Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AKIron on February 13, 2004, 03:52:38 PM
-
What race are the French exactly? Hmmmmm.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=638&ncid=762&e=3&u=/nm/20040213/en_nm/leisure_canada_conan_dc
-
Nothing like pissing off the country that's covering your operating expenses.
Conan should know better.
Another low moment in American entertainment.
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Nothing like pissing off the country that's covering your operating expenses.
Conan should know better.
Another low moment in American entertainment.
You mean that Province that will take a shopowner's business away from him for hanging an english language sign outside the store is upset about racism? Too funny.
-
you caan insult zee Quebecez, but you must do it in la french lanquezz. i it zee law.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
You mean that Province that will take a shopowner's business away from him for hanging an english language sign outside the store is upset about racism? Too funny.
Ummm...not quite, and not really sure where you got this information.
-
If we sell one of our products in Quebec, all labels must be in both French and English. But there is more. The law also specifies that one language cannot take precidence over the other. All lettering MUST be of equal size and font, and side by side or alternating if one is on top of the other.
-
Oh! Oh! Now the Canadians wouldn't be our friends any more...
-
If we sell one of our products in Quebec, all labels must be in both French and English. But there is more. The law also specifies that one language cannot take precidence over the other. All lettering MUST be of equal size and font, and side by side or alternating if one is on top of the other.
That's for product labeling, as far as store signs go, french has to be written noticebly larger than english is
btw MT. should be renewing my account within the next month or so, looking forward to flying with the squaddies again :)
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
Ummm...not quite, and not really sure where you got this information.
From this BBS, from a Canadian.
-
Originally posted by Otto
Oh! Oh! Now the Canadians wouldn't be our friends any more...
Indeed, Canada flips a switch and the entire eastern seaboard drops off the grid. :D
And if we get really pissed the invasion of the Celine Dion clones begins.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
From this BBS, from a Canadian.
If you have a link to the original post it would be appreciated, because:
1. I grew up in Montreal and still have family there, and I have lived through all of the language nonsense.
2. I have never heard of a business being "taken away" as a result of violating the laws which you are referring to (fines yes, business being taken away no),
and I am therefore curious as to what was originally posted.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
If we sell one of our products in Quebec, all labels must be in both French and English. But there is more. The law also specifies that one language cannot take precidence over the other. All lettering MUST be of equal size and font, and side by side or alternating if one is on top of the other.
Bear in mind that 80%+ of the population of Quebec speaks French as their first language. The labelling law goes a bit too far in my mind, but that being said, if you are selling a product into a market where the first language of a vast majority of the population is not English, don't you think it makes good business sense to label the product so that the people who are supposed to be buying it understand the label?
Bad law in the sense of too much government intereference, but still good business practice regardless.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Indeed, Canada flips a switch and the entire eastern seaboard drops off the grid. :D
Didn't the black out come from the US?
As for the racist comments by an ignorant.
MJHerman is right.
What would you do if all the signs in your home town were in a language you do not speak fluently?
In the 60s the signs in Montreal were almost all in English.
That is what lead to the language laws.
So, if you don't know the whole story maybe you should shut up.
I agree that it went too far but we have bigger fishes to fry.
-
<>>
move , or learn the language.
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
Didn't the black out come from the US?
As for the racist comments by an ignorant.
MJHerman is right.
What would you do if all the signs in your home town were in a language you do not speak fluently?
In the 60s the signs in Montreal were almost all in English.
That is what lead to the language laws.
So, if you don't know the whole story maybe you should shut up.
I agree that it went too far but we have bigger fishes to fry.
It is not the draconian language laws that can lead to you being fined, put in jail and eventually loseing the business if you refuse to pay the fines for having a sign in English that amaze me, it the reaction of Quebecers like this guy who see nothing wrong with the law.
He would be right at home in Afganistan under the Taliban. The concept of freedom and liberty does not exist in Quebec. There it is make everyone toe the line and make racist laws and it is all ok. As long as it is french.
At least the rest of the world and this NG see how wrong it is.
-
Did Canada's Quebec french soldiers surrender more frequently compared to their English origin counterparts during WW2?
Now thats a topic worth discussing.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Did Canada's Quebec french soldiers surrender more frequently compared to their English origin counterparts during WW2?
Now thats a topic worth discussing.
Actually if you study the history of both world wars you find that they did one better. They did not enlist. Period. The vast majority of Canada's forces were English speakers and there was a huge debate over conscription and getting the french speaking population to contribute men to the war. Which they did not.
In the end there was limited conscription but any french speaking conscripts were kept out of front line units to appease the french.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Actually if you study the history of both world wars you find that they did one better. They did not enlist. Period. The vast majority of Canada's forces were English speakers and there was a huge debate over conscription and getting the french speaking population to contribute men to the war. Which they did not.
In the end there was limited conscription but any french speaking conscripts were kept out of front line units to appease the french.
WOW!!!! :eek:
-
Originally posted by AKIron
What race are the French exactly?
Aren't they just Viking bastards? :)
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
What would you do if all the signs in your home town were in a language you do not speak fluently?
An area of Dallas where I spent a few years of my youth now are found many signs in a language I don't speak fluently, Spanish. What do I do? Nada.
-
I just find it humorous the French Canadians accuse Conan of being a racist. So far as I recollect, country/nation/religion/language <> race.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Actually if you study the history of both world wars you find that they did one better. They did not enlist. Period. The vast majority of Canada's forces were English speakers and there was a huge debate over conscription and getting the french speaking population to contribute men to the war. Which they did not.
In the end there was limited conscription but any french speaking conscripts were kept out of front line units to appease the french.
I guess the one buried near my hometown are just english speaking Québecois ...
Like some buried at Dieppe ?
In short don't trust him Filip I've just 1 hour drive to make photo. to proove he is wrong.
-
He never said none died, just that the majority were assigned to the rear.
Also, I don't belive you, I wanna see you go take a photo to prove it.
-
You want a pict of me taking picts in a military graveyard ?
Nothing difficult.
He never said none died, just that the majority were assigned to the rear.
He would better give some substance to his claim.
I guess the 6th Airborne québcois veteran I've met when I was young was just yet another french speaker assigned to rear position ?
Btw you need to look up the conscription history in Canada to have a better figure of his perception.
There is nothing to do with a lack of courage from french speaking canadian but an outstanding lack of respect for them by the canadian HQ.
It would have been easily solved by creating more "french" regiment but they didn't want to.
look up to the history of the "les Fusiliers Mont-Royal" in Dieppe.
You will soon notice how they fought and died
How strange for a rear-front assigned regiment.
-
Originally posted by Habu
It is not the draconian language laws that can lead to you being fined, put in jail and eventually loseing the business if you refuse to pay the fines for having a sign in English that amaze me, it the reaction of Quebecers like this guy who see nothing wrong with the law.
He would be right at home in Afganistan under the Taliban. The concept of freedom and liberty does not exist in Quebec. There it is make everyone toe the line and make racist laws and it is all ok. As long as it is french.
At least the rest of the world and this NG see how wrong it is.
I never said the law was right now did I?
I've said it went too far, but that went right over your head.
Maybe you should go back to school and learn to read. :rolleyes:
I did not see Triumph and I certainly would not have been insulted by is comments.
Insulting people is what he does for a living.
You don't know squat so shut up or I will report your racist comments.
-
Did Canada's Quebec french soldiers surrender more frequently compared to their English origin counterparts during WW2?
Now thats a topic worth discussing.
Did Canada's Quebec french soldiers bend over more frequently compared to Croatians during WW2?
Now thats a topic worth... nah... no one provided executive relief more readily than the Croats. Except maybe the Swedes.
In the end there was limited conscription but any french speaking conscripts were kept out of front line units to appease the french.
Maybe they didn't want to end fighting French collaborator types. Maybe the Free French wanted to liberate France themselves and felt it was another stain on their honour for a bunch of colonials to take part. Who knows. Apart from you, evidently, who can be relied to take the anti-French line in any thread.
I just find it humorous the French Canadians accuse Conan of being a racist. So far as I recollect, country/nation/religion/language <> race.
You're right of course. Bigoted and prejudiced would be more apt words.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Actually if you study the history of both world wars you find that they did one better. They did not enlist. Period. The vast majority of Canada's forces were English speakers and there was a huge debate over conscription and getting the french speaking population to contribute men to the war. Which they did not.
In the end there was limited conscription but any french speaking conscripts were kept out of front line units to appease the french.
too far Habu...too far with this insult.
-
You try to prove a point by saying there were some French that fought and died. Of course there were. However the percentage of the population versus the percentage that enlisted is the statistic that is being discussed here.
Why don't you just do a google search. Type French Canadian conscription world war 2 and see what turns up.
You can argue all you want but the facts are the facts. The french Canadians did not enlist. Just because it makes you mad does not change the facts.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Actually if you study the history of both world wars you find that they did one better. They did not enlist. Period. The vast majority of Canada's forces were English speakers and there was a huge debate over conscription and getting the french speaking population to contribute men to the war. Which they did not.
In the end there was limited conscription but any french speaking conscripts were kept out of front line units to appease the french.
This obviously explains all the battle honours gained by the Van Doos, Les Fusiliers du Mont Royal and other Regiments that had their enlistment sources primarily from Quebec.
The deal with conscription was that ANY conscript could not be sent to the front, unless he volunteered to do so.
But don't let the facts get in your way.
-
Originally posted by Habu
You try to prove a point by saying there were some French that fought and died. Of course there were. However the percentage of the population versus the percentage that enlisted is the statistic that is being discussed here.
Great.
Now just provide some source supporting your affirmation.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
This obviously explains all the battle honours gained by the Van Doos, Les Fusiliers du Mont Royal and other Regiments that had their enlistment sources primarily from Quebec.
The deal with conscription was that ANY conscript could not be sent to the front, unless he volunteered to do so.
But don't let the facts get in your way.
Lets clarify a few of your facts. Are you saying the Quebecers who volunteered for the Van Doos were French Canadians as opposed to English Canadians?
Regarding your "facts" on overseas service and conscription. He is some background....
"When Canada declared war on Germany on 11 September 1939, then Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King knew only too well how (the implimentation of conscription in) the previous war had threatened national unity and destroyed the Conservative Party in the province of Quebec. King had promised the country --though in essence it was a pledge to Quebec -- that there would be no conscription for overseas duty; there was, however, conscription for the defence of Canada. On 21 June 1940 the National Resources Mobilization Act was enacted, giving 'government special emergency powers to mobilize all our human and material resources for the defence of Canada.' The Act called for a national registration of all eligible men and women for domestic defence, but Camillien Houde, the populist mayor of Montreal urged Quebecers to ignore the registration. Houde was interned for much of the war. "
By 1944 the overseas regiments were so short of men that 12,000 conscripts were eventually sent overseas. This is a miniscule amount and of course they were not all french.
-
FYI, a partial list of the Canadian Regiments that landed in Normandy. The Regiments which originated from and drew their primary recruiting base from Quebec are noted:
12th Manitoba Dragoons
14th Royal Canadian Hussars
17th Duke of York's Royal Canadian Hussars
1st Bn. The Canadian Scottish Regiment
48th Highlanders of Canada
4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards
8th Princess Louise's (New Brunswick) Hussars
Le Regiment de Maisonneuve - Quebec
Le Regiment de la Chaudiere - Quebec
Le Royal 22e Regiment - Quebec
Les Fusiliers Mont-Royal - Quebec
Lord Strathcona's Horse
Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry
The Algonquin Regiment
The Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders of Canada
The Black Watch of Canada - Quebec
The British Columbia Dragoons
The British Columbia Regiment
The Calgary Highlanders
The Calgary Regiment
The Cameron Highlanders of Ottawa
The Canadian Grenadier Guards - Quebec
The Cape Breton Highlanders
The Carleton & York Regiment
The Elgin Regiment
The Essex Scottish Regiment
The Fort Garry Horse
The Governor General's Foot Guards
The Governor General's Horse Guards
The Hastings & Prince Edward Regiment
The Highland Light Infantry of Canada
The Irish Regiment of Canada
The Lake Superior Regiment
The Lanark & Renfrew Scottish Regiment
The Lincoln & Welland Regiment
The Loyal Edmonton Regiment
The New Brunswick Rangers
The North Shore (New Brunswick) Regiment
The Ontario Regiment
The Perth Regiment
The Princess Louise Fusiliers
The Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders
The Queen's Own Rifles of Canada
The Regina Rifle Regiment
The Royal Canadian Dragoons
The Royal Canadian Regiment
The Royal Hamilton Light Infantry
The Royal Regiment of Canada
The Royal Rifles of Canada
The Royal Winnipeg Rifles
The Saskatoon Light Infantry
The Seaforth Highlanders of Canada
The Sherbrooke Fusiliers - Quebec
The South Alberta Regiment
The South Saskatchewan Regiment
The Stormont, Dundas & Glengarry Highlanders
The Three Rivers Regiment - Quebec
The Toronto Scottish Regiment
The West Nova Scotia Regiment
The Westminster Regiment
The Winnipeg Grenadiers
The Halifax Rifles
The Grey and Simcoe Forresters
16/22 Saskatchewan Light Horse
The two New Brunswick Regiments also contained a high percentage of French Canadians, as did regiments drawn from the Ottawa region and some regiments drawn from Manitoba.
So next time you choose to insult our war dead, please make sure you have your facts straight.
-
"Lets clarify a few of your facts. Are you saying the Quebecers who volunteered for the Van Doos were French Canadians as opposed to English Canadians?"
You obviously have no idea of who the Van Doos are or anything about their regimental history if you even need to pose this question.
Don't preach to me about the facts of the history of the Province I grew up in and the military I served in which, by the way, was a Quebec regiment with a 50/50 split between Anglophones and Francophones.
No one hear suggested that conscription in Canada was not a major political issue and that Quebecers, in general, opposed it. But the opposition was for political reasons and was a function of the history of our nation, and had very little to do with any cowardice on the part of young men in Quebec.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
No one hear suggested that conscription in Canada was not a major political issue and that Quebecers, in general, opposed it. But the opposition was for political reasons and was a function of the history of our nation, and had very little to do with any cowardice on the part of young men in Quebec.
sure, supported by this for exemple :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_Crisis_of_1944
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
"Lets clarify a few of your facts. Are you saying the Quebecers who volunteered for the Van Doos were French Canadians as opposed to English Canadians?"
You obviously have no idea of who the Van Doos are or anything about their regimental history if you even need to pose this question.
Don't preach to me about the facts of the history of the Province I grew up in and the military I served in which, by the way, was a Quebec regiment with a 50/50 split between Anglophones and Francophones.
No one hear suggested that conscription in Canada was not a major political issue and that Quebecers, in general, opposed it. But the opposition was for political reasons and was a function of the history of our nation, and had very little to do with any cowardice on the part of young men in Quebec.
Wow you have really set me in my place. I have a question. You say that the regiment was 50 percent english, what percentage is the english population in Quebec?
-
What I would like you to pull up is the number of English speaking soldiers in those Quebec regiments. Now compare that stat to the number of French soldiers. Now compare that to the population of Canada.
Don't get smart with your facts. The conscription crisis did not start because the French were pulling thier weight. I did not invent the crisis. You only make yourself look stupid when you state facts that upon closer scrutinity disprove your argument.
Originally posted by MJHerman
FYI, a partial list of the Canadian Regiments that landed in Normandy. The Regiments which originated from and drew their primary recruiting base from Quebec are noted:
12th Manitoba Dragoons
14th Royal Canadian Hussars
17th Duke of York's Royal Canadian Hussars
1st Bn. The Canadian Scottish Regiment
48th Highlanders of Canada
4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards
8th Princess Louise's (New Brunswick) Hussars
Le Regiment de Maisonneuve - Quebec
Le Regiment de la Chaudiere - Quebec
Le Royal 22e Regiment - Quebec
Les Fusiliers Mont-Royal - Quebec
Lord Strathcona's Horse
Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry
The Algonquin Regiment
The Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders of Canada
The Black Watch of Canada - Quebec
The British Columbia Dragoons
The British Columbia Regiment
The Calgary Highlanders
The Calgary Regiment
The Cameron Highlanders of Ottawa
The Canadian Grenadier Guards - Quebec
The Cape Breton Highlanders
The Carleton & York Regiment
The Elgin Regiment
The Essex Scottish Regiment
The Fort Garry Horse
The Governor General's Foot Guards
The Governor General's Horse Guards
The Hastings & Prince Edward Regiment
The Highland Light Infantry of Canada
The Irish Regiment of Canada
The Lake Superior Regiment
The Lanark & Renfrew Scottish Regiment
The Lincoln & Welland Regiment
The Loyal Edmonton Regiment
The New Brunswick Rangers
The North Shore (New Brunswick) Regiment
The Ontario Regiment
The Perth Regiment
The Princess Louise Fusiliers
The Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders
The Queen's Own Rifles of Canada
The Regina Rifle Regiment
The Royal Canadian Dragoons
The Royal Canadian Regiment
The Royal Hamilton Light Infantry
The Royal Regiment of Canada
The Royal Rifles of Canada
The Royal Winnipeg Rifles
The Saskatoon Light Infantry
The Seaforth Highlanders of Canada
The Sherbrooke Fusiliers - Quebec
The South Alberta Regiment
The South Saskatchewan Regiment
The Stormont, Dundas & Glengarry Highlanders
The Three Rivers Regiment - Quebec
The Toronto Scottish Regiment
The West Nova Scotia Regiment
The Westminster Regiment
The Winnipeg Grenadiers
The Halifax Rifles
The Grey and Simcoe Forresters
16/22 Saskatchewan Light Horse
The two New Brunswick Regiments also contained a high percentage of French Canadians, as did regiments drawn from the Ottawa region and some regiments drawn from Manitoba.
So next time you choose to insult our war dead, please make sure you have your facts straight.
-
Originally posted by Habu
What I would like you to pull up is the number of English speaking soldiers in those Quebec regiments. Now compare that stat to the number of French soldiers. Now compare that to the population of Canada.
Don't get smart with your facts. The conscription crisis did not start because the French were pulling thier weight. I did not invent the crisis. You only make yourself look stupid when you state facts that upon closer scrutinity disprove your argument.
OK smart guy. Why did the conscription crisis start? You seem to have all the answers, so I look forward to me educated on my nation's history by you.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Wow you have really set me in my place. I have a question. You say that the regiment was 50 percent english, what percentage is the english population in Quebec?
Approximately 80%.
Now I'll just wait for you to say something dumb like "That proves my point because the regiment is not 80% French" without having any understanding of my regiment, its history or the demographics of the region in which it was raised.
Still waiting for an answer to whether you have any idea who the Van Doos are.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
Approximately 80%.
Now I'll just wait for you to say something dumb like "That proves my point because the regiment is not 80% French" without having any understanding of my regiment, its history or the demographics of the region in which it was raised.
Still waiting for an answer to whether you have any idea who the Van Doos are.
Actually what we are discussing is how French Canadians did not enlist to fight in both world wars.
You mentioned the Van Doos. I asked what proportion of the Van Doos were english compared to french. You said they were 50% english while Quebec is only 20% english. At the time of WW2 what was the french percentage of the regiment?
Now smart guy. Tell me how anything you have said in this thread supports the argument that the French pulled their weight in WW1 or 2?
You seem to want to fight but you have no argument nor ammo.
-
FFS it took 2 minutes of Google to find the answers.
The gvt came up with the "National Resources Mobilization Act" (NRMA). This was a sort of "Home conscription" with the Goal to train Canadians to protect Canada. These NRMA conscripts would NOT be forced to serve overseas.
English Canadians felt that these NRMA's were mostly French Canadians who did not want to serve overseas. They were nicknamed "Zombies"
English Canadians felt that more help was necessary and demanded a general conscription.
The gvt did not want to order a general conscription, so as a compromise, a referendum was held.
The majority of Canadians did agree to conscription.
63% to be exact.
But lets take a look at the breakdown of the numbers, how did the different parts of Canada vote on conscription:
71.2% NO -Quebec
77% YES -English Canada
63% YES - Across Canada
16 000 were eventually conscripted from the NRMA to the "normal" army.
Of these, 2 500 conscripts went overseas, where 69 died.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Actually what we are discussing is how French Canadians did not enlist to fight in both world wars.
You mentioned the Van Doos. I asked what proportion of the Van Doos were english compared to french. You said they were 50% english while Quebec is only 20% english. At the time of WW2 what was the french percentage of the regiment?
Now smart guy. Tell me how anything you have said in this thread supports the argument that the French pulled their weight in WW1 or 2?
You seem to want to fight but you have no argument nor ammo.
Actually, I said that my Regiment, in the early 1990s, was 50/50, which was and still is highly unusual given that it is based in a predominantly English area of Montreal.
If you were doing anything other than talking out of your bellybutton you would know that the Van Doos are The Royal 22e Regiment, and historically their ranks have been almost 100% French Canadian.
The same is true, both historically and currently, for all other "French" units of the Canadian Forces.
Again, please continue to insult our war dead with your diatribe about how French Canadians did not pull their weight. It's idiots like you who perpertuate myths about certain segments of society without understanding the historical background to certain events, which in the case of conscription, go back a lot further than 1939 or 1917.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
FFS it took 2 minutes of Google to find the answers.
You should have economized 1.5 minute by reading the link I posted before :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referenda_in_Canada
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
FFS it took 2 minutes of Google to find the answers.
The gvt came up with the "National Resources Mobilization Act" (NRMA). This was a sort of "Home conscription" with the Goal to train Canadians to protect Canada. These NRMA conscripts would NOT be forced to serve overseas.
English Canadians felt that these NRMA's were mostly French Canadians who did not want to serve overseas. They were nicknamed "Zombies"
English Canadians felt that more help was necessary and demanded a general conscription.
The gvt did not want to order a general conscription, so as a compromise, a referendum was held.
The majority of Canadians did agree to conscription.
63% to be exact.
But lets take a look at the breakdown of the numbers, how did the different parts of Canada vote on conscription:
71.2% NO -Quebec
77% YES -English Canada
63% YES - Across Canada
16 000 were eventually conscripted from the NRMA to the "normal" army.
Of these, 2 500 conscripts went overseas, where 69 died.
Hortlund,
Your numbers are correct, and again I will say that no one here was advocating that Quebecers were strongly against conscription. But the issue has been simplified too much, and the numbers don't reflect the reasons WHY conscription was so strongly rejected. To understand those reasons, you have to understand the underlying historical tensions.
The fact is that the majority of ALL Canadians voted in favour of conscription. So, regardless of what Quebecers may have felt about the issue, once it was resolved the will of the majority was respected.
Painting French Canadians generally as cowardly simply as a result of the exercise of their democractic right to vote against a measure that they did not believe in is like saying every American who does not support the invasion of Iraq is a coward.
-
Actually Hortland I wanted the french connection here to start to read all of that so they would begin to understand how bravely French Canadians helped fight for France in the wars.
The "official" Canadian history trys to justify the reasons the French did not enlist by saying the officer core was english speaking and other such nonsense. It is always easy to go back after the fact and find reasons not to enlist. What they miss is how the English speaking Canadians enlisted in WW1 even though there was no army nor command speak of. They joined then they created one. They fought under British officers until they had qualified Canadians to step up and lead. Then they produced some of the top aviators and generals and most sucessful divisions in the war.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Actually Hortland I wanted the french connection here to start to read all of that so they would begin to understand how bravely French Canadians helped fight for France in the wars.
The "official" Canadian history trys to justify the reasons the French did not enlist by saying the officer core was english speaking and other such nonsense. It is always easy to go back after the fact and find reasons not to enlist. What they miss is how the English speaking Canadians enlisted in WW1 even though there was no army nor command speak of. They joined then they created one. They fought under British officers until they had qualified Canadians to step up and lead. Then they produced some of the top aviators and generals and most sucessful divisions in the war.
BS look at the official 22 regiment site and the part about WWI.
cannon fodder ring a bell ?
-
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDD-1-71-579/conflict_war/van_doos/
btw they're in the process of mobilising to Afghanistan now.
the 22nd is primarilly a french speaking regiment.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
What race are the French exactly? Hmmmmm.
Le Mans. (sorry if it's been said, I'm way too lazy to read this much flame bait). :)
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
Le Mans. (sorry if it's been said, I'm way too lazy to read this much flame bait). :)
-Sik
:D
-
Originally posted by straffo
BS look at the official 22 regiment site and the part about WWI.
cannon fodder ring a bell ?
Thank you Straffo, I found the website.
Great info on the 22nd there.
I did not know they fough near PASSCHENDAELE.
Iron Maiden have a great song about that battle on their last album. :cool:
-
I don't know if Habu is an American, but if he is, I thought this staetment from the Van Doos link (referencing a TV clip so I can't post the whole article) was interesting:
"On a cold Korean hill known only by its elevation, the Van Doos defend a UN position and save American lives."
All I can say to Habu is my Regiment's motto: Honi Soit Que Mal Y Pense.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Actually what we are discussing is how French Canadians did not enlist to fight in both world wars.
You fool, you have already this. And It has already been shown that they had. Now quit insulting your betters, you only dishonour yourself.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
You fool, you have already this. And It has already been shown that they had. Now quit insulting your betters, you only dishonour yourself.
The conscription crisis was the biggest issue in both wars. It did not occur because French Canadians enlisted in large numbers, it occured because they did not. The percentages do not lie.
Saying that there were French regiments is proof that this is not true is nonsense.
If I show you one blind man who can play golf will you believe me when I say blind people are good golfers?
-
Originally posted by Habu
The conscription crisis was the biggest issue in both wars. It did not occur because French Canadians enlisted in large numbers, it occured because they did not. The percentages do not lie.
Saying that there were French regiments is proof that this is not true is nonsense.
If I show you one blind man who can play golf will you believe me when I say blind people are good golfers?
Sorry Habu, but no one is buying it. You use the conscription crisis to slander an entire segment of the Canadian population, and when we keep posting evidence to the contrary you keep regurgitating the same bile.
Again, no one is denying that the conscription crisis occurred, but it was a political crisis that had nothing to do with the bravery of the French Canadian population. If you knew anything about Canadian history you would understand that, and I for one am not about to provide to educate you as to reasons for a large number of things that have happened in Canada, particularly where those reasons date back to 1759.
As an English Canadian I take great offence to suggestions about the honour and valour of the Canadian military, particularly when statements concerning the bravery or lack thereof of French Canadian soldiers are thrown around by someone as ill informed and thick headed as you seem to be. If you paint any member of the Canadian military with a comment to the effect that he or she is a coward, you paint us all.
Frankly, I would love to see you take a trip up to Val Cartier, Quebec, stand in the enlisted ranks mess, stare right at the Regimental Colours and spew your garbage to the people who happen to be in attendance.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
Again, no one is denying that the conscription crisis occurred, but it was a political crisis that had nothing to do with the bravery of the French Canadian population.
You say so, but it sure doesnt look that way.
-
Should be obvious.
They are "SLO".
:p
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
You say so, but it sure doesnt look that way.
Perhaps. But then again my knowledge and understanding of the situation is culled from more than what happens to be posted on the Internet.
For example, if my sole source of information regarding WWII was the Internet (and in particular this BBS), I might be inclined to believe that Sweden did a very good job of not interfering too much with Nazi Germany's ambitions.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
Perhaps. But then again my knowledge and understanding of the situation is culled from more than what happens to be posted on the Internet.
For example, if my sole source of information regarding WWII was the Internet (and in particular this BBS), I might be inclined to believe that Sweden did a very good job of not interfering too much with Nazi Germany's ambitions.
Well, then you would be correct. And if you ventured to study the subject and read a couple of books, you might even come to the conclusion that Sweden was more allied with Germany during 41-44 than anything else.
And if you studied *really* hard, you would find out that our King threatened to abdicate in case we did not allow German transit traffic, and that Sweden was *this close* to joining the war on the German side in 1941.
I'd say your choise in what information to believe seems to be more painted by your desire to reach a desired conclusion than to find the actual truth. Something rather common when you are personally attached to a subject.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
Blaa Blaa Blaa.
As an English Canadian I take great offence to suggestions about the honour and valour of the Canadian military, particularly when statements concerning the bravery or lack thereof of French Canadian soldiers are thrown around by someone as ill informed and thick headed as you seem to be. If you paint any member of the Canadian military with a comment to the effect that he or she is a coward, you paint us all.
Frankly, I would love to see you take a trip up to Val Cartier, Quebec, stand in the enlisted ranks mess, stare right at the Regimental Colours and spew your garbage to the people who happen to be in attendance.
I love it how you take a true series of statements and twist them so that I am insulting French Canadian soldiers.
You are a dolt. The cowards are not the ones who fought in WW2 or WW1 but the other 98% of the population who did not. And yes I would say that fact to anyone. It deserves to be repeated and remembered.
Frankly you are the one who has no clue what is going on in this thread. And don't worry I don't take offense when a mental giant such as yourself calls me stupid.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Well, then you would be correct. And if you ventured to study the subject and read a couple of books, you might even come to the conclusion that Sweden was more allied with Germany during 41-44 than anything else.
And if you studied *really* hard, you would find out that our King threatened to abdicate in case we did not allow German transit traffic, and that Sweden was *this close* to joining the war on the German side in 1941.
I'd say your choise in what information to believe seems to be more painted by your desire to reach a desired conclusion than to find the actual truth. Something rather common when you are personally attached to a subject.
So as a Canadian, growing up in Montreal, with a background both in Military History and military service in a Quebec based regiment, I have absolutely no idea what I am talking about....but you and Habu do?
My choice "in what information I choose to believe"? You must be right...my life experiences and education have all been a sham....if only I had had the benefit of the Internet all these years then I could have seen the errors of my ways and delegated by understanding of what is and what is not true and correct in Canadian history to foreigners.
Gee, thanks for clearing all of that up.
-
Originally posted by Habu
I love it how you take a true series of statements and twist them so that I am insulting French Canadian soldiers.
You are a dolt. The cowards are not the ones who fought in WW2 or WW1 but the other 98% of the population who did not. And yes I would say that fact to anyone. It deserves to be repeated and remembered.
Frankly you are the one who has no clue what is going on in this thread. And don't worry I don't take offense when a mental giant such as yourself calls me stupid.
Thanks Habu. See my post in response to Hortlund. Thanks for clearing everything up.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
So as a Canadian, growing up in Montreal, with a background both in Military History and military service in a Quebec based regiment, I have absolutely no idea what I am talking about....but you and Habu do?
My choice "in what information I choose to believe"? You must be right...my life experiences and education have all been a sham....if only I had had the benefit of the Internet all these years then I could have seen the errors of my ways and delegated by understanding of what is and what is not true and correct in Canadian history to foreigners.
Gee, thanks for clearing all of that up.
This is too funny. So in other words, we are to take the word of a Franco-Canadian who served in a Franco-Canadian regiment that the Franco Canadians were indeed not a buch of draft-dodging weenies who did everything in their power to escape having to go to war?
Im sorry if you dont strike me as the pillar of unbiased truth in this subject.
-
Sorry am I supposed to be impressed with you resume? Your knowlage of the issue of French Canadian participation in both wars is lacking. Conscription was the result of the fact that they did not enlist. Nothing you can cry can change that.
Hey I was accepted into RMC in the 80's. Does that make me a more credible source?
-
Credible source when you have backed none of your assertions ?
Certainly not.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
This is too funny. So in other words, we are to take the word of a Franco-Canadian who served in a Franco-Canadian regiment that the Franco Canadians were indeed not a buch of draft-dodging weenies who did everything in their power to escape having to go to war?
Im sorry if you dont strike me as the pillar of unbiased truth in this subject.
hahem ... isn't unbiased truth a kind of Chimera ?
-
hrm...good point straffo
-
But there are degrees of being biased...ce ne pas?
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
ce ne pas?
Just out of curiosity straffo...what exactly did I just say here?
-
LOL :)
You said nothing as the proper "gallicisme" is : n'est-ce pas
But if you had writen :
"But there are degrees of being biased ... n'est ce pas?" I would have translated roughtly to : "But there are degrees of being biased ... isn't it ?"
Because it's one of the only occurence where it can be transtlated directly in English
It's typicaly French to have a negative sentence used in a interogative context... (we're not simple ...)
Exemple :
Ne joue-t-il pas au football avec ses amis ?
Translation : Does he play football with is friend ?
Litteral translation : Doesn't he play football with is friend ?
(it sound and it is weird :))
-
Originally posted by Habu
Conscription was the result of the fact that they did not enlist. Nothing you can cry can change that.
So conscription was as a result of people failing to enlist? Presumably that's why they introduced it to Britain, Australia, New Zealand and of course the good old USA. Be careful where you fling the dirt you never know where it might stick. Just for balance did you know there were Australians who enlisted during WW2 strictly for home service. No one is suggesting Australians are cowards. Yet some of you are prepared to tar the entire French Canadian population as cowards.
So many armchair warriors.:confused:
-
Originally posted by cpxxx
So conscription was as a result of people failing to enlist? Presumably that's why they introduced it to Britain, Australia, New Zealand and of course the good old USA. Be careful where you fling the dirt you never know where it might stick. Just for balance did you know there were Australians who enlisted during WW2 strictly for home service. No one is suggesting Australians are cowards. Yet some of you are prepared to tar the entire French Canadian population as cowards.
So many armchair warriors.:confused:
You know nothing about the issue. I am trying to be polite but really are you all so stupid that you cannot do a google search before jumping in and defending the French Canadians when there is just a ton of literature on the topic that all says the same thing?
Conscription in Canada was all about getting French Canadians to join the army. Canada was very patriotic and managed to field armys way out of proportion to its small size in both wars. The need for manpower was huge as attrition kicked in. Canada lost over 60,000 soldiers (killed) in WW1 out of a population of not even 3 million. When the need to fill the ranks came and there were few military aged English recruits left the issue of getting French Canadian to join started. There was no need to conscript English Canadians in either war, they joined in droves and did so through out the war. Just like an uncle of mine who died in the tail gun of a Halifax.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
Sorry Habu, but no one is buying it. You use the conscription crisis to slander an entire segment of the Canadian population, and when we keep posting evidence to the contrary you keep regurgitating the same bile.
Again, no one is denying that the conscription crisis occurred, but it was a political crisis that had nothing to do with the bravery of the French Canadian population. If you knew anything about Canadian history you would understand that, and I for one am not about to provide to educate you as to reasons for a large number of things that have happened in Canada, particularly where those reasons date back to 1759.
As an English Canadian I take great offence to suggestions about the honour and valour of the Canadian military, particularly when statements concerning the bravery or lack thereof of French Canadian soldiers are thrown around by someone as ill informed and thick headed as you seem to be. If you paint any member of the Canadian military with a comment to the effect that he or she is a coward, you paint us all.
Frankly, I would love to see you take a trip up to Val Cartier, Quebec, stand in the enlisted ranks mess, stare right at the Regimental Colours and spew your garbage to the people who happen to be in attendance.
You know what makes me mad? People who do not know what they are talking about who taint the proud military memories of the many English Canadian recruits who fought the Italians reinforced by the best German divisions from the foot of Italy right on up to the top before D-Day even happened, without the help of the French in Canada. These men died because they were not in the numbers they could have been if the French had enlisted.
Yes your proud province mates let English Canada bear the brunt. How dare you try to step in now and claim credit.
-
Habu
Don't call me stupid, you are in no position to call anyone stupid.
If you care to take a break from the usual mindless French bashing that people are so good at. You might want to do a bit of research into conscription and the need for it most countries during the war.
You need conscription because many men quite simply do not want to die in any war. Even when they volunteer many simply opt for a role away from the frontline. That's a fact. Further as a general rule only the least intelligent and poorly educated soldiers tended to end up in fighting units. Just like in Vietnam. This was acknowledged by the US army in WW2 who had to make a point of beefing up the IQ of combat units by remustering Army Air Force recruits as riflemen. That was true of most countries. The intelligent guys got the specialist jobs and the dumbs ones got killed. Most men wanted to avoid combat not least because the huge casualty rates of frontline troops.
Naturally you are also ignoring the reality of the complicated relationship French Canadians have with the Canadian government. That is the real background to the issue. Not their supposed cowardice. The fighting record of those who did enlist gives lie to that.
But of course this has nothing to do with anything as this in fact is simply another French bashing thread by the kind of armchair warriors and REMF's (look it up) indulging in their mindless pastime.
-
Habu you are serious in your interpretation....
well at least we didn't sell out to the Germans....
-
Originally posted by Habu
You know what makes me mad? People who do not know what they are talking about who taint the proud military memories of the many English Canadian recruits who fought the Italians reinforced by the best German divisions from the foot of Italy right on up to the top before D-Day even happened, without the help of the French in Canada. These men died because they were not in the numbers they could have been if the French had enlisted.
Yes your proud province mates let English Canada bear the brunt. How dare you try to step in now and claim credit.
You may want to double check that reference to only English Canadians dying in Italy.
But, again, don't let facts get in your way. Here, I'll help you out:
"Along "the Gully," a long ravine that lay to the south of Ortona, the Canadians encountered seasoned German veterans who were entrenched along the depression. Several days of ferocious fighting ensued before the Germans finally withdrew. On 13 December, the Canadians, led by the Seaforth Highlanders and the West Nova Scotia Regiment, eventually breached the German lines. In another battle, on 14 December, the farm village of Casa Berardi fell, but only after a fierce struggle. The attacking Van Doos (the Royal 22nd Regiment) and the Royal Canadian Regiment suffered heavy casualties in the desperate fighting."
Geez, there's them damn Van Doos again........
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
we are to take the word of a Franco-Canadian
Keeping digging that hole. He's not a Franco-Canadian, what's more he even said so just a few posts up.
LMAO!
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Keeping digging that hole. He's not a Franco-Canadian, what's more he even said so just a few posts up.
LMAO!
*shrug* anyone from Montreal, desperately trying to defend the french honor is Franco-Canadian to me.
Keep laughing Thrawn, you know, there is a saying in Sweden "if you laugh alot and walk really fast, no one will realize you are stupid". Id say your drive-by postings and unmotivated borderline hysterical laughters would be the internet variant of that.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
*shrug* anyone from Montreal, desperately trying to defend the french honor is Franco-Canadian to me.
Mislabling things is a irrational behaviour. Sure to eveyone else in the world he would be an Anglo-Canadian because english is his primary language, but you would know better eh? Do you call the sky the ground as well.
:D
I wouldn't laugh so much Hortlund if you weren't so damn funny. :D :D
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Mislabling things is a irrational behaviour. Sure to eveyone else in the world he would be an Anglo-Canadian because english is his primary language, but you would know better eh? Do you call the sky the ground as well.
I dunno Thrawn, personally I dont think everyone else in the world knows what kind of criteria you guys have for labelling someone franco-canadian or anglo-canadian. In fact, Im pretty sure that a majority of the inhabitants of the world would struggle to even point out canada on a map, much less grasp your epithets on yourself. You wouldnt have to go to some tribe on New Guniea to prove Im correct either, just go a few miles south of the border and ask them for the difference between anglo-canadians and franco-canadians...
Anyway, If it walks like a duck...
-
They are French, isnt that obvious?
-
American ignorance?, GScholz, you.. you're a...you're a hoser, eh..
-
Norway/Norwegen/ Noruwee/Norvegia
You dont even know where you come from... :)
-
Why are americans supposed to know the standards by which candaians determine each other to be french or english?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I'm poking Hortlund poking Americans by mistake while poking Canadians.
What do you mean "by misstake"? Its pretty much common knowledge that the average memebr of the US population aint exactly the best in the world when it comes to geography-knowledge.
Your contribution to this thread has truly been a pile of pointless trolling garbage so far...but since that seems to be your only contribution to pretty much every thread...keep it up :aok
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Its pretty much common knowledge that the average memebr of the US population aint exactly the best in the world when it comes to geography-knowledge.
We do not need to know where things are, we just need to know how to look up the coordinates for the targeting computer....
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I'm from Norge! :)
Well at least you know to look under "N" in the atlas.. :)
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
If it walks like a duck, it is Hortlund.
So what is your point? You are a racist?
Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread.
From the level of personal insults, irrelevant side tracks, and threats (yeah, saw that one before you edited your post SLO) I'd say the Franco-Canadian defenders are getting really desperate here.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
*shrug* anyone from Montreal, desperately trying to defend the french honor is Franco-Canadian to me.
With this one comment you completely blew away any credibility you could have possibly had in this thread regarding the issues we had been previously discussing.
The pathetic thing is that you have no idea how stupid you would have to be to say something like this.
-
Originally posted by MJHerman
With this one comment you completely blew away any credibility you could have possibly had in this thread regarding the issues we had been previously discussing.
The pathetic thing is that you have no idea how stupid you would have to be to say something like this.
Oh noo...the french guy thinks my credibility is gone. Who can help us now.
The ironic part here is that you dont realize that your own credibilty on this topic was gone halfway down page 1 of this thread...and yet you make comments about mine.
If you read back in this thread, and skip over the personal attacks from you and slo and thrawn and whathaveyou, do you realize that you have been wrong on the facts so far?
For example:
The deal with conscription was that ANY conscript could not be sent to the front, unless he volunteered to do so.
(wrong)
The fact is that the majority of ALL Canadians voted in favour of conscription. So, regardless of what Quebecers may have felt about the issue, once it was resolved the will of the majority was respected.
(wrong)
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread.
From the level of personal insults, irrelevant side tracks, and threats (yeah, saw that one before you edited your post SLO) I'd say the Franco-Canadian defenders are getting really desperate here.
absolutely right....I did erase it....didn't want skuzz to freeze this.
a swede dispensing morals.....first you should learn not to stick your nose up some germans prettythang before you judge anyone.
too me....at least the French DID surrender publicly.....you surrendered like hipocrites....
-
Originally posted by SLO
you surrendered like hipocrites....
and they have very insignificant male reproductive organs, too !!
:lol
-
Originally posted by SLO
you surrendered like hipocrites....
No, we didnt surrender, we ALLIED with them. I understand the difference might be hard for you to grasp and all, but the difference is enormous.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
No, we didnt surrender, we ALLIED with them. I understand the difference might be hard for you to grasp and all, but the difference is enormous.
Yep, at least WE fought !
you guys were prison biatches right away !
System : you have been PWNED
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Oh noo...the french guy thinks my credibility is gone. Who can help us now.
(wrong)
LOL I spilled my coffee this morning when I read that. Good one Hortland.
I think it is funny the guy keeps saying "My Van Doo's were there so you are wrong" totally missing the point that the percentage of French Canadian soldiers was so small (but yes there were some) that the government back home had a huge crisis regarding conscripiton. I can just see if he was Prime Minister back then.
"Sir English Canada is not going to vote Liberal anymore as they are all pissed off that so few French Canadians are enlisting."
"Hey I know there are at least 2 over there fighting so English Canada is wrong"
"But sir 2 out of 100,000 is not that many"
"I said there are 2 fighting and they are brave so how dare you imply the French Canadians are not pulling their weight"
"Ok thats good enough for me, thanks for clearing that up"
It really is like boxing in the Special Olympics trying to have an intelligent discussion in here sometimes.
-
No, we didnt surrender, we ALLIED with them. I understand the difference might be hard for you to grasp and all, but the difference is enormous.
You smoked but didn't inhale? Or rather you sucked but didn't swallow? Either way, and stupid analogies aside, there was definite executive relief involved.
-
To be honest if I was Finland Sweden or Denmark and saw what was happening in Russia at the time (as saw how being allied with France in WW1 was a ticket to misery) I would appease the Germans as well. I would be much more worried about Stalin than the Germans.
At the begining of the war people had no idea about the attrocities the Nazis were commiting in regards to the death camps.
-
Yes. It's all perfectly accountable. As is the profit margin for those Swedish industrialists, raking it in after the Hitler was revealed to be genocidal maniac.
-
Originally posted by Habu
To be honest if I was Finland Sweden or Denmark and saw what was happening in Russia at the time (as saw how being allied with France in WW1 was a ticket to misery) I would appease the Germans as well. I would be much more worried about Stalin than the Germans.
As far as I know you were allied with France too.
Or Toronto is a special place in Canada wich was not allied with France ?
Britain-born Canadian residents volunteered more often than English and French-Canadians combined
tss tss ...
I had to reserach this one as I was not sure of the date it this speak took place
At the begining of the war people had no idea about the attrocities the Nazis were commiting in regards to the death camps.
A. Hitler 30 january 1939 :
Europa kann nicht eher zur Ruhe kommen, bevor die jüdische Frage ausgeräumt ist. Die Welt hat Siedlungsraum genügend, es muß aber endgültig mit der Meinung gebrochen werden, als sei das jüdische Volk vom lieben Gott eben dazu bestimmt, in einem gewissen Prozentsatz Nutznießer am Körper und an der produktiven Arbeit anderer Völker zu sein.
Das Judentum wird sich genauso einer soliden aufbauenden Tätigkeit anpassen müssen, wie es andere Völker auch tun, oder es wird früher oder später einer Krise von unvorstellbarem Ausmaß erliegen.
Wenn es dem internationalen Finanzjudentum in und außerhalb Europas gelingen sollte, die Völker noch einmal in einen Weltkrieg zu stürzen, dann wird das Ergebnis nicht der Sieg des Judentums sein, sondern die Vernichtung der jüdischen Rasse in Europa!
-
What are you talking about?
-
Fire up your translator and look at the part I added.
So far some where able to clearly understand Hitler, or I won't have be born.
-
Given that the free exchange of rationale and well thought out arguments in this post probably ended some 10 or so posts ago, this will be my last contribution to this thread. I will give both Hortlund and Habu the benefit of the doubt that they are simply misinformed about this issue, and try and set the record straight. Frankly, the only reason I felt it was necessary is to do my small part to try and limit the disinformation that circulates on this BBS and others, so you can take or leave all of this if you like.
For the record:
1. At no time did I say that conscription was not a major issue in Canada in both WWI and WWII. My point was that you cannot understand the reasons why it was such an issue without an understanding of the political context at the time and the history of Canada.
2. My objections to various comments made were objections to those comments that suggested that Quebec's rejection of conscription was somehow a function of a lack of bravery on the part of French Canadians.
3. I am an Anglophone from Montreal. If either of you seem to think that means that I am a French Canadian and that somehow explains my point of view, you need an education on what it means to be an Anglophone in Quebec.
4. At no time did I make any attempt to defend "french" honour. At all times I made every attempt to defend Canadian honour. Again, the fact that you don't seem to understand the difference goes a long way to explaining some of your posts.
5. The Van Doos are a proud and distinguished regiment, and in fact have always been the "Pride of Quebec" so to speak, even amongst those people who disagree with the entire conscription issue. I would ask that you show even just a little bit of respect. If that is beyond you, so be it, but your lack of respect does not belittle them it belittles you.
6. Habu, I would love to see statistics that back any of your assertions that, as a percentage of the total population of Canada at the time, French Canadians were underepresented. I suspect you have none, so your only ammunition is the 98% number you referred to above together with your ridiculous "2 out of 100,000" example which you somehow think supports an attack on me.
I will concede that both of you are entirely correct in your point of view that French Canadians are cowards when you can refer me to any book, article, etc. written by a respected military historian (Canadian or otherwise) which takes the position that the conscription crisis was a result of French Canadian cowardice. I suspect that you will not find one, but I am willing to give you the benefit of doubt since you both seem convinced that you are entirely right on this whole issue. Given your commitment to you ideas, I can only assume that you formed those ideas on the basis of reading something, anything, that supports that position, and frankly I would be interested in being similarly enlightened.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Yes. It's all perfectly accountable. As is the profit margin for those Swedish industrialists, raking it in after the Hitler was revealed to be genocidal maniac.
What you forget is this:
Sweden was allied with Finland during ww2. We sent them equipment, food, weapons, aircraft. We also sent regular combat troops and airunits.
Finland was at war with Russia.
After the winter war, everyone knew that the Russians would be coming back for more. Suddenly Germany attacks Russia. Well, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Sweden was *very* close to joining the war on the German side in July/August 1941. And we did all we could to help them fight the war against Russia. That included letting German troops transit through Sweden, escort German merchant ships in the baltic, supply them with iron ore, lumber, paper, ball-bearings etc. We did this way up to August 1944 when the US gave us an ultimatum; "stop that trade or we will attack you".
Now, I know this is probably a wasted post, since you or someone else will go off on some "chicken**** surrendering owned nazi slaves"-rant or whatever.
But that is the reason why Sweden almost joined the war against Russia.
Russia always has been, and always will be, our enemy. This dates back to well before 1534. We have had longer or shorter periods of peace, but we have more or less always been at war with them.
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
I have thrown no insult at you at any time.
I did however mock you,
...
I called you a racist
In some cultures however (such as the Swedish culture), it would be considered an insult to call someone a racist.
:aok
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
You must have a reading comprehension problem.
All we have said is that our stand against conscription was politically motivated and had nothing to do with cowardice.
They refused to enlist. You can justify the actions any way you like but in two world wars the French Canadians did not enlist.
Cowards always have reasons why they do not perceive themselves as cowards.
I am sure if the Canadian Government was asking people to enlist in a government job with a big pension and little work the "Politically motivated" reasons would be forgotten and the French would be at the front of the line.
I don't think you guys in Quebec realize how bad the reputation of French Canadians is among people in the rest of Canada. The language laws and referendum have done way more damage than you can imagine.
-
Originally posted by Habu
They refused to enlist. You can justify the actions any way you like but in two world wars the French Canadians did not enlist.
I am sure if the Canadian Government was asking people to enlist in a government job with a big pension and little work the "Politically motivated" reasons would be forgotten and the French would be at the front of the line.
I don't think you guys in Quebec realize how bad the reputation of French Canadians is among people in the rest of Canada. The language laws and referendum have done way more damage than you can imagine.
half my squad is Anglo-Canadian.....I think I would know MUCH better then you what they feel or think about us.
so point 1 you lose....
your question about cowardice....I would personnelly love to show you......BUT.....I'm a civilized individual.....I'll just say I'd rather be a COWARD then a BROWN NOSER....
sniffing butts just ain't for me....
several times Herman tried to explain to you the political situation....yet you ignore those facts......TWICE you Europeans started WORLD WARS.....TWICE North Americans went to save your prettythang.
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
Habu, The problem here you cannot proove that they were cowards, it is just your opinion.
Some that went to war showed great courage, which prooves you wrong when you say they all were.
Some Anglo Canadians did not go to war and some voted against the conscription in 1942.
According to your logic that would make you all cowards.
Generalisations can do whatever you want them to, but they are way too broad to have much accuracy.
They refused to enlist. You can justify the actions any way you like but in two world wars the French Canadians did not enlist.
Cowards always have reasons why they do not perceive themselves as cowards.
I am sure if the Canadian Government was asking people to enlist in a government job with a big pension and little work the "Politically motivated" reasons would be forgotten and the French would be at the front of the line.
-
french are decendents of the Franks. A germanic people that conquered gaul around 300-400 ad.
-
Originally posted by SLO
half my squad is Anglo-Canadian.....I think I would know MUCH better then you what they feel or think about us.
Hey SLO, what Regiment?
-
Originally posted by Habu
They refused to enlist. You can justify the actions any way you like but in two world wars the French Canadians did not enlist.
Gosh I wonder how my grandfather got over there.
:confused:
Your sweeping generalisations or BS. You attack the French Quebecers as cowards with no understanding of the polictical reasons why the did not want to join and why they were against the unnessary act of conscription, the MacKenzie-King promised on a couple of occasions not to inact. I mean, wtf?
Hortlund you had a chance to cop to a simple oversight, instead you stumbled through some sad rationals, like the following.
"personally I dont think everyone else in the world knows what kind of criteria you guys have for labelling someone franco-canadian or anglo-canadian."
Well gosh, instead of shooting of your mouth about something you admit you don't know (like the whole subject of French-Canadians and Canada), maybe you should have just asked.
There goes that credibility thing again. :D
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Gosh I wonder how my grandfather got over there.
[/b]
And again you seem utterly unable to understand what we are discussing here.
Your sweeping generalisations or BS. You attack the French Quebecers as cowards with no understanding of the polictical reasons why the did not want to join and why they were against the unnessary act of conscription, the MacKenzie-King promised on a couple of occasions not to inact. I mean, wtf?
[/b]
Oh so now the conscription act was unnecessary? Why was it unnecessary?
There goes that credibility thing again.
Yeah, again you go off on some credibility tangent. But for that to work, you would first have to pretend that before this thread, I had credibility in your eyes. A quick glance at our posting history should show rather nicely that you dont exactly take my words for gospel on any subject.
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
french are decendents of the Franks. A germanic people that conquered gaul around 300-400 ad.
I should have scored better in my history courses if it was so simple :)
-
Originally posted by AKIron
What race are the French exactly? Hmmmmm.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=638&ncid=762&e=3&u=/nm/20040213/en_nm/leisure_canada_conan_dc
One could equally ask what race are the Americans......
-
Shaden the real question is : do race exist among human ?
The definition I know is : a race subset of
A species groups the potentially inter-reproducible individuals.
So as I would have written in French :
"Une espèce groupe les individus potentiellement inter-reproductibles."
So far race is more a taxonomy shortcut used badly.
PS :
I think that Taxonomy is the proper translation of "taxonomie" and systematic the translation of "systematique"...
If not I've done yet another badly translated post :p
PPS : it's can pretty wide discution leading to pretty harsh comment see : Racialism , eugenism ...
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
And again you seem utterly unable to understand what we are discussing here.
Of course I do, I'm not the one that seems utterly unable to stop using sweeping generalisations.
Oh so now the conscription act was unnecessary? Why was it unnecessary?
In a word, yes. It was estimated that 15,000 reinforcements were needed. But there were 30,000 soldiers readily available by remustering soldiers in support services. And no that wouldn't have caused a problem with support as, the Canadian military was support heavy. The Canadian military had %13.6 percent of it's soldiers assigned to staff posistions, were the US military had %4.
Then why did Prime Minister MacKenzie-King inact it? Like MJHerman state, politics. MacKenzie-King's Liberals were losing approval ratings in spades, as the country turned to the right. It was a way to pick up votes from the right and also pick up votes from all the soldiers serving already, at the cost of Quebec votes that he probably wasn't going to get anyway.
Part of the reason that MacKensie-King got elected in 1942 in the first place was on an promise that he would limit Canada's participation in the war and not consript.
A large part of the reason that French-Canadians didn't sign up is because the military was pighead and wouldn't start up more French units!
-
I just find it amusing Hortlund, that you rant about the chicken**** French or French-Canadians, but then can rationalise away Sweden's collusion.
Glass houses and stones are never a good combination.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
I just find it amusing Hortlund, that you rant about the chicken**** French or French-Canadians, but then can rationalise away Sweden's collusion.
Rationalise away? FFS read the damn post. I've said two times already that Sweden was more allied with Germany than anything else. This because we shared a common enemy. The desicion to side with Germany was a desicion of choise.
Also, please quote the post by me where I ranted about "chicken**** canadians" or frenchies.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That was not nice SLO.
sorry GScholz:(
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I'm from Norge! :)
As far north as it is possible to be...
Norway's Crown Prince Haakon placed Portugal on the Mediterranean in a welcome speech for the country's president.
The prince was welcoming president Jorge Sampaio and his wife Maria José Ritta when he made the mistake, reports the Aftenposten quoting the VG newspaper.
He said: "Norway and Portugal are on their own edge of Europe. You are placed on the Mediterranean's warm beaches, we are as far north as it is possible to be."
The speech was posted on the internet and also mis-spelt the name of Portugal's football legend Eusebio.
The Norwegian palace's information section apologised for the mistake, saying the meaning was clearly that Portugal lies far to the south, at the mouth of the Mediterranean. 2004/04/02
Glad to see that shortcoming in geographical knowledge is not just an American phenomenon.
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
Thrawn, The election was in 40 and the referendum in 42.
These two sometimes get mixed up.
My apologies Hortlund and AVRO1. I had no desire to mislead anyone.
But it kind of emphises my point, an election was just around the corner.
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
Le Mans.
Le Mans will be April 3rd and 4th this year, I can't wait. I hope the TVR guys make a good show of it!
-Sik
-
Originally posted by _Schadenfreude_
One could equally ask what race are the Americans......
Bingo.
To slur americans is not racist but anti-american, really the point of my question.
To call someone a racist based on their ridicule of a culture is a dishonest (or maybe just feeble) attempt to debase and discredit someone's entire character. This sort of attack does not cause the recipient to become introspective or feel guilt (since it was dishonest) but rather only more animosity. If you're going to solve these sorts of problems you must deal with them honestly. Trying to manipulate through guilt will only bite you in the bellybutton in the end. Just my opinion.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
To call someone a racist based on their ridicule of a culture is a dishonest (or maybe just feeble) attempt to debase and discredit someone's entire character.
I would say it's perhaps dishonest, but we don't really have a word for someone that ridicule's a culture, at least non that I know of. That doesn't mean that people don't do it, nor that it's a desirable trait. I think the connotations of the term "racist" are the closest word we do have that can carry the meaning.
-
There is a big difference between someone that despises or holds another in contempt solely because of their race and someone that despises another because of their actions. The first is unjustified and a flaw in the racists character. The second may or may not be justified depending on the situation. To apply the term racist to someone that dislikes a culture based on their actions is dishonest and counter productive towards settling differences.
-
That makes more sense than what I said.
-
A racist is someone who think with stereotypes and put emphazis on this to support is view.
(this sentence sound definitly better in French ...)
-
Originally posted by straffo
A racist is someone who think with stereotypes and put emphazis on this to support is view.
(this sentence sound definitly better in French ...)
I disagree.
If I say "all criminals are stupid", that would be racist according to your definition.
-
and if we look at the yahoo article :
This
At one point in the show, Triumph the Insult Comic Dog -- a hand puppet that is a regular on the show -- said to a Quebecer: "You're French, you're obnoxious and you no speekay English."
is a racist comment.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
I disagree.
If I say "all criminals are stupid", that would be racist according to your definition.
*
right :)
I've just to work a bit more on my definition
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
If you start the insults you have no right to call anyone on them afterwards.
Well, that sure opens up alot of interesting possiblities you goatshagging meatball head.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Sorry bud, but that is a nationalistic or ethnic comment. The French are not a seperate race.
Not that I disagree (in fact I don't believe there is "races" among humans)
But it work according to the definion of racist "A racist is someone who think with stereotypes and put emphazis on this to support is view."
But Hortlund pointed the flaw in this definition :)
forgot the quote
-
You have got to be the most über-hysterical drama queen I have ever seen.
"If it walks like a duck" Yeah...I cannot possibly imagine how one would NOT interpret that as an insult ON CANADA...
"You hate us" geez...FFS someone take this guy for a walk along the beach in the moonlight and calm him down.
-
Hortland imagine what it is like to live in a country with people like this all over.
Lets summerize some of the more brilliant arguments put forth.
The french did enlist because the Van Doos were fighting and they were french so therefore the whole conscription crisis and debate was based on nothing to do with the french.
The french did not enlist for political reasons, not because they were cowards.
The french wanted to enlist but the english army would not let them.
French Canadians are a race, they are not a race, the whole human race is the only race. You are racist but not because they are a race because they are not actually.....
My head is spinning.
You know more about Canada than any of these Canadians. lol. It is just too funny
-
Originally posted by straffo
Not that I disagree (in fact I don't believe there is "races" among humans)
But it work according to the definion of racist "A racist is someone who think with stereotypes and put emphazis on this to support is view."
But Hortlund pointed the flaw in this definition :)
forgot the quote
Sorry, that's not the definition of racist.
rac·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rszm)
n.
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.
I'm not playing symantics here. Like I said before, if I don't like you because of your race, I'm a racist and wrong minded imo. If I don't like a group of people that share the same goal, maybe to take away my rights, I'm not a racist if I don't like them because of their shared goal or actions.
-
not that I disagree with your definition (actually it work) it's just that I didn't wanted to use the term "race" in my definition just because I don't believe there such think called a 'race".
And therefore I canno't use it to define racism.
-
Originally posted by straffo
not that I disagree with your definition (actually it work) it's just that I didn't wanted to use the term "race" in my definition just because I don't believe there such think called a 'race".
And therefore I canno't use it to define racism.
If there is no race then there can be no racist.
-
No, they exist.
Just because I don't agree with the basis of their doctrine won't make them disapear.
-
I would like to apologize to anyone I might have insulted.