Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: T0J0 on February 06, 2003, 03:55:25 PM
-
The Complete Military History of France
Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.
Hundred Years War - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare: "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman."
Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians. Wars of Religion - France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots
Thirty Years War - France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.
War of Devolution - Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.
The Dutch War - Tied
War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.
War of the Spanish Succession - Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.
American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of the fighting."
French Revolution - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.
The Napoleonic Wars - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.
The Franco-Prussian War - Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.
World War I - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.
World War II - Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.
War in Indochina - Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu.
Algerian Rebellion - Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare: "We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.
War on Terrorism - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.
The question for any country silly enough to count on the French should not be "Can we count on the French?", but rather "How long until France collapses?"
-
:rolleyes:
-
Funked- every time you post a " :rolleyes: ", God kills a kitten.
But there really is no need for these kinds of posts. France may not agree with Bush in regards to Iraq, but I highly doubt they will stand in the way militarily. Same with Germany and Russia. It's their peregotive in what they want to get involved in and what they don't want to get involved in. Just because they don't want to be part of this doesn't mean they are losers or bad people.
-SW
-
As fun as it is to make fun of the French, you can't dismiss the fact that they were a world power for a few hundred years.
And as for the American Revolution, I'm grateful for the help they gave us. We needed all the help we could get.
-
pathetic :mad:
thank for your kind post sw it helped me remember that not all American are french basher (in the same way that not all french are American basher)
I regognise that currently I'm doing more American-bashing than usualy because all that threads about Iraq I read on the BBS are getting on my nerves.
In fact I think I'm a bit embittered and should have left the O'club for at least one week otherwise I'll end writing something I'll regret later.
and thanks
-
Originally posted by straffo
pathetic :rolleyes:
Yep damn pathetic record there... :D
-
Originally posted by T0J0
The Complete Military History of France
World War I - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.
That is funny as toejam man LOL
-
T0J0, why dont you tell this joke to a French SpecOPS operative, or Foreign Legion soldier, and we'll see how brave You are.
-
Originally posted by Animal
I find the use of the rolleyes smiley idiotic. The poster who uses it is instantly regarded as mindless and incapable of formulating a real and viable argument.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
-
The Napoleonic wars weren't just won by one man. He had the best cavalry in the world and the Imperial Guard terrified the bejeezus out of anyone who had to stand and fight them. This is mainly because they would form into a huge column of several thousand men and slowly walk towards the enemy lines, in the face of musket fire, roundshot and grapeshot. They would never stop, just close up ranks and push on, all the while shouting 'Vive L'Emperor!'.
Only once were they actually turned back - and that was at Waterloo, which Wellington himself called a 'close run thing'. If it weren't for the timely, but unexpected arrival of the Prussians on Napoleons exposed flank Napoleon would have won the battle and history would be very different.
Before Waterloo, the French armies destroyed all in their way. Russian, Austrian, Spanish, British - it didn't matter. They threw the British out of Spain in 1809, and only started losing ground because of the partisan war and the arrival of Wellesley on the scene.
The 'joke' about WW1 is particularly stupid. I'm sure if anyone joked about the deaths of American servicemen, there'd be uproar around here. But because it's the French, you can piss all over the graves of nearly 2 million Frenchmen. How very amusing.
Then there's the small issue of Free French voluteers fighting all over the globe in WW2. Funny material, I know. Yeah, those resistance fighters are good material for a laugh too.
Tosspiece.
-
oh, my god... fluffy just rolled over and croaked.
gawddammit, they killed fluffy!
-
Originally posted by Animal
T0J0, why dont you tell this joke to a French SpecOPS operative, or Foreign Legion soldier, and we'll see how brave You are.
It's still funny. Stereotypes don't work if you break them down person by person.
I am sure there are some really intelligent and thoughtful farmers in the southern USA, but that is no reason to dispense with redneck jokes.
Me, I am just a stupid american and I am sure in the eyes of the french I hold my cigarrettes incorrectly, but to me the french government has always seemed to be a bunch of whiny snots.
France, for all of its accomplishments pretends to a level of prestige I don't believe has been earned.
Of course like I said, I am just a stupid american.
...it must suck to not be allowed to sell SH exocets and mirages anymore.
F.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Everyone already knows you are idiotic and incapable of a viable arguement.
-
Look.. I ain't dancing around the fire, skipping and war whooping and waving my tomahawk with glee over the destruction of the French..
Yet.
-
You don't support my country's war against Iraq and now I make fun of your country... neener neener.
Yep, maturity is at an all-time high in this thread.
Daniel
-
neeener neeener neeeener.
-
For sale: French army rifle. Never fired, only dropped once. Hahaha.
-
david... i gotta tell ya, you owe me a fuggin KEYBOARD you %$%$# bastige!
LMAO.
:D
To all the "angry" remarks here:
CAREFUL. You're all falling into the political correct attitude appropiate to current events.
In short, this would have been considered quite funny by all and even taken in good humor by frenchies before "all this" happened.
Now please find us the one for the Dutch, I hear they got a good one too :)
-
the only "frenchmen' in the "French Foreign Legion' are the officers , thats why they call it the "french FOREIGN legion ", well ok , maybe some french criminals snuck in.
-
This is an all time classic post.
I am sure the French are great one on one. It is just their leaders that suck.
-
I don't think that redneck Americans can say toejam about the French unless they have actually packed a bag and visited there. If you don't have your American head up your bellybutton you will find a most friendly and gracious people. That wives tale about the 'rude French' is brought on by the 'ugly American' whom insists that the whole world speak English. Americans trash on other nations but Americans love to gloss over things like oh.. slavery..the elimiation of an entire race of natives..segregation..civil rights (or the lack of) not to mention the treatment of women and our horrid record of treating the environment.
yes, yes..the pickup driving-middle American flag waver will hoot and holler and try and pidgeon hole me for such a view but we certainly aren't the squeeky clean utopia that we like to saw we are.
-
Been there.
The people were fine.
The police, customs, car rental people, waiters, hotel workers, politicans, phone operators, etc were all prime pinheads.
and Paris smelled like an over full diaper.
But, that was 30 years ago.
I hear it's worse now.
;)
-
just think hawk , you could move to france and live there all your life and no frenchmen will ever call you a "frenchmen", but a frenchmen can move to the USA and be a "american" the next day.
-
Originally posted by davidpt40
For sale: French army rifle. Never fired, only dropped once. Hahaha.
Good one :D
-
you're right, John.. thats a difference between our two nations.. but is that a bad thing?
-
good lord you can listen to am radio and know what his next topic will be.
-
French.........as in french-fries, french silk pie, french toast, french kiss, french dressing, The French Connection, oh check these websites out for both French and Americans. Touche' y'all.
http://www.zompist.com/frenchcult.html
http://www.zompist.com/amercult.html
Thorns
-
Originally posted by hawk220
but Americans love to gloss over things like oh.. slavery..the elimiation of an entire race of natives..segregation..civil rights (or the lack of) not to mention the treatment of women and our horrid record of treating the environment.
1776 ring a bell?
Want to talk who first brought slaves to the North American continent?
Who started (and pretty well made inevitable) the eradication of the Native American?
BTW, I recognize this as an attempt a humor but I think there's a problem with timing here. There's a bit too much serious stuff going on in the world for this type of humor right now.
Just my .02. But I'll bet there were a bunch of things Americans no longer thought were funny after the morning of 9/11. Just as the French probably don't think this is too funny right now.
-
Toad....
Well Said!
Unfortunately the French are... well the French and they know all.... :rolleyes: (<---- diddlyYou Animal, you third world wanna be American. No Puerto Rico is not a state!)
Who knows, when the current terrorists in their population take over, maybe we should let them. Like they could be worse????
-
Maybe we can persuade the French to at least fart in Sadaams general direction. :p
-
or what we will taunt them a second time ?
-
Want to talk who first brought slaves to the North American continent?
Who started (and pretty well made inevitable) the eradication of the Native American?
Selective personal responsibility.
Gotta love it.
-
Merely a history lesson for those who forget so easily where the original injustice originated that was later corrected with a huge outlay of blood.
-
'Corrected'? I see. Another sanitised term for the relocation of people under threat of violence, like 'ethnic cleansing'. When the British are doing it, it's evil and disgusting. When the US is doing it, it's the fault of the British.
Interesting.
-
No, like the Civil War.. North against South?
-
And if you're talking about Native Americans, any objective study will show that the vast majority of them were "ethnically cleansed" PRIOR to 1776.
-
Aaah... slavery? The slave trade was abolished in 1807, and slavery altogether in 1838. In the British Empire, as was.
The Constitution was a great document and truly groundbreaking. I honestly believe that. Unless you had the misfortune to be born black before 1865, of course. Then it was a little less sparkling.
The point is this. Ethnic cleansing and slavery as operated by the British was evil. The US had the opportunity to shape its own destiny the moment the Declaration of Independence was signed, and could have outlawed both. It didn't. Blaming the British for events on sovereign US soil is a little too convenient for my liking.
-
but Dowding, it was your fault.
-
I know. But for a 250 year old, I do look kinda youthful. That Oil of Ulay, is just that.
Mea culpa, mea culpa. May I be flensed alive for the sins of my fathers.
-
Yeah, you guys ESTABLISHED the institution of slavery here. Prime movers in the very lucrative (for England) slave trade as well.
We win our independence and inherit the institution. In 1807 you abolish the trade, in 1838 you abolish slavery.
It takes us a very bloody Civil War to accomplish that goal.... 27 years after England abolishes slavery.
Deny your involvement all you like. It won't change the facts.
What do you suppose would have happened if England had abolished slavery say in....... 1606, the year before the Jamestown colony was founded?
Would the US ever have had slavery?
-
Originally posted by Furious
I am sure in the eyes of the french I hold my cigarrettes incorrectly
??? you lost me here ???
, but to me the french government has always seemed to be a bunch of whiny snots.
It's a feeling shared by a lot of French (me included)
-
Originally posted by john9001
the only "frenchmen' in the "French Foreign Legion' are the officers , thats why they call it the "french FOREIGN legion ", well ok , maybe some french criminals snuck in.
wrong.
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
Been there.
The people were fine.
The police, customs, car rental people, waiters, hotel workers, politicans, phone operators, etc were all prime pinheads.
and Paris smelled like an over full diaper.
But, that was 30 years ago.
I hear it's worse now.
;)
wrong ! a diaper refuse to smell that bad.
ever been in Paris Métro ?
-
Originally posted by john9001
just think hawk , you could move to france and live there all your life and no frenchmen will ever call you a "frenchmen", but a frenchmen can move to the USA and be a "american" the next day.
That's so true that since they know I'm half polish- half dutch my neighbought keep sendind stone and a lot of junk to my children ... they even wrote "Jew" on my house (yep they didn't evoluate since the 40's)
-
Straffo,
Je crois que le mot tu veut utiliser est "evolve" et c'est vrai peut-etre mais ils ont beaucoup de compagne avec cette problem. ;)
kbman
-
Hmpf
I think my french-are-cowardly-bastards-post was wayy better than this one.
-
Deny your involvement all you like. It won't change the facts.
Thanks. And I will. I was born in 1978 - perhaps I ought to pay you reparations for my historical sins? Mea culpa.
No matter. Let me put this to you. When slavery was abolished in the British Empire, there was no civil war. There was no mass uprising. There was no civil unrest. The prosperity of the Empire increased in the years afterward. So I suggest that the American Civil war was not solely about slavery - therefore to level the blame solely on Britain via slavery, is to not only twist historical fact but also shift the blame from the US politicians of the time to a nation that had had nothing to do with the US for nearly a century.
So who was really to blame? The US administration at the time (and those preceeding it) or the British government several thousand miles away?
-
Originally posted by kbman
Straffo,
Je crois que le mot tu veut utiliser est "evolve" et c'est vrai peut-etre mais ils ont beaucoup de compagne avec cette problem. ;)
kbman
Frenglish at work :D
-
Spanglish is waaay classier than Frenglish :D:D:D:D
Daniel
-
Quisiera una habitacion con ducha por siete noches, por favor. Deme una kilo de manzanas y seis latas de cervercas.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
... - therefore to level the blame solely on Britain via slavery, is to not only twist historical fact but also shift the blame from the US politicians of the time to a nation that had had nothing to do with the US for nearly a century.
my 2 cents...
The blame for slavery is is shared by many nations, brought to the americas by at least England and Spain, if not numerous others.
These countries inherited slavery from Rome, and Rome from societies predating. Many ancient societies enslaved those who were captured during war.
The American experience:
Though tensions between North and South were building for a few decades, the US civil war was sparked when South Carolina ceceded from the Union due to the election of Abraham Lincoln, a politician who had previously said that the nation cannot endure half slave and half free.
The Southern economy and much of its social order were built upon the foundation of slavery, and the South was unable to see a future without it. South Carolina ceceded to keep the status-quo, i.e. to keep slavery. The rest of the Confederacy followed suit.
Though states rights versus the rights of the federal government was noted as a cause of the civil war, that cause was intimately intermingled with slavery. The US Civil war was about slavery.
To say one country's history is morally superior because it abolished slavery first is a fallacy, because the superior history would be not to have had slavery at all.
-
Dowding, I can tell that the community is overdue for another of my America threads. :D
But Mr. Toad is right, and in view of what might take place in the next few weeks, now is not a good time. But can you now see why I wrote those threads? You have yanks, pissing all over other countries at random; So far, the recipients of their golden showers have been the French, the English, the Dutch, the Japanese - to name but four countries. They get away with it because of one thing - numbers. A bit like an AH gangbang. And they come away feeling so smug and self righteous. And from time to time they need to be reminded that actually, no - not everything in America is perfect.
What cracks me up is when I write one of those threads, and people say I'm talking total bollocks and it's not worth reading etc., but if you check the number of times read, I can easily get past the thousand mark. :confused:;)
Animal! :rolleyes: :p
-
To say one country's history is morally superior because it abolished slavery first is a fallacy, because the superior history would be not to have had slavery at all.
That's not my point at all. I'm merely pointing out that if the 'evil Empire' could do it, why couldn't the Land of the Free do it at its inception? Afterall, it was a new beginning and a 'break from the old'. Why the need to blame Britain for continuing the activity when the US was a sovereign nation?
-
Jefferson, a slave owner, wanted to write abolitionist language into the founding documents.
The southern colonies would not allow abolition, so a compromise to hold the 13 colonies together resulted in the original form of the constitution.
The Civil War was in a sence the last battle of the nation's birth.
Political compromise overcomes the ideal in many circumstances.
-
The thirteen colonies....... English colonies....... allowed the institution of slavery just like their mother country.
This particular discussion started with Hawk220's oversimplification of American attitudes towards slavery and mistreatment of the American Indian.
I merely added historical background, pointing out that slavery was created and institutionalized LONG before those 13 colonies ever became the United States. It was abolished here a short 25 years after it was abolished in the enlightened Motherland at a very great cost through a Civil War. As McGroin pointed out it was, primarily, a peculiarly Southern institution. Research will show that of all the former colonies, the Southern ones clung to their overseas roots in society, manner, dress, habits, etc., far longer than the Northern ones.
As for the genocide of the Native American, those peoples were being cheated, lied to, stolen from and "ethnically cleansed" almost from the day Columbus landed. Research will again show that the overwhelmingly huge majority, a majority measured in tens of millions throughout North and South American, had already been either displaced or "cleansed" long before 1776.
These are simply historical facts. Those of you that would cast them as attacks on a particular country are showing your bias.
Particularly given the comments made by some of people in this thread that excuse their remarks about the US so diffidently and easily. Apparently you laundry men don't like to see the dirty laundry of YOUR homeland aired out on the neighborhood line either, eh?
-
this is funny as hell, and almost true
-
Gosh guys, give the poor French a break.
I mean how many country's have lost a war with Mexico!
Hay Driver, theres a extra five in it for ya if ya run over a skunk. :D
-
WTF is all that french bashing about? This is completely tacky.
So shame on you!
Well, the French had their sour moments, but so had everybody. The French also had their good hours, that are not mentioned in the header of this thread. Going that far back in history, where is Charlemagne for instance?
Do not forget as well that France was a formidable military power for hundreds of years. They had the finest cavalry in the world for a long time, and at the time of Napoleon, no nation was the match for the French army.
To add insult to injury, mentioning the French as bad performing and "saved" by the Americans in WW1 is nothing but rubbish. The French did no worse than the English, and when the Americans came around, the course of the war had already taken a decisive route. The Americans in WW1 however never were subjected to horrors in the magnitude of Verdun for instance, where with incredible losses, the French held their ground.
How would the Americans feel if somebody posted a thread named "the worst military screw-ups in history", mentioning Pearl Harbour and the Philippines at the top? Maybe I should put up such a post, - surely would be a flamefest compared to the humble french reaction in this thread.
(would also be a nice way to sway and hijack this thread, hehehe)
BTW, I am not French.......
-
BTW, I am not French.......
rats... had my ass-kickin boots on too...
-
Tarmac: And as for the American Revolution, I'm grateful for the help they gave us. We needed all the help we could get.
Otherwise we would have had to end slavery 50 years earlier and still would have ended up oppressed like Canadians adn Aussies... :D
miko
-
As for the genocide of the Native American, those peoples were being cheated, lied to, stolen from and "ethnically cleansed" almost from the day Columbus landed. Research will again show that the overwhelmingly huge majority, a majority measured in tens of millions throughout North and South American, had already been either displaced or "cleansed" long before 1776.
True, it did happen from day uno. I don't take issue with that. But it often sounds like an attempted displacement of guilt when an argument containing the words 'the British started it' is dragged kicking and screaming into the debate. That is why I replied.
The US was responsible for its part in ethnic cleansing after gaining independance. The US was responsible for its part in the slave trade after gaining independance. That has been my argument all along.
Want to talk who first brought slaves to the North American continent?
Who started (and pretty well made inevitable) the eradication of the Native American?
If that doesn't sound like a shifting of blame, then I must be going nuts.
We win our independence and inherit the institution.
The very people who instituted and supported both slavery and native displacement were the merchants and land-owners who now formed the new American government and nation. At that point they now had free will, but chose to continue.
These are simply historical facts. Those of you that would cast them as attacks on a particular country are showing your bias.
Particularly given the comments made by some of people in this thread that excuse their remarks about the US so diffidently and easily. Apparently you laundry men don't like to see the dirty laundry of YOUR homeland aired out on the neighborhood line either, eh?
Now, I'm going to pick my way through your comments very carefully. I wouldn't want to jump to any conclusions, would I?
I assume the facts you refer to are those concerning slavery etc. Ok, that must refer to me because I'm the only one discussing those facts with you. Then you go on to say those that see them as attacks (the facts about slavery, which only I am currently discussing with you) are showing bias "...Particularly given the comments made by some of people in this thread that excuse their remarks about the US so diffidently and easily." You see the only conclusion I can draw from that? That I've made remarks about the US. What are they and why exactly am I excusing them?
Because, I'm at a loss to understand what you are banging on about.
I don't dispute the facts. Slavery and ethnic cleansing occured in the British Empire all the time, and that includes the US colonies. Mea culpa, sins of the fathers... yada, yada yada. I dispute the interpretation of those facts to say that Britain was responsible for acts by US citizens after independance was achieved. That's not personal responsibility. That's a vague shifting of the blame which I know you dislike so much.
-
The Americans fought a bloody civil war largely over the slave debate, don't forget that. However they had to fight over that, being the last "civilized" nation to benefit from slave work.
The "who started it" is obsolete here.
Anyway, wasn't this about the French?
Bloody trout bashing, or Cod bashing perhaps.......
-
Geez Tojo your a funny bastard
You did however miss the Gulf War where the French were involved - nothing remotely funny concerning that, I noticed in your post....or is it that not enough French soldiers were killed to make it amusing enough for you?
Tronsky
-
What it is is simply a more complete historic picture. It easy to snips and snaps and make a new collage like hawk220 did. Take issue with that all you like, but it's simply history.
You replied because you felt the British were being insulted or slammed? Or what?
Because it's merely unassailable historical fact. I can't help it if you find history objectionable.
You'll note I never tried to absolve the US for it's actions against Native Americans or for participation in slavery. That's simply historical fact too. It happened; there's no disputing it, no denying it.
You must be going nuts because there's no shift of blame. There's history. The US inherited the institution.. and most if not all of it's Indian policy.. from the English colonies that they were.
The very people who instituted and supported both slavery and native displacement were the merchants and land-owners who now formed the new American government and nation. At that point they now had free will, but chose to continue.
Yes, indeed they did. As did their former Motherland for quite a few more years. And it wasn't as easy to end in the US; it took a bloody war rather than a law.
Ok, that must refer to me because I'm the only one discussing those facts with you.
Keep it straight. I drew a more complete picture than Hawk220 and you took issue with that.
And what I said, in full was "These are simply historical facts. Those of you that would cast them as attacks on a particular country are showing your bias."
I haven't typed anything about England that isn't true, nor about the US. I haven't attempted to "shift blame". If you ARE trying to cast this statement of history as an attack on England, you are showing your bias. IMO, of course.
I dispute the interpretation of those facts to say that Britain was responsible for acts by US citizens after independance was achieved. That's not personal responsibility. That's a vague shifting of the blame which I know you dislike so much.
Dispute all you like. But who are you disputing with? No one here that I've seen has tried to make that case. No one has tried to shift any blame for the actions of the US after Independence. My remarks addressed the period prior to Independence.
-
Thread like this just make me sad.
When someone write a thing like this, whats his objective??
Humiliating a nation??
Humiliating france AH players or french BBs readers?
Maybe one thinks to be a great Historic doing this?
Maybe one can say "how awful is my country" and how "shit" is another, and feel proud of it??
Tell me , in which manner do we need thread like this??
The only thing I can wonder reading this is that absurd fundamentalism is not only a muslim fact, nor evil and stupidity, it seems.
But we just know that.
-
Thread like this just make me sad. When someone write a thing like this, whats his objective?? Humiliating a nation??
Humiliating france AH players or french BBs readers?
Yep.. no sidestepping here, no fancy dancing. What part of "the French have screwed us again" don't you get? What we're doing is putting to print the disgust and annoyance we feel with a nation that continiously insults our intelligence by defying plain facts in favor of lining their pockets with a dictators cash.
-
I read a news aticle the other day that france had put its military on alert and is maybe moving a carrier into the gulf region. The conventional wisdom is that it was preparation ot join in the effort to disarm iraq if necessary. I did however notice the quote from the goverment that "They should be ready for anything".
The conspiratorial part of me wonders if the surrender-monkeys are actually stupid enough to consider militarily interfering with our efforts.
There is some dark part of me that almost wishes they'd be that stupid.
Ah...CNN:
that France has sent an aircraft carrier to the Eastern Mediterranean on Tuesday and that Chirac had said to French troops in a New Year message that they should be ready for anything this year.
Wab
-
One of the stupidest threads ever, so much missinformation in such a small package . Here's something for you to ponder as you go on your way french bashing. If you have an english surname, your ancestors were french. If you're writing in english, you are writing in french . If this confuses or surprises you perhaps you should visit your local library .
-
Yep.. no sidestepping here, no fancy dancing. What part of "the French have screwed us again" don't you get? What we're doing is putting to print the disgust and annoyance we feel with a nation that continiously insults our intelligence by defying plain facts in favor of lining their pockets with a dictators cash.
Hang ,I understand your right to put here your feelings, but is it necessary to begin from Gallic wars, and go on blaming thousands years of French History to explain your opinion?
And why ridiculize a single nation here, maybe french AH players are responsible of political decision of their government?
I admit that French, Usa.... or any other country politicians can take decision that I don't like , but is this a reason to ridiculize in such way that nation History??
Noone likes his nations be treated like this, I think, cause everyone has feeling that bind him to the history of his country, regardless of present political situation
-
We insult and take cheap shots at our friends and neighbors with whom we have so much in common with while at the same time uncivilized antisocial monsters plot our destruction . This is complete counterproduction .
-
Hang ,I understand your right to put here your feelings, but is it necessary to begin from Gallic wars, and go on blaming thousands years of French History to explain your opinion?
Hi Stegor!.. No sir.. it's unfortunate that when one posts in a thread, one begins to wear all the laundry exhibited up-thread.
I do not believe I have refrered to french acts in a previous age to make any point about french attitudes or political posturing in this one.
Frances postion and posture regarding the removal of saddam hussein, the french position regarding american efforts in striking back against terrorists and the nations that succor them is disgusting. The french policy of public political defamation of american intent in Iraq while lining their financial pockets with saddams money is also disgusting to me and most other americans.. and THAT is the only point I'm trying to make in this tread.
I read a news aticle the other day that france had put its military on alert and is maybe moving a carrier into the gulf region. The conventional wisdom is that it was preparation ot join in the effort to disarm iraq if necessary. I did however notice the quote from the goverment that "They should be ready for anything".
Rgr That Wab.. but I rather doubt the french will do anything more than make a pro-forma show of support militarily for the regime change in Iraq. You see, if the French attempt to intervene in support of saddam, they will lose ALL financial intrest in Iraq.. and oddly enough; the french ALSO have significant financial intrests in America. They'd lose those too. No.. France will do what best benefits France.. and what best benifits France is NO action to remove Saddam.
Since they KNOW we will do what we are going to do despite France's duplictious and underhanded attempts to defame our nations policy of regading the removal of saddam, they will then do the NEXT best thing in Frances intrest.. offer token military support during the regime change. Not because they support the removal of this mass-murderer, but because they wish to preserve their financial intrests in the region.
We insult and take cheap shots at our friends and neighbors with whom we have so much in common with while at the same time uncivilized antisocial monsters plot our destruction . This is complete counterproduction .
Tell the French, Suave. Friends don't try to stop friends from doing the right thing.
-
The post was humor nothing more.. Bad humor obviously...
And it was discussed and flamed and picked apart, and hijacked many numerous times...
Amazingly enough we all can discuss topics in an open forum and not risk execution for are thoughts, we can talk about religion and not be persecuted or hunted down, our families will not be executed for opinions and discussions we have...
Its a beautiful thing.....
Enjoy your freedom to communicate, others can not...
No I am not apoligizing for bad humor!!
Deal with it!!
T0J0
-
The only reason they have trees lining Paris boulevards is so Germans can march inthe shade.