Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AKIron on June 09, 2004, 07:54:05 PM
-
What the hell's up with that?
-
oui oui pass the wine!
-
Why would we want the likes of Chirac at the funeral?
-
Simple, he hates conservitives and really dosent like Americans, were to upity for him.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Why would we want the likes of Chirac at the funeral?
Personally I don't but I consider it an unforgiveable insult.
-
He must have more important things to do.
-
Originally posted by moot
He must have more important things to do.
Yep, American titty bars (no armpit hair)
;)
-
now your gonna whine about a Presidents fuggin agenda.....
he's fuggin dead....I don't think he gives a fug who goes to see a FUGGIN CORPES
now what about the other 300 countries in this world.....you gonna whine about them now u pansie prettythang clown
-
:rofl
-
Originally posted by SLO
now your gonna whine about a Presidents fuggin agenda.....
he's fuggin dead....I don't think he gives a fug who goes to see a FUGGIN CORPES
now what about the other 300 countries in this world.....you gonna whine about them now u pansie prettythang clown
Ronald Reagan was a longtime likeable person and favorite leader among most Americans. Any foreign leader who happens to be in the US during his funeral would likely gain a little favor among Americans by paying his respect, especially the leader of a country that owes so much to America like Chirac. BTW, Ronald Reagan was in the US Army Air Corps during WWII.
Whine? No. Reject everything French? Absofreekinlutely!
Guess I can understand why the French might hold Reagan in low regard. He wasn't one to give up easily.
-
Shoe on the other foot.
If Nixon had been in Cannes during De Gaulle's funeral and decided not to attend the French would not have been insulted?
(:confused: When are the French not insulted anyhow?)
This should also bring up an insulting quote too.
;)
-
Why would Chirac go? Reagan was everything Chirac will never be.
Reagan was a leader, a visionary, a communicater, a geniune human being, honest, a victor, respected...etc.
Chirac can't stand people like Reagan....people that have faith, possitive outlook and purpose.
-
Was he invited?
-
Originally posted by _Schadenfreude_
Was he invited?
good question. I dont even know if it's true that Chirac wont attend.
-
Got some Louisiana Hot Links and some Bratwurst but those are for the weekend.
Invited? Duh... yeah, he attended.
-
Originally posted by _Schadenfreude_
Was he invited?
Invitations aren't issued for funerals, anyone may attend. How is it done in your country? Certainly if Chirac wanted to attend he would be welcomed and likely given a place of honor.
-
Next outburst on the BBS will be "Who in hell invited the French guy to Reagan's funeral!!!!"
Got to be the most whiney BBS on the net.
-
Well, we've got guys like you to make posts to ensure that's true, don't we?
-
Originally posted by _Schadenfreude_
Next outburst on the BBS will be "Who in hell invited the French guy to Reagan's funeral!!!!"
Got to be the most whiney BBS on the net.
I guess you have not found your "European BB" yet and are content to stay here :lol
-
Wed 09 juin 2004 - The french evil dude's Agenda.
Starting 09h00
Arrival at the Beach Club of various country leaders and representative.
- greetings by president Bush.
10h00 to 12h00
>>
Work cession of the G8
- Economy and trade
13h00
>>
Work lunch of the various G8 delegations and of the leaders of North Africa and "Grand Moyen-Orient".
14h50
Pictures
16h15
Work cession of the G8
- Security issues
19h45
>>
Pictures of the G8 delegation. (Ocean Forest Club)
20h00
>>
Work diner of the G8 varoius delegation.
- Regional issues.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
good question. I dont even know if it's true that Chirac wont attend.
I dunno either but it was reported here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96207,00.html
If he has any sense he'll change his plans and attend.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Why don't all you French bashing A-holes give it a rest for a while.
"A great statesman who through the strength of his convictions and his commitment to democracy will leave a deep mark in history. " -- French President Jacques Chirac about President Reagan
How about never? You want a rest be my guest and close your browser.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Why don't all you French bashing A-holes give it a rest for a while.
"A great statesman who through the strength of his convictions and his commitment to democracy will leave a deep mark in history. " -- French President Jacques Chirac about President Reagan
who is bashing the French?
-
So what's the evil French dude doing on Friday? He's sending Foreign Minister Michel Barnier to the state funeral.
The Canadian PM says he's not coming, btw. Neither is Russia's Putin.
However, it doesn't insult me if these guys don't show. This isn't for them, it's for us.
While it was very impressive overall, two things struck me while watching the ceremony at the Capitol tonight.
1. We sure as heck have dang few politicians that can speak as well as Reagan did. Or even speak publicly at all. Stevens was embarassing. I hope Bush is practicing very hard. :rolliething: He needs to do well on this one.
2. I wish they did something like that for every soldier coming home in a box from anywhere overseas. I think it'd help our Congress if they had to see that.
Just my cranky observations.
-
Come to think of it, I think they should "eminent domain" all land within 600 yards of the Capitol and use that for Arlington's expansion. Then make them walk to work from parking lots outside the 600 yards. It'd give them time to reflect.
Gee, I am cranky tonight!
-
Originally posted by GScholz
"who is bashing the French?" -- NUKE, the most ignorant person since MrBlack was banned.
I dont get it. Did I miss something?
-
It's also reported at Bloomberg's.
French bashing? Hardly. Seems you're the sensitive one.
There's no doubt many here will take it as a slight.
Again, how would the French have felt if we had sent only the Secretary of State to De Gaulle's funeral? Would they have taken it as a slight?
Answer honestly, Scholz.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I guess you have not found your "European BB" yet and are content to stay here :lol
I'm enjoying the local colour and the experience of a new culture!
have a pic!
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/66_1086838568_cheney_edited.jpg)
-
ive been looking at all kinds of news sources and nowhere is it mentioned that Chirac will not attend the funeral...all it does say is how all the world leaders had nice/positive things to remember Reagan by, including the statement from J Chirac.
Online papers from all over the world...and not a mention any in one of them either?
-
not only whiney but apparently not very bright either if the previous post is true.
-
Reagan Funeral Puts Washington on High Security Alert (http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=amkti.H3naAY&refer=us)
French President Jacques Chirac, attending the Group of Eight summit on Sea Island, Georgia, said Foreign Minister Michel Barnier would represent his government.
There you go. Bloomberg is pretty accurate.
-
Shadenfreude, I am curious, are funerals in your country by invitation only? Have you never been to one?
-
In that case my apologies for casting aspersions on the intellectual capacity of the BBS this time.
-
Originally posted by _Schadenfreude_
In that case my apologies for casting aspersions on the intellectual capacity of the BBS this time.
Im going to go out on a limb and suggest you are drunk.
-
the way americans have voiced their hatred for the french and their president i'm surprised chirac sent anyone as a representative
-
Originally posted by Toad
1. We sure as heck have dang few politicians that can speak as well as Reagan did. Or even speak publicly at all. Stevens was embarassing. I hope Bush is practicing very hard. :rolliething: He needs to do well on this one.
I thought Cheney delivered an excellent eulogy. Little hope Bush will do so well.:(
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
the way americans have voiced their hatred for the french and their president i'm surprised chirac sent anyone as a represtative
Fully deserved. Too bad the French will never understand what they have lost. Then again, ya never know.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Who did the US send to attend President Georges Pompidou's funeral? I know Al Gore was sent to President François Mitterrand's funeral.
Well, Chirac happens to be in the area. I wouldn't want that piece of filth anywhere near Reagan's body though, so it's great that he won't be attending.
-
Pompidou and Mitterand were certainly not the players on the world stage that Reagan was.
Yet President Nixon attended Pompidou's funeral in '74.
Again, how would the French have felt if we had sent only the Secretary of State to De Gaulle's funeral? Would they have taken it as a slight?
Answer honestly, Scholz, Schade. If you can.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I don't know, but knowing the French I would guess they would take offence.
Indeed. So why are you making such a big deal in this thread?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
*lol* I think I know why the French are a but sour.
"In Paris for the funeral of French president Georges Pompidou in 1974, Nixon remarked, 'This is a great day for France.'"
Anytime a US President is in France, it's a great day for France:)
Seriously, what was the context of that quote?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Why don't all you French bashing A-holes give it a rest for a while.
Yeah, I think you're making a big deal out of nothing. Especially considering the comment about Nuke that followed this one.
-
BTW, Nixon said that at De Gaulle's funeral, not Pompidou's.
That's the quote I referred to earlier. I can understand why the French would be P.O.'d too, considering their regard for De Gaulle.
-
But you're making a big deal of it in THIS thread.
As for any of the French showing, I really think most Yanks could not care a whit less about it if they don't.
I know I don't give a fig if they show or not.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
The rampant French bashing is not limited to this thread Toad. Considering the way the French have been treated by Americans both officially and publicly you should be happy that they send any representative at all.
can you give some examples?
-
The French have earned far more than the benign bashing they get on this board. I would very much like to see all of our ties with them forever severed.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
What have they done to earn the bashing?
We've been over this before. So far as I'm concerned it began with their unwillingness to let us overfly their territory when we attacked Khadafi and culminated most recently in their stubborn refusal to support the ouster of their buddy Saddam. Lots of stuff in between as well but it's late here and I'm going to bed.
-
Didn't agree or actively obstruct?
The first doesn't bother me. The second does.
And they did.
-
Well, it's not like we have physically attacked France, but we certainly don't have to like or support in any way anyone that attempts to thwart our every effort at making the world more safe and free for all.
-
You guys amaze me sometimes. The complete Bloomberg quote states:
"French President Jacques Chirac, attending the Group of Eight summit on Sea Island, Georgia, said Foreign Minister Michel Barnier would represent his government."
Can you guys state why Chirac might not be able to attend the funeral personally? I mean, beyond conjecture and misperception? Chirac would demonstrate disrespect if he failed to send any governmental representative. As it is, he sent the most appropriate senior official to attend such a ceremony in his absence. France therefore plans to attend the funeral and pay its respects to Reagan. This is how countries do things diplomatically.
Why doesn't anyone complain about Prince Charles representing the British royal family rather than Queen Elizabeth? Such disrespect!
What a complete non-issue.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
You guys amaze me sometimes. The complete Bloomberg quote states:
"French President Jacques Chirac, attending the Group of Eight summit on Sea Island, Georgia, said Foreign Minister Michel Barnier would represent his government."
Can you guys state why Chirac might not be able to attend the funeral personally? I mean, beyond conjecture and misperception? Chirac would demonstrate disrespect if he failed to send any governmental representative. As it is, he sent the most appropriate senior official to attend such a ceremony in his absence. France therefore plans to attend the funeral and pay its respects to Reagan. This is how countries do things diplomatically.
What a complete non-issue. Jesus.
-- Todd/Leviathn
I can see that you're no diplomat. How many Americans do you think will feel insulted when a head of a state already at odds with many Americans fails to attend the funeral of one of it's most revered leaders? Especially when it is conspicuously convenient for him to do so.
-
I don't care what foreign leader attends, that doesn't matter. Ya figure that the Americans here would give the partisan politics a break til he is gone, show some respect. What foreign person could understand anyway? They never got the chance to live in such a time as we did, we should consider ourselves lucky. I have seen people outside my family pass on, but this one really saddens me. He was like a father, you didn't like some of the things he did, but in the end you find it hard to live without him. Those were the best of times, and he lead the way, i'm gonna miss him. In his honor, no more politics til all respects have been paid and he is resting in peace.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I can see that you're no diplomat. How many Americans do you think will feel insulted when a head of a state already at odds with many Americans fails to attend the funeral of one of it's most revered leaders? Especially when it is conspicuously convenient for him to do so.
Pretty much just you. Diplomacy isn't about appealling to American public opinion anyway. As far as the government of the United States goes, I'd wager this is a complete non-issue. So long as someone appropriate represents France, it's all good. Had France refused to send anyone, I'd be the first to agree that their response was completely undiplomatic.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
Pretty much just you.
-- Todd/Leviathn
If you really believe that then I'm surprised you can operate a pc, much less do so well in that damn spit 5.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Im going to go out on a limb and suggest you are drunk.
No...just the result of a classical education.
-
Todd, I posted the whole quote from Bloomberg. No one's hiding anything.
I really don't care if Chirac attends. I wouldn't change my opinion of the French either way whether he attends or does not attend.
Still, it's Blair that is the head of the British government. The Queen isn't.
Lastly, same question to you:
How do you think the French would have felt if we had sent only the Secretary of State to De Gaulle's funeral? Would they have taken it as a slight?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
If you really believe that then I'm surprised you can operate a pc, much less do so well in that damn spit 5.
Obviously you're not going to be a candidate for Secretary of State anytime soon.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by GScholz
How by voting against you and lobby other nations to do the same? How very un-American of them ... not.
No. I was in the US military and dealt with French policy towards us many times.
Even on things as simple as filing a flight plan over French territory on the way to Athens, they're axeholes. Always have been. They are obstructionist.
Their failure to cooperate with us goes beyond disagreement. They actively obstruct us.
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
Obviously you're not going to be a candidate for Secretary of State anytime soon.
-- Todd/Leviathn
Watch TV after Friday and if Chirac doesn't attend tell me again that I'm the only one that noticed and was insulted by it. That is what you said wasn't it?
-
Originally posted by Toad
How do you think the French would have felt if we had sent only the Secretary of State to De Gaulle's funeral? Would they have taken it as a slight?
Ask the French. And let's not start with the hypotheticals. I can spin a story just as easily as you, and neither would necessarily represent the truth.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Watch TV after Friday and if Chirac doesn't attend tell me again that I'm the only one that noticed and was insulted by it. That is what you said wasn't it?
The real question, frankly, is whether the Bush administration finds Chirac's absence insulting. Do you know its position on the matter?
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
The real question, frankly, is whether the Bush administration finds Chirac's absence insulting. Do you know its position on the matter?
-- Todd/Leviathn
I doubt Bush would ever publicly admit any slight. However, public opinion dictates government policy these days more than ever before, and a popular US boycott of French products will not likely go unnoticed by the French.
-
Just a dodge, Todd. You know the answer and so does everyone else, especially the French.
Scholz, you miss it.
They won't let US military fly through their airspace on a whim. Not just armed aircraft, transports. They'll hold you at their ADIZ and then reroute you entirely around France. This after they approved your entry flight plan before takeoff. It's routine, not exceptional.
That's just one example.
They're axeholes obstructionists.
Their UN behavior is best defined by the "NIH" syndrome. If they didn't think up the idea, they obstruct it until someone has to kiss their axe to get them to go along. It's just vanity and past gloire.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I doubt Bush would ever publicly admit any slight. However, public opinion dictates government policy these days more than ever before, and a popular US boycott of French products will not likely go unnoticed by the French.
Public opinion rarely dictates foreign policy, at least strategically.
If you disagree with France's actions, by all means boycott them. This is your right, and perhaps France will act differently in the future as a result. That does not change the question of whether France's actions are diplomatically appropriate however since you plan on boycotting them whether or not the Bush administration finds their decision acceptable.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Ah, here we go with the "boycott the Freedoms" again. Tell me, how did the previous boycott go?
Dammit, I was almost off to bed, now I'll have to lookitup. ;)
-
Originally posted by Toad
Just a dodge, Todd. You know the answer and so does everyone else, especially the French.
So why not ask them? Seriously.
Also ask yourself if this situation mirrors De Gaulle's in 1970. Think geopolitically.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
We need a chat room. This feels like I'm IMing you guys. :)
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by GScholz
So you're saying they would first grant permission to overfly France, and then revoke the permission when the bird approaches their airspace?
Over my 6 years of flying it happened that way almost every time we filed over France. It was a real problem, as the fuel was based on the shortest route.
It really screwed up the operation. What's worse is the shipbirds would have you hold at the ADIZ telling you the clearance would be coming through in a few minutes. They'd never give it, of course. They were just making sure that your non-stop flight would be dropping into Spain for an extra fuel stop.
Doesn't seem like much to you, but it was a 15+ hour flight direct. The fuel stop easily would add two hours to that. Made a long forking day for the crew that much longer.
Towards the end, we just filed around them through Spain and planned on getting extra fuel from the tanker. Which generated other problems, but I digress.
They're axeholes.
-
Couldn't find anything current, the "boycott" may have subsided. Apparently it did do some damage: http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2003-04-30-france_x.htm
If the boycott has dwindled, Chirac's absence from this emotional event may refuel it. I hope he stays away. Night all. :)
-
Because the need to ask them if they'd be insulted is equal to the need to ask them if the sun will rise tomorrow.
BTW, do you like gymnasiums, Billy? ;)
-
Originally posted by Toad
Because the need to ask them if they'd be insulted is equal to the need to ask them if the sun will rise tomorrow.
[/b]
Well, I can't ask the sun if it'll rise tomorrow, but you sure can ask some of the French folks here if they would have been insulted. :)
BTW, do you like gymnasiums, Billy? ;)
Speaking of gyms, I need to take my son to Little Gym tomorrow. I should hit the sack!
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Non.
There's no need to ask about the insult for the same reason as there's no need to ask them about sunrise.
The answer is apparent to all.
Bon soir!
-
Originally posted by Scootter
were to upity for him.
Now wouldnt THAT be a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black. LOL
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Ah, here we go with the "boycott the Freedoms" again. Tell me, how did the previous boycott go?
Actually from what I understand it went quite well.
Frech lost a ton of money.
There was something I noticed that I found particularly amusing.
Local grocery store for the longest time didnt seem to sell muchin the way of "French roast" coffee.
At one point I remember there was a 2 for one sale and all the coffee of that brand was sold out with the sole exeption of "French roast" which remained stocked full.
Even funnier is even though it was a 2 for 1 sale.
I couldnt bring myself to buy it either. LOL
-
Originally posted by Toad
The answer is apparent to all.
So if Nixon hadn't attended the funeral in the middle of the Cold War for a noted World War II figure during a war in Southeast Asia ostensibly begun by France the French would be mad? I wonder what the Soviets would have thought? The Vietnamese? Ah, but now I'm asking hypotheticals myself. But you do know the answers don't you?
I see plenty of reasons to view Chirac as a slug. Not attending Reagan's funeral is not one of them.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Toad
Pompidou and Mitterand were certainly not the players on the world stage that Reagan was.
Yet President Nixon attended Pompidou's funeral in '74.
Again, how would the French have felt if we had sent only the Secretary of State to De Gaulle's funeral? Would they have taken it as a slight?
Answer honestly, Scholz, Schade. If you can.
For you certainly, but président Pompidou is still very present in our memory and Mitterrand was président during 14 year.
They were as important in my eyes as Reagan in your.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Why would Chirac go? Reagan was everything Chirac will never be.
Reagan was a leader, a visionary, a communicater, a geniune human being, honest, a victor, respected...etc.
Honest?
curly
-
Could someone please explain to me as a foreigner what the whole Iran-Contra thing was about?
-
Originally posted by _Schadenfreude_
Could someone please explain to me as a foreigner what the whole Iran-Contra thing was about?
What a mess! The US congress made it illegal for Reagan to aid the rebels in Nicaragua in their fight to overthrow the Sandinistas.
At the same time, Reagan was searching for ways to free US hostages held in Lebanon.
Iran agreed to intervene with Lebanon if we would sell them weapons (under the table, so to speak.) The profits from the weapons sale were diverted to the Nicaraguan rebels.
Reagan dodged the bullet, but many of his confederates were convicted (but pardoned later by Bush.) Reagan's ability to laugh off the entire mess earned him the sobriquet "the teflon president."
The entire proceedings from the iran-contra hearings are located here:http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/irancontra/irancon.html
Reagan, yeah, he was a real charmer. :rolleyes:
curly
edit: whoops the above link is a commercial microfiche site. I'm sure you can track down more details using yahoo/google.
-
Christ, what a bunch of women. Toad, in answer to your question: who gives a crap. If they did gripe about it, they'd be just as whiney and retarded as the americans whining about Chirac in this thread. Do you people skulk around the funerals of your loved ones too, trying to spy out the people there who aren't grieving enough?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Any foreign leader who happens to be in the US during his funeral would likely gain a little favor among Americans by paying his respect,
So you suggest he or any foreign leader should attend a funeral just to gain favor with the U.S.? Seems that's a bit insincere, and I wouldn't want anyone to attend for that purpose.
Originally posted by AKIron
especially the leader of a country that owes so much to America like Chirac. [/B]
France was a major player on our side in the Revolutionary War.
-
Originally posted by SOB
Do you people skulk around the funerals of your loved ones too, trying to spy out the people there who aren't grieving enough?
Superb comment and the only reason I'm not putting into my sig is that no-one would have the slightest idea what it's about!
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
So you suggest he or any foreign leader should attend a funeral just to gain favor with the U.S.? Seems that's a bit insincere, and I wouldn't want anyone to attend for that purpose.
France was a major player on our side in the Revolutionary War.
The French showed up at the last minute then spent every waking minute begging us to surrender.
-
Storch alert!!!! Yuros head for the closest shelter!!!
-
Originally posted by Saintaw
Storch alert!!!! Yuros head for the closest shelter!!!
Stop hijacking threads!!
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29859-2004Jun9.html
By Jim Hoagland
Thursday, June 10, 2004; Page A19
The good that Ronald Reagan did is not being buried with his bones tomorrow, as Shakespeare's Mark Antony predicted of Caesar. Reagan's good is being disinterred and magnified. It is being raised to new and unrealistic heights that will live on, and hang heavily over his successors, in public expectations.
This is not to begrudge the 40th president the thunderous applause that has come from politicians, journalists, historians and citizens to mark Reagan's final bow. Ill should rarely be spoken of the dead. But it is puzzling how these assessments of Reagan's accomplishments have improved so dramatically and uniformly in the 16 years since he left office.
Perhaps this is how contemporary history is made or, in the electronic era, mismade and distorted. Reagan's growing reputation as the great victor in the Cold War who made Mikhail Gorbachev tear down the Berlin Wall depends on looking at Reagan and his times through the light cast by subsequent events.
The craving by Americans for uncluttered heroism -- for what is seen in retrospect as the order and clarity of the Cold War -- also powers this yearning for a near-mythical transformation of Reagan's death into a moment to sweep aside the dread and anguish of the wars in Iraq and against al Qaeda.
Yes, winners always write the history. But it is dangerously easy today to make the leap from that news footage of Reagan speaking at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin to concluding that he came to office with a master plan to make victory in the Cold War inevitable. As one television executive said to me not long ago, "Today history is what we say it is."
To one who covered many of the key international events of that day, Reagan seemed in fact to come late to a realistic view of the Soviet Union and the world, and -- like most presidents -- to have improvised furiously and not always successfully in foreign affairs.
It is also easy in today's elegiac mood to forget how unpopular Reagan was abroad for most of his presidency, even among his peers. France's Francois Mitterrand once sputtered in rage at me when I asked about his ideological conflicts with Reagan over Soviet policies. Kremlin officials expressed private delight at Reagan's election because they would be able to "roll him."
That is no skin off Reagan's record. He was more right about the evil and the fate of Soviet imperialism than Mitterrand, Gorbachev and most other leaders of the day. He was far from the amiable dunce portrayed by his knee-jerk critics.
But the opposition that Reagan stirred should not be airbrushed out of the final photograph of his times. Nor can we ignore the fact that the analysis and policies that brought some breakthroughs with Moscow originated more with George Shultz at the State Department than at Reagan's White House.
The Wall collapsed a year after Reagan's successor had been chosen and had started to alter policies toward Moscow. That collapse was due more to the struggle in the 1980s of the citizens of Poland, Hungary, East Germany and other satellite nations than to new actions by Washington. Nor should we minimize the contribution that a half-century of common dedication by U.S. and West European citizens and their military forces made to the final collapse of the Soviet empire.
There were important costs that came with Reagan's undeniable successes. His confrontational style used in getting much-needed Pershing 2 missiles deployed in Europe helped prematurely end the career of West Germany's highly competent chancellor, Helmut Schmidt.
U.S. support extended to guerrillas to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan has blown back in the form of al Qaeda and extreme instability in Central Asia. U.S. help to Saddam Hussein in Iraq also boomeranged. Iran-contra was not as great an aberration at the Reagan White House as it is often painted today.
The commentariat has made many of the right points about Reagan's uplifting personality and all the good and the fascinating that will live after him. Even if he was not a great president, he lived a great life from which we can all learn.
But if we airbrush and prettify history for the small screen and the front page, and ultimately for the books to come, we will not learn the most important lessons about mistakes that can be avoided. Let Reagan be Reagan, warts and all, for all time now.
-
who cares what the french think or do... sort of like AKcurly's conservative hating posts :)
-
AKcurly, Very well thought out and written. But somewhat revisionist and in keeping with your misguided political slant. We spent the major part of the cold war dragging our "allies" kicking and screaming every step of the way. Furthermore Mr. Reagans domestic and foreign policies almost bankrupted us but they certainly bankrupted the former soviet union and were actually the coup de grace. Get it straight.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
The rampant French bashing is not limited to this thread Toad. Considering the way the French have been treated by Americans both officially and publicly you should be happy that they send any representative at all.
Umm are you saying that the US decided to pick on France and therefore France is justified in snubbing the US any chance it can?
That the relationship has nothing to do with France's policy of trying to undermine the US as a superpower (due to Frances' inferiority complex) and thus trying to use the European Union or the UN, the World Court or any other organization to do so?
France is in decline. Economically, politically, socially and nationally. They know it too. Don't worry about France. In 20 years they will be on the same level as the Portugals and Greeces of the world. Not in the same league as the US China Russia Japan England Canada and all.
-
Originally posted by storch
AKcurly, Very well thought out and written. But somewhat revisionist and in keeping with your misguided political slant. We spent the major part of the cold war dragging our "allies" kicking and screaming every step of the way. Furthermore Mr. Reagans domestic and foreign policies almost bankrupted us but they certainly bankrupted the former soviet union and were actually the coup de grace. Get it straight.
Tell me, Storch. If I were standing in my front yard and a meteorite struck the ground 100 feet away, would you give me credit for making the meteor fall?
Reagan's share of the responsibility for the collapse of the Eastern bloc is precisely the same as my responsibility for the meteor falling ... we were simply there.
curly
-
bet klinton could have made sure the soviet union hung on for a decade or two more tho.... would he be responsible for it not falling or just there?
oh... and you being a liberal I would not expect yu to take responsibility for anything.
lazs
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Tell me, Storch. If I were standing in my front yard and a meteorite struck the ground 100 feet away, would you give me credit for making the meteor fall?
Reagan's share of the responsibility for the collapse of the Eastern bloc is precisely the same as my responsibility for the meteor falling ... we were simply there.
curly
I would take God to task for his poor aim.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
who cares what the french think or do... sort of like AKcurly's conservative hating posts :)
Then why care if he attends the funeral, or not? I could care less, actually.
-
I say let the French attend but make them stand way at the back over by where the waiters are.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29859-2004Jun9.html
By Jim Hoagland
Thursday, June 10, 2004; Page A19
This is not to begrudge the 40th president the thunderous applause that has come from politicians, journalists, historians and citizens to mark Reagan's final bow. Ill should rarely be spoken of the dead. But it is puzzling how these assessments of Reagan's accomplishments have improved so dramatically and uniformly in the 16 years since he left office.
Most certainly that is exactly what many liberals are doing in fear that by recognizing Reagan's accomplishments they will somehow transfer to the standing Republican president. They should at least remain quiet until the guy is in the ground. A lot of Americans liked Reagan alot, Republicans and Democrats alike. Any criticism at this time will most likely backfire on them.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Tell me, Storch. If I were standing in my front yard and a meteorite struck the ground 100 feet away, would you give me credit for making the meteor fall?
Reagan's share of the responsibility for the collapse of the Eastern bloc is precisely the same as my responsibility for the meteor falling ... we were simply there.
curly
Never would have taken you for a Calvinist Curly. :p
-
DMF, see Straffo's post.
SOB, remember I said I don't give a fig if any French attend.
However, it's pretty obvious that the French would be incensed if the shoe were on the other foot. Just an observation.
-
"The French", "French government", "Chirac", "The French president", etc, all mixed together undiscriminately, that's credible?
If you don't care for "the French" nor Chirac, why do you care?
Keep your blinders on and carry on.
-
Originally posted by SLO
now your gonna whine about a Presidents fuggin agenda.....
he's fuggin dead....I don't think he gives a fug who goes to see a FUGGIN CORPES
now what about the other 300 countries in this world.....you gonna whine about them now u pansie prettythang clown
:rofl
Struck a nerve, did he?
-
still the same....
very american....very biased....and very fuggin boring
when you fly over American territory....you follow american rules
when you fly over French Territory....you follow French rules
get it punk....who the fug are you too judge THERE rules....in so doin you allow me to ***** about your PARANOID border guards.....but I won't...childish in nature
You say you helped the French during WW2...OK you did....but so did England, Canada and oh so many more....OH and wait a minute....we liberated them fuggin ITALIANS too...and just imagine....they where helpin them bad guys
please try to never forget that FRANCE helped you gain your fuggin freedom and in so doin helped you build your own fuggin COUNTRY...you owe them your FREEDOM chump
next.....
-
SLO, relax before you have a seizure or something! Wow..
As for Chirac, he has said some pretty respectful things about Reagan. I'm not insulted or anything because he is or isn't going..I don't even plan to attend my own funeral if I can find some way to gracefully bow out of it.
I *do* think that if he doesn't attend, he will be passing up a good PR opportunity. I mean, he's a politician..would surprise me to see him miss a chance like this.
Maybe, someday, after this whole US/ French thing blows over...I'll be able to order French fries without my fellow Americans looking at me like I just shot Jesus :lol
-
Originally posted by VOR
SLO, relax before you have a seizure or something! Wow..
nah I'm at work with some free time too waste reading these BBS clowns:rofl
now I got to go on Crescent St. and see all them nice girls and nice cars...its F1 week in Montreal man....beautiful weather and beautiful girls to go...damn work is hard
-
Funny I go look at jets when I want to dream of owning something I will probably never have in my life.
-
Originally posted by SLO
nah I'm at work with some free time too waste reading these BBS clowns:rofl
now I got to go on Crescent St. and see all them nice girls and nice cars...its F1 week in Montreal man....beautiful weather and beautiful girls to go...damn work is hard
Never been a bigger clown around here than you.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Never been a bigger clown around here than you.
why thank you Iron...at least I don't bore people with my useless 1 sided blabbering like you :D
-
Originally posted by SLO
at least I don't bore people with my useless 1 sided blabbering like you :D
But of course you do!
BTW, if that little hissy fit was meant for me, it's obvious you don't know merde about international aviation.
Put "ICAO" in Google. It would be a start on lifting the veil of darkness.
Ta.
-
(http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040611/i/r3547230019.jpg)
Lech Walesa says he owes Reagan a "debt of gratitude" for what he did for the Polish people.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
bet klinton could have made sure the soviet union hung on for a decade or two more tho.... would he be responsible for it not falling or just there?
oh... and you being a liberal I would not expect yu to take responsibility for anything.
lazs
Most economists believe reagan only speed up the soviet demise by about 3-5 years. Their collapse is not because of reagan, but because communisim just does not work. When the soviet economy fell apart in the mid 70's it was only a matter of time.
I will thank reagan for signing treaties with russia in order to stop the nuclear arms race.
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
Most economists believe reagan only speed up the soviet demise by about 3-5 years. Their collapse is not because of reagan, but because communisim just does not work. When the soviet economy fell apart in the mid 70's it was only a matter of time.
I will thank reagan for signing treaties with russia in order to stop the nuclear arms race.
Some say the Japanese would have surrendered without the use of the atomic bomb. Maybe, but who knows how many more would have died if not for the decisive action of Truman. The same may be said about Reagan. Who knows what might have happened had not Reagan shown the strength, determination, and resolve to stand against encroaching communism?
-
well.... if Regan "only" speeded up the fall of the soviet union by 3-4 years as "most econimists" say... then if klinton ccould have prolonged it for 7-8... we woulda had a decade or so more of cold war under klinton... seems we owe Regan a lot. Way things were going... I don't think the world would survive another decade of sword rattling.
lazs
-
Well, my fears were unfounded. Bush's eulogy, while not half so moving as that of Thatcher, wasn't bad at all.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Shadenfreude, I am curious, are funerals in your country by invitation only? Have you never been to one?
yup they are for invited only in our country.
Famiy members doesnt need invitation, all other should have
Since there is some tension between US and Fr, it would be nice to send invitation.
-
Originally posted by storch
Stop hijacking threads!!
yeah watch him, he si bloody terrorist hijacking almost everything....
:D
edit.: you better go check your daughters case if he is not hidding there
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Some say the Japanese would have surrendered without the use of the atomic bomb. Maybe, but who knows how many more would have died if not for the decisive action of Truman.
yeah and second AB were just for case... sure sure ...
there is no better way, how to show rest of amy, that war is over that throw AB on big cities full of people.....
bomb some military targets would not be so clear for rest of army i guess
Im wondering who chosen targets for AB.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
well.... if Regan "only" speeded up the fall of the soviet union by 3-4 years as "most econimists" say... then if klinton ccould have prolonged it for 7-8... we woulda had a decade or so more of cold war under klinton... seems we owe Regan a lot. Way things were going... I don't think the world would survive another decade of sword rattling.
lazs
You think wrong .... world could survive more 3-4 years w/o any problem
Specialy with secret that Commies are about to fall..
I guess it had to be hard time for military industry, when cold war is over.
-
Originally posted by lada
yeah and second AB were just for case... sure sure ...
there is no better way, how to show rest of amy, that war is over that throw AB on big cities full of people.....
bomb some military targets would not be so clear for rest of army i guess
Im wondering who chosen targets for AB.
You might ask former Soviets where their multi-megaton warheads were targetted.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
You might ask former Soviets where their multi-megaton warheads were targetted.
No im not interesting in Soviets..
Im interesting in fact, that military power were show on city full of people from ... "DEFEATED" country
Or do you consider your self to have same habbits like a former Russia ?
-
Originally posted by lada
No im not interesting in Soviets..
Im interesting in fact, that military power were show on city full of people as demonstration of power for ... "DEFEATED" army.
Or do you consider your self to have same habbits like a former Russia ?
Defeated? Are we talking about the same Japan? The one that declared they would fight to the last man, woman, and child? The same Japan that did in fact fight so very fiercely in hundreds of engagements throughout the Pacific? The same Japan that didn't surrender even after the first bomb decimated one of their cities? Let's do stick to the "facts" shall we?
Now, about the "fact" of where those Soviet missiles were pointing?
-
Osama declared that he have as many young people willing to die for america as Bush have young people willing to live in america......
according to your logic, im wondering that Afghanistant were not Abed as well
chmmmm ... interesting arguments you have
check time between first, second bomb and capitulation
-
Originally posted by lada
Osama declared that he have as many young people willing to die for america as Bush have young people willing to live in america......
according to your logic, im wondering that Afghanistant were not Abed as well
chmmmm ... interesting arguments you have
check time between first, second bomb and capitulation
Osama is a blow hard terrorist and never did speak for all of Afghanistan.
Aug 6th, 1945, first bomb. Aug 9th, 1945, second bomb. Aug 10th, 1945, unconditional surrender.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Osama is a blow hard terrorist and never did speak for all of Afghanistan.
Aug 6th, 1945, first bomb. Aug 9th, 1945, second bomb. Aug 10th, 1945, unconditional surrender.
yup and what were between ?
Ahhh.... so what were reason to invade afghanistan ?
-
Originally posted by lada
yup and what were between ?
Ahhh.... so what were reason to invade afghanistan ?
Figured you could discern that for yourself. Ok, There was the first bomb. Then, 3 days later, with no surrender forthcoming, another. Next day they surrendered unconditionally.
Regarding Afghanistan, are you trying to make a point or are you really in the dark as to why the US invaded?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Figured you could discern that for yourself. Ok, There was the first bomb. Then, 3 days later, with no surrender forthcoming, another. Next day they surrendered unconditionally.
Regarding Afghanistan, are you trying to make a point or are you really in the dark as to why the US invaded?
Sure killing civilians day by day and in name of whatever is realy better that kill some and ask for surrender. What a cool habbits.
yes come on tell me what were purpose to invade Afg. when you do not agree that it were Osama and his statements.
may be US market need more opium ? :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by lada
Sure killing civilians day by day and in name of whatever is realy better that kill some and ask for surrender. What a cool habbits.
yes come on tell me what were purpose to invade Afg. when you do not agree that it were Osama and his statements.
may be US market need more opium ? :rolleyes:
I'll try to decipher and respond, at least to your second statement. The first seems only a rant to which I won't further respond.
I do agree that the US invaded Afghanistan to eliminate Al-Queada when the Taliban refused to hand over it's leader. My previous comment about Afghanistan was in stating we didn't nuke them when you asked why not was because it wasn't necessary in order to rid Afghanistan of the terrorists that attacked us. Did you forget about the ruthless attack against one of our major cities on 9/11?
-
now there's something alot of us have forgotten...
Where The Fug is Osama.....thought he was no.1 on the hit list....or did georgie boy change his mind
-
Originally posted by SLO
now there's something alot of us have forgotten...
Where The Fug is Osama.....thought he was no.1 on the hit list....or did georgie boy change his mind
There may come a day when we wished we had nuked him. Still, I think we'll find him before he can be party to any more destruction against us.
-
The main point of Chirac's non-attendance is that he missed an opportunity to change American opinion about the French. Contrary to what Kerry has said, among other more out of control liberals (Dean and Gore come to mind), Bush has not done anything or said anything to purposefully alienate the countries of Europe. He has not used inflamatory rhetoric or US power against either the French in general or Chirac in particular. Indeed, President Bush has gone out of his way to make it clear that while he was disappointed by the lack of support from France, Germany, and Russia in dealing with Iraq, he still considered those countries as friends and allies. The American people, on the other hand, have made it clear that they considered the policies of France (and to a lessor extent, Germany and Russia) as a betrayal by a country we thought we could trust.
Chirac could have taken this opportunity to try to heal that rift between our countries (something the US Administration has been trying to do since the Iraq invasion) by showing Americans that he does not see us as a potential foe. Rather, that our two countries stood side by side (even after France's withdrawal from NATO's military alliance) during Reagan's watch to oppose the evil of communism. He showed himself to be far more inept as a statesman than either Reagan or President Bush.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Come to think of it, I think they should "eminent domain" all land within 600 yards of the Capitol and use that for Arlington's expansion. Then make them walk to work from parking lots outside the 600 yards. It'd give them time to reflect.
Gee, I am cranky tonight!
cranky yes,
correct yes...
Politicians see not the human results of their posturing, only the "bottomline" as it helps their party.
-
Originally posted by SLO
now there's something alot of us have forgotten...
Where The Fug is Osama.....thought he was no.1 on the hit list....or did georgie boy change his mind
Osama is rotting in a collapsed hole somewhere on the Afghani/Pakistani border...
Confirming that only makes him a martyr...
-
Originally posted by GScholz
What have they done to deserve this bashing?
Absolutely nothing
-
OK, that's just funny :)
-
Originally posted by Toad
But of course you do!
BTW, if that little hissy fit was meant for me, it's obvious you don't know merde about international aviation.
Put "ICAO" in Google. It would be a start on lifting the veil of darkness.
Ta.
lifting the veil of darkness....too funny
what you seem to forget is TERRITORY....If they didn't let you fly over France...maybe they had there reasons....ever try to find WHY before you ranted like a usual mindless clown
and who are you to JUDGE them.
-
You're just ignorant chum
I see you didn't research ICAO. Given that you clearly don't understand international aviation it's not suprising you post such drivel.
From this last bit, it also appears you didn't read what I posted... well, didn't comprend it anyway. Not suprising.
You're a boring, one-sided little Putz.
-
where he is from being a boring little one sided putz is pretty much the rule.
lazs