Unprecedented rally is largest in France's history, officials say

Luftwaffe said:

What explanation do you have for the other countries not sending all their leaders after Sandy Hook?

Let the Europeans congregate over European problems and let the Americans congregate over American problems :shrug:

Be careful with your speech.

Click to expand...

:shock:

What? Sandy Hook vs. terrorist attack?

:screwy

rhinefire said:

Our Attorney General was in Paris but Obama decided he should not attend the massive protest against terror attended by world leaders from all parts of the globe proving beyond all doubt the President of the United States is a babbling imbecile and a disgrace.

Click to expand...

I don't remember Jacques Chirac in NYC when bush was addressing people at ground zero. After 9/11

Luftwaffe said:

His walk so far is bigger than his talk. He at least is ordering air-strikes on ISIS and has a garrison in the ME.

The french are doing nothing, like they have been doing for a while since WWII.

They can make some good cheese though :shrug:

Click to expand...

That's not true the French did help us in Desert Storm. And several minor altercations between World War II in today. They were also part of the defense plan against the Soviets in the event of World War III. However they are not a part of NATO, and the reason is because of bad feelings going back to the 60s, The French wanted nuclear weapons, they currently have nuclear weapons. We did not want the French to have them, we tried to get them to agree not to develop nukes well Charles de Gaulle didn't like that, so they flip NATO the middle finger left NATO and develop their own nuclear weapons. French president Charles de Gaulle, was not a fan of the US having to bail out his country twice and wanted a more powerful military including nukes to ensure a third time would not be necessary
That's a reason they don't participate in many of our wars, is because they were not a NATO country until the late 90s

From the BBC:

Mr Kerry defended his absence, citing prior commitments and saying the US relationship with France "is not about one day or one particular moment"...

White House officials told CBS News Mr Obama did not attend because his security would have interfered with the huge crowds.

BBC News - Kerry to visit France amid criticism of rally absence

The rather amateurish explanations are really astonishing from a PR standpoint, especially as the Obama Administration has been in office for almost 6 full years.

The first point lacks merit, as others with longstanding relationships with France were represented i.e., the UK and Germany.

The second point also lacks merit, as the presence of 40 world leaders or senior officials would result in extraordinary security precautions. Any additional U.S. security requirements would have been marginal in that context.

EMNofSeattle said:

I don't remember Jacques Chirac in NYC when bush was addressing people at ground zero. After 9/11

Click to expand...

The U.S. did not organize the kind of rally that was organized in Paris. In any case, President Chirac flew to Washington and met with President Bush on 9/18.

President Chirac Pledges Support

donsutherland1 said:

The U.S. did not organize the kind of rally that was organized in Paris. In any case, President Chirac flew to Washington and met with President Bush on 9/18.

President Chirac Pledges Support

Click to expand...

And I'm sure at some point Obama will meet with Pres. Hollande.

But there were rallies all over the country. Bush himself spoke at ground zero. To a crowd.

Any number of world leaders could've come down to them, but in many cases they did not and that's not a problem to me.
Obama misses out on a rally not a problem to me. We have pledged our support to France. Just as France provided military support to us. Really there is no real case that we have abandoned each other as allies, it seems more as if the political right in this country is upset that Obama missed a photo op, and if Obama went and did the littlest thing wrong then the American political right would be after him for hogging the show. Can't win for losing

EMNofSeattle said:

And I'm sure at some point Obama will meet with Pres. Hollande.

But there were rallies all over the country. Bush himself spoke at ground zero. To a crowd.

Any number of world leaders could've come down to them, but in many cases they did not and that's not a problem to me.
Obama misses out on a rally not a problem to me. We have pledged our support to France. Just as France provided military support to us. Really there is no real case that we have abandoned each other as allies, it seems more as if the political right in this country is upset that Obama missed a photo op, and if Obama went and did the littlest thing wrong then the American political right would be after him for hogging the show. Can't win for losing

Click to expand...

In substance, it matters little. Symbolically, it does matter. The negative PR concerning the President's absence and absence of high-ranking U.S. officials is entirely self-inflicted and was completely avoidable.

donsutherland1 said:

In substance, it matters little. Symbolically, it does matter. The negative PR concerning the President's absence and absence of high-ranking U.S. officials is entirely self-inflicted and was completely avoidable.

Click to expand...

All that is true, but in fairness, the GOP wannabe 2016 hopefuls missed an opportunity as well. If I were one, I'd have been there.

Tim-

FWIW, the White House now acknowledges that the U.S. should have sent a more senior official to Paris. From The Washington Post:

The White House said Monday that it should have sent a higher-profile official to a Paris rally where 1.5 million people marched in a show of unity against terrorism.

"I think it's fair to say that we should have sent someone with a higher profile" to the event, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday. The United States was represented by Ambassador to France Jane Hartley.

White House: We should have sent a higher-profile official to Paris march - The Washington Post

donsutherland1 said:

FWIW, the White House now acknowledges that the U.S. should have sent a more senior official to Paris. From The Washington Post:

The White House said Monday that it should have sent a higher-profile official to a Paris rally where 1.5 million people marched in a show of unity against terrorism.

"I think it's fair to say that we should have sent someone with a higher profile" to the event, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday. The United States was represented by Ambassador to France Jane Hartley.

White House: We should have sent a higher-profile official to Paris march - The Washington Post

Click to expand...

Greetings, donsutherland1. :2wave:

Woulda, coulda, shoulda... usually an excuse used after the fact when you didn't do something! Our government had as much time to make a decision as any of the countries that attended. We opted not to go. End of story. The question people are asking is why that decision was made.

polgara said:

Greetings, donsutherland1. :2wave:

Woulda, coulda, shoulda... usually an excuse used after the fact when you didn't do something! Our government had as much time to make a decision as any of the countries that attended. We opted not to go. End of story. The question people are asking is why that decision was made.

Click to expand...

I agree. The acknowledgment merely reflects that the rationale that were used to explain the unfortunate absence were unconvincing.