To Answer Mark:
"Why did France continuously seek to weaken sanctions on Iraq prior to 1441?"

It wanted more time for the UN inspections, just more time. When the US invaded Iraq, nobody was able to positively prove the WMD's where there.

"Why has France publicly sought to lead Europe away from the US and set up a counterweight when there are still many international threats to western democracy and economies?"

France is one of the leading countries in the fight against terrorism. They have more people who can translate arab language, have an experience with Islamic terrorism. The war in Iraq does not help.

"Why did France seek to distance itself from NATO?"
It's been away for 30 years. But, it does believe a European defense, not depending on the US but cooperating with it, is a solution. Not everybody agrees in the EU and France knows that and won't act unilaterally on this instance.

"Why did Chirac claim allies should speak openly when they disagree then threaten Eastern Europeans for disagreeing with him?"

This was a blunder his own government recognized and during a later EU meeting (with the eastern newcomers) the incident was set aside.
(France cannot decide on its own, anyway)

"Why has France consistently been the least dependable ally the US has?"
Because the French are exactly like the Americans: they love freedom and are individualistic.

"Why does France distrust the US's good intentions so much when it has saved France twice, rebuilt Europe, and rebuilt Japan? France has a similar number of skeletons in its closet from colonial times as the US does from the cold war. Why does it feel a focus on US mistakes is more appropriate than on US generosity and beneficience?"

Because the USA that liberated France (along with many other countries, btw) isn't the same as the USA that invaded Iraq.
The aggressor was Hitler. Now, the aggressor wasn't Saddam (that happened 12 years ago). Because the US that liberated Europe also created the UN and its most important fondation rests upon the non-interference against sovereign states, unless a clear threat exists.
Where's the threat?

"I do not trust the Fench Raoul based on experience and history. Especially when I don't get answers to direct questions such as the ones above and question 1 in the previous post. I think you made a decent shot at 2, but it doesn't square with or explain away earlier evidence of French economic interests overiding international security concerns. It doesn't address the fact that Bush had no power to punish France economically either while Saddam did."

France has a large part in the creation of the USA (a long time ago for the US but merely iseveral generations only, in the European perpective). And Chirac was the first foreign head of state to pay his respect to the 9/11 deaths.at ground zero.

Hating France is no help in the fight against terrorism.

Besides, France has been an arrogant country and it knows that and how damaging it has been.
That's why you find in french magazines, comments such as: about the american neo-fundamentalists : fundamentalists because they claim they are Good and want to impose "Good" to all; neo- because this "Good" isn't no mre constituted by God, but by the democratic values.
Anyway, there are loads of books about the continental (d)rift.

To Tom (about Finlandization): how they managed.

Raoul