Author Topic: A Flame Free Discussion on France (Read 1893 times)

Ripsnort · « **Reply #15 on:** February 11, 2003, 02:29:01 PM »

A touching letter from a Marine in Bosnia when faced with a frenchman:

Marine letter home...

A funny thing happened to me yesterday at Camp Bondsteel (Bosnia):

A French army officer walked up to me in the PX, and told me he thought we (Americans) were a bunch of cowboys and were going to provoke a war in Iraq. He said if such a thing happens, we wouldn't be able to count on the support of France.

I told him that it didn't surprise me. Since we had come to France's rescue in World War I, World War II, Vietnam, and the Cold War, their ingratitude and jealousy was due to surface [again] at some point in the near future anyway.

I also told him that is why France is a third-rate military power with a socialist economy and a bunch of pansies for soldiers. I additionally told him that America, being a nation of deeds and action, not words, would do whatever it had to do, and France's support, if it ever came, was only for show anyway.

Just like in ALL NATO exercises, the US would shoulder 85% of the burden, and provide 85% of the support, as evidenced by the fact that this French officer was shopping in the American PX, and not the other way around.

He began to get belligerent at that point, and I told him if he would like to, I would meet him outside in front of the Burger King and whip his bellybutton in front of the entire Multi-National Brigade East, thus demonstrating that even the smallest American had more fight in him than the average
Frenchman.

He called me a barbarian cowboy and walked away in a huff. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Dad, tell Mom I love her,

Your loving daughter,

Mary Beth Johnson, LtCol, USMC

Hangtime · « **Reply #16 on:** February 11, 2003, 02:43:54 PM »

LOL!!

Perfect reply Straffo!

Now, has it yet occured to you that the French could have very easily decided that Hussein was not the guy to do buisness with much earlier on, decided that their intrests would be better served by removing him and then done so yourselves...

..AT ANY POINT DURING THE LAST 10 GAWDAMNED YEARS..

by simply staying on the moral side of the dillema.. "Saddam is a butcher of innocents; a mass-murderer, has offered to purchase from us elements necessary to complete WMD and as such is in violation of the UN resolutions... we will not allow him to remain in power and intend to remove him ourselves immediately..

And the rest of the free world would have hailed your actions as reasonable, appropriate and have aided your efforts at any level... and you guys would be handing out Iraqi oil leases instead of the 'CIA".

Bonehaids. You smelly lil boys deserve to buy oil from BP.

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #17 on:** February 11, 2003, 02:56:21 PM »

assuming this isnt just made up

an officer (female?) challenges a male officer of a allied nation to a common brawl and is refused like any sane male would.

and you think that is some sort of usa patriotic statement?

no toejam i worry for you guys. you seem to believe civilization and gentalmanly behavior has become old fashioned. and idiots cliaming patriot status are acting like complete fools with a officers uniform on should rally us together under the flag? not my damn flag thank you.

just plain barbaric and neither cool nor inspiring to me.

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #18 on:** February 11, 2003, 02:58:26 PM »

its a lie sorry to bother

http://www.snopes.com/military/marine.htm

consider the source sigh

straffo · « **Reply #19 on:** February 11, 2003, 03:09:04 PM »

@Hang : we can have a agreement sometime I just need to be a bit more drunk than usual

for saddam we have an expression : "parier sur le mauvais cheval" it give badly translated by my spongius decadent brain : "placing a bet on wrong horse".

Quote

Originally posted by lord dolf vader
its a lie sorry to bother

http://www.snopes.com/military/marine.htm

consider the source sigh

it's not far from what some french military think but as you know we have almost the same percentage of bellybutton hole in the military and among civilian ... what is not strange concidering that civilian can become soldier and soldier civilian ... (it sound too logical ... I'm not drunk enought where is my bottle of Jack Daniels ?(*))

back to the MA...

(*) yep sometime I drink great satan alcohol instead of our savourous local beverage just to feel the pain of bad distilled abomination

Manedew · « **Reply #20 on:** February 11, 2003, 03:41:38 PM »

Pre-emtive strike means sneak attack, how often can you listen to spin and half-truths and belive them ... this is about OIL! not anything else ... if we are such good bloody humanitarians why don't we care about wars in Africa? Proably because they have no Oil... that'd be my guess....

someone once said something about the sick mix of goverment and corparation...

Don't be fooled into unessary war, this won't be a war of attrition ... it won't be pretty ...

I think that's why the French don't want the war .. oh ya and the OIL

muckmaw · « **Reply #21 on:** February 11, 2003, 04:19:14 PM »

We tried the the peacekeeping thing in Afica. Somalia? Anyone remember that little endeavor? How many American's died trying to help the Somalis? Is there oil in Somalia? Negative.

What about Bosnia? Nothing there that can fuel a pontiac. We went there too.

Vietnam? No oil.

Korea? Nope.

There's a whole host of motivations here that I'm seeing, and learning about.

What happens if Hussein gets the bomb? He's going to put it on a missle and Nuke Tel Aviv. It's only a matter of time, if he's given it. He would love nothing more than to be known as the savior of the Arab world who took the Jews out of Palestine. So what if Israel Retaliates. He won't be killed. Only a good portion of his population. A sane mind would never consider a first strike using nuclear weapons, but we're not talking about a sane mind here.

As for backing the wrong horse.....we'll I think the USA has the worst reputation for doing that. Castro? Marcos? Noriega?

How many more don't we know about.

As for the French connection, well I was listening to the radio on the way home, and Shawn Hannity was on. Now hes extreme, I'll admit, but he had a point.

The French sold Iraq a 200 kiowatt reactor, as well as a host of military items, (Ever notice how the Iraqi Air Force is made up of Migs and....yep...Mirage IIs and IIIs?)according to an Iraqi defector. The Germans sold them a subterfuge, as military equiptment. And of course we have the soviets. Tanks, Choppers, missles, Planes....you name it.

So I think I've answered my own question, with the help of you fine gentlemen. It all comes down to money.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #22 on:** February 11, 2003, 07:23:03 PM »

Ripsnort, that letter (100% BS) defines clearly the marine that wrote it:
Ignorant, brainless and barbarian.

Manedew · « **Reply #23 on:** February 11, 2003, 07:44:53 PM »

What i'm saying is why do we goto Bosnia but not Rawanda... I think it's a stability issue.... noone cares about that part of Africa, but a bad Europe seems worse.

If it doesn't concern the US it doesn't concern us.... if you undestand what i'm saying

Soup Nazi · « **Reply #24 on:** February 11, 2003, 07:46:18 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Ripsnort, that letter (100% BS) defines clearly the marine that wrote it:
Ignorant, brainless and barbarian.

Yeah but that same Marine will ask no questions when protecting the rights of Democracy, even for you Mandoble.

AKIron · « **Reply #25 on:** February 11, 2003, 07:48:51 PM »

Tucker Carlson said it well on Crossfire tonight. "Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordian".

Hangtime · « **Reply #26 on:** February 11, 2003, 09:32:21 PM »

I really shouldn't post when I get worked up..

BUT!!

Have you guys stopped to put some bits and pieces together here?

Item: french technical teams remained in argentenia in support of exocet missle deployment during the falklands conflict.

Item: france is the iraqi arms supply buisness. the French government owns most of these suppliers.

Item: our boys and girls will soon be facing french supplied and serviced high-tech weaponry.

Whats the PC response?

I know how I feel.. but how can i express myself without melting my keyboard?

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #27 on:** February 11, 2003, 09:40:22 PM »

Item: french technical teams remained in argentenia in support of exocet missle deployment during the falklands conflict.

eazy, cite where you got this at ? rush show?

Hangtime · « **Reply #28 on:** February 11, 2003, 09:58:06 PM »

Air & Space Power Journal - Fall 2002

DISTRIBUTION A:
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Argentine Airpower in the Falklands War
An Operational View

Dr. James S. Corum

Snip

The pilots of the 2d Escuadrilla, trained in France in 1980–81, were fully qualified with the aircraft. However, at the time the conflict in the Falklands began, only five of the Super Etendards and five Exocet missiles had been delivered from France. The Common Market nations and NATO immediately initiated an arms embargo on Argentina, therefore halting the French shipments of planes and missiles. Throughout the conflict, the Argentine government tried desperately but unsuccessfully to obtain more Exocets on the world market. Argentina would have to fight the war with only five Etendards and Exocet missiles. Since spare parts for the Etendards were cut off by the NATO arms embargo, the FAA decided to hold one of the five fighters in reserve and use it for parts to support the remaining four aircraft.

The Argentinians had no previous experience with antiship missiles, and the Exocet was a complicated and cranky weapon. The Argentinians experienced a lot of trouble fitting the Exocet launch system and rails to the Super Etendards. In November 1981, Dassault Aviation, owned by the French government and builder of the Super Etendard, sent a team of nine of its own technicians (and some additional French Aerospatiale specialists) to work with the Argentine navy to supervise the introduction of the Etendards and Exocets. Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems. Without the technical help and collusion from the government of France—Britain’s NATO “ally”—it is improbable that Argentina would have been able to employ its most devastating weapon.18

18 Christopher Chant, Super Etendard: Super Profile (Somerset, England: Winchmore Publishing, 1983)., 48–49.

Kudos, Habu!

Toad · « **Reply #29 on:** February 11, 2003, 10:13:42 PM »

Iron,

I read that bit in a piece by Jack Kelly.

He attributed it thusly:

Quote

in the words of former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Jed Babbin, like going deer hunting without an accordion

Jack Kelly, a former Marine and Green Beret, was a deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force in the Reagan administration and is national security writer for the Pittsburgh (Pa.) Post-Gazette.

He's written two good pieces that I've read that lay it out pretty clearly.