, its only fair that we're on her retaliatory short-list. "
Nobody's betraying Israel. Obama said they shouldn't keep building settlements - which is something Israel actually agreed to previously, and called for peace talks between the two sides. And there are lots of Israelis that agree with Obama.
It certainly reads that you're supporting Israeli interests over ours. That's idiocy and unAmerican. It also breaks your oath as a Marine.
And Obama's doing fine with Iran, he's working on sanctions and building a coalition. So, unless you think we should invade Iran, he's doing it exactly right.
Posted by: WPE | Monday, September 28, 2009 at 11:13 AM
"But what did the international community gain from these offers of dialogue? Nothing."
Ouch. Hey, Slappy, don't get mad, just make a gesture behind his back. Our super h[z]ero is shrinking before our eyes.
I predict an obscene, diminutive lawn jockey will be popular Xmas 2010.
Posted by: gary gulrud | Monday, September 28, 2009 at 11:30 AM