Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: muckmaw on February 11, 2003, 11:51:13 AM

Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: muckmaw on February 11, 2003, 11:51:13 AM
I do not consider myself an ignorant person.

However, I'm trying to understand why the French are consistantly trying to block every initiative the United States puts forth in the case against Iraq.

Of course, Germany and Russia include themselves in this camp, but the French seem to be the most vocal.

So I ask you this; what are they trying to achieve?

I am no fan of going to war with Iraq. As a matter of fact, somtimes I get the feeling the President has a personal vendetta against Hussein. I have not seen any real proof of the possession of WMD, although I believe they are there. I think Powell made a good case for the UN, but I am not 100% convinced. I support the president, and more importantly, the troops that will have to fight this war.

But can someone tell me, in a FLame free way, what the French are protecting by balking? Are they afraid of the interruption of the oil flow? Is their sale of arms to Iraq? Are they simply pacifists?

And above all else, why would they refuse to assist in the protection of Turkey, a NATO member?

Once again, let's try and keep this Flameless. I would just like some honest answers that I cannot get from the biased media.

Thanks in advance.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 11, 2003, 11:55:27 AM
Oil.

They are Husseins largest customer in a variety of areas. If we boot hussein, they lose the preferintial deals.

It really simple.. The French would rather do buisness with Hussein than anybody we'd put in his place.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Furious on February 11, 2003, 12:18:32 PM
...that and weaponery.

Lotta french stuff in SH's inventory.  They made alot of money selling it to him.

So...when the next dictator is out shopping for a new air superiority fighter or some air-surface missiles, and is reading the nice french brochures, and suddenly realizes that all that expensive french toejam didn't keep the last guy from getting his bellybutton handed to him...

...well, that just can't be good for business.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 11, 2003, 12:27:29 PM
understand 1 thing.....americans DO NOT control ever1's thought.

France see's Differently then the US....AND THERE MAKIN THERE OPINIONS KNOWN

why does that tickle your funny bone?


at least france is not doin what the Germans did...that is calling BUSH a little Hitler....go figure.

its to be expected...when your opinion differs then that of americans...your branded as a traitor...and whine whine whine

personnelly...I want Saddam out....but i think BUSH is pushing it to far by makin the "UN" look un-important.....

my country will follow the UN..not the US

personnelly i don't give a watermelon what monkey brains(Bush) thinks about that...or you for that matter
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 11, 2003, 12:30:46 PM
Quote
its to be expected...when your opinion differs then that of americans...your branded as a traitor...and whine whine whine


Hey.. the thread starter said "flame-free"; yah french-canadian twit!!  

edit: he didn't anwser any of the questions either. *sniff*
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Eagler on February 11, 2003, 12:33:40 PM
will the OBL/Iraq tape change anyones mind?

doubt it, if Powells powerpoint presentation didn't don't think anything will...
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: ra on February 11, 2003, 12:36:09 PM
Quote
personnelly...I want Saddam out....but i think BUSH is pushing it to far by makin the "UN" look un-important.....

The UN is making itself into a big joke by constantly drawing lines in the sand and then backing off.  Bush has nothing to do with that.

Quote
my country will follow the UN..not the US

Your country should follow your country.

ra
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: midnight Target on February 11, 2003, 12:38:55 PM
I had flames in 10 in the over-under. Wooo Hoooo!
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 11, 2003, 12:43:36 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ra
The UN is making itself into a big joke by constantly drawing lines in the sand and then backing off.  Bush has nothing to do with that.

 
Your country should follow your country.

ra


there's a big difference between Bush and the UN.....Bush controls 1 country...the UN is tryin to balance much more then 1.....think...don't let monkey brains decide 4 u

that 1 i don't understand "your country should follow your country"

Hangtime...I luv u 2...now shud-up:eek:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: AKIron on February 11, 2003, 12:45:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by SLO
understand 1 thing.....americans DO NOT control ever1's thought.


Just keep thinking that. (turns up the power on the thought control ray) ;)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 11, 2003, 12:48:56 PM
Most apt BBS handle I ever saw.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Furious on February 11, 2003, 12:51:50 PM
french-canadian.

hmmmm.



damn it.  where do you start with that?  the mind literally reels at the nearly limitless variety of colorful insults. (all in good fun, sure.)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Rockstar on February 11, 2003, 12:52:37 PM
I wouldn't be concerned about France or anyother country's opinion at the moment.

In politics nobody can lose face, at the end of negotiations everyone leaving the table must feel like they got the best deal out of all.  France isn't the enemy neither is Germany or Russia, Iraq is.  More than likely Russia, France, Germany and us are trying to ensure their interests in the region are secured.   Once the pie is cut to everyones satisfaction we'll get the green light to level the place and sort things out as previously agreed.

Until then politicians will feed the media who in turn will  regurgitate it and feeds it us.  Unfortunetly some will fall for every word spoken.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 11, 2003, 12:58:25 PM
well said rockstar:cool:

Lol akiron

furious...whats that supposed to mean....hmmm:p
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 11, 2003, 01:59:24 PM
It's simple if ever the ricain bust poor little Saddam the remplacing prettythang hole carfully choosen among CIA puppets (not Osama as he got sacked)  will not sell a single litter of oil to a non US/UK "multinational" compagny.


Is that good/harsh enough Hang ?

Can I apply to the FDB now and should I send you a resume ? :D

no flame where used when writing this post
well in fact I've to say ... a bottle of Chorey-les-Beaune 99 was near (it's a Bourgogne for you ignorant american ;))
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 11, 2003, 02:29:01 PM
A touching letter from a Marine in Bosnia when faced with a frenchman:

Marine letter home...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dad, tell Mom I love her,

Your loving daughter,

Mary Beth Johnson, LtCol, USMC
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 11, 2003, 02:43:54 PM
LOL!!

Perfect reply Straffo!

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

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

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

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

Bonehaids. You smelly lil boys deserve to buy oil from BP.
;)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: lord dolf vader on February 11, 2003, 02:56:21 PM
assuming this isnt just made up

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


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

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



just plain barbaric and neither cool nor inspiring to me.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: lord dolf vader on February 11, 2003, 02:58:26 PM
its a lie sorry to bother


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


consider the source sigh
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 11, 2003, 03:09:04 PM
@Hang : we can have a agreement sometime I just need to be a bit more drunk than usual :D
for saddam we have an expression : "parier sur le mauvais cheval" it give badly translated by my spongius decadent brain : "placing a bet on wrong horse".

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


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


consider the source sigh


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

back to the MA...



(*) yep sometime I drink great satan alcohol instead of our savourous local beverage just to feel the pain of bad distilled abomination ;)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Manedew on February 11, 2003, 03:41:38 PM
Pre-emtive strike means sneak attack,  how often can you listen to spin and half-truths and belive them ... this is about OIL! not anything else ... if we are such good bloody humanitarians why don't we care about wars in Africa?  Proably because they have no Oil... that'd be my guess....

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

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

I think that's why the French don't want the war .. oh ya and the OIL :rolleyes:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: muckmaw on February 11, 2003, 04:19:14 PM
We tried the the peacekeeping thing in Afica. Somalia? Anyone remember that little endeavor? How many American's died trying to help the Somalis? Is there oil in Somalia? Negative.

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

Vietnam? No oil.

Korea? Nope.

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

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

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

How many more don't we know about.

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

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

So I think I've answered my own question, with the help of you fine gentlemen. It all comes down to money.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: MANDOBLE on February 11, 2003, 07:23:03 PM
Ripsnort, that letter (100% BS) defines clearly the marine that wrote it:
Ignorant, brainless and barbarian.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Manedew on February 11, 2003, 07:44:53 PM
What i'm saying is why do we goto Bosnia but not Rawanda... I think it's a stability issue.... noone cares about that part of Africa, but a bad Europe seems worse.

If it doesn't concern the US it doesn't concern us.... if you undestand what i'm saying :rolleyes:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Soup Nazi on February 11, 2003, 07:46:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Ripsnort, that letter (100% BS) defines clearly the marine that wrote it:
Ignorant, brainless and barbarian.


Yeah but that same Marine will ask no questions when protecting the rights of Democracy, even for you Mandoble.;)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: AKIron on February 11, 2003, 07:48:51 PM
Tucker Carlson said it well on Crossfire tonight. "Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordian".
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 11, 2003, 09:32:21 PM
I really shouldn't post when I get worked up..



BUT!!

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

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

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

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

Whats the PC response?

I know how I feel.. but how can i express myself without melting my keyboard?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: lord dolf vader on February 11, 2003, 09:40:22 PM
Item: french technical teams remained in argentenia in support of exocet missle deployment during the falklands conflict.


eazy, cite where you got this at ? rush show?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 11, 2003, 09:58:06 PM
Air & Space Power Journal - Fall 2002

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

Argentine Airpower in the Falklands War
An Operational View

Dr. James S. Corum

Snip

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

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

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

Kudos, Habu!
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Toad on February 11, 2003, 10:13:42 PM
Iron,

I read that bit in a piece by Jack Kelly.

He attributed it thusly:

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


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

He's written two good pieces that I've read that lay it out pretty clearly.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SFRT - Frenchy on February 11, 2003, 11:55:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
A touching letter from a Marine in Bosnia when faced with a frenchman:

Marine letter home...

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

A French army officer walked up to ......................
Mary Beth Johnson, LtCol, USMC


LOL:D  ... what's next, you believe what CNN is telling you Ripsnort? Oh man ... that made my day. thx, I had a great laugh.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hades55 on February 12, 2003, 12:12:00 AM
Money its a point, but not The point.
Controling the meedle east  oil you
control the economies of Europe &
Japan. You rule them.
If Europe wants a free  command
of her self Needs Oil. Her Oil.
The interests are Opposite.
You know what that means.Soon or later.
If a president of Usa sees his self as a
Ceasar thats his problem.(or hiden Hitler)
The support of some Americans to this
War its the same as the support of the
prewar Germans to Hitler.
At least in the eyes of the Europeans.
If someone fails to understand that,he is out of reality.
Sadam is indeed a dictator, but the people here dont support sadam when
they dont want this war.
They think Whos next ?
If some of you Americans are sleeping
dreaming free fuel for your cars, ill tell
you one thing.
The most europeans see at this war the start of WWIII.
And if some of you think ,so what ?
Ill tell you, think twice because Usa
for first time in her short history is
vulnerable to straight hits from the enemy weapons whoever is he.
WWII was a war of honor.
We had a bad guy ( hitler ) and we
( allies ) was fighting for the good of
humanity.
We,(europeans),now,remain the good
guys But Bush have take the possition
of hitler.
Maby you dont like what i write here,
but if someone want to understand WHY you have to look at this view,
but also to THINK.Have a nice day all :)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Slash27 on February 12, 2003, 01:29:01 AM
Nice reply Hang:D  That answer your question dolf nader?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: bounder on February 12, 2003, 04:47:06 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Hangtime
Air & Space Power Journal - Fall 2002

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


Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems. Without the technical help and collusion from the government of France—Britain’s NATO “ally”—it is improbable that Argentina would have been able to employ its most devastating weapon.[/b]18

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


Apparently:  appearing as such but not necessarily so.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Naso on February 12, 2003, 05:03:00 AM
Disclaimer: It's just my opinion, and I am talking about policie and NOT the percieved reasons by the population.

I'll try to answer in short your points.

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


Somalia.. well this one I cannot explain fully, I have heard that in the "horn of Africa" there are big reserves of Uranium, but I dont remember where and when I heard it so I can be probably wrong.

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


This one was nice, but first listen some fact.
We, here, (we share boundaries with former Yugo), percieved since the beginning the atroucious facts that were happening, and, as electors, there was a big opinion movement to "do something to stop the butchering", at politic level, there was a problem of stability and risks to have an important road cutted for reaching the eastern markets.
The European community started moving slowly, as is in his usual behaviour, toward an intervention in the egida of the European Military Association (OCSE?), since the US was in some way refusing to be involved.
Just before the EC start moving, a huge information campaign was  raised in US (I remember it because suddenly my US friend started asking me informations about it), and the US jumped in, imposing the action in the egida of the NATO (of witch US is part).
So we can call this a...
Preentive strike against the Euros acting as indipendent and common military force.

Quote
Vietnam? No oil.


Geopolitical zone control.
"Domino effect", did you heard this before? ;)

Quote
Korea? Nope.


See Vietnam

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

What happens if Hussein gets the bomb? He's going to put it on a missle and Nuke Tel Aviv. It's only a matter of time, if he's given it.


I dont know, using a nuclear bomb it's not an easy choise, even for a mad like Saddam, mad, but not stupid.
The reactions by the entire world will be surprising.
And it's the case even if US use the bomb, something that make me laugh when some of the posters here use terms like "glass", "glowing glass" , or other nice expressions suggesting the use of the A-bomb by the US.
Never forget that the US it's not the only one having the A-bomb, but I am confident that you govenment know it VERY WELL, and they are'nt mad, either. :)

Quote

He would love nothing more than to  be known as the savior of the Arab world who took the Jews out of Palestine.


For sure he is using in the last years a propaganda image that point to have help by the fundamentalists, but dont forget Iraq it's one of the few "arab" nations (arab it's not exact) that is not under a religious control, and, the particular ... i fail the word... version? of Islamism, it's not the same that host the "active fundamentalists".

Quote
So what if Israel Retaliates. He won't be killed. Only a good portion of his population.


Do you really think that the "intelligent bombs" that are going to be used now will not kill the population?

Quote

 A sane mind would never consider a first strike using nuclear weapons, but we're not talking about a sane mind here.


I dont know if Saddam it's sane or insane, but it's not an idiot.

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

How many more don't we know about.


Lol, sorry but I never heard that US is supporting Castro. :)

For the others, what let you think they were wrong horses?
They were and are in some way doing US interests, so, why wrong?
In the moment they are no more useful... see Noriega. ;)

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

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


The French, for their reasons, are disagreeing with US, so they are presented to you as a new member of the axis of evil, like Germany, It's a propaganda question, and must stay out of a good and unbiased discussion.

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


Yep! :)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: X2Lee on February 12, 2003, 06:15:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by SLO





personnelly...I want Saddam out....but i think BUSH is pushing it to far by makin the "UN" look un-important.....

my country will follow the UN..not the US



Short trip to make the UN look un important. Would be much harder to make them look credible.

And who needs Canadas backing?
Not Us   :p
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Toad on February 12, 2003, 06:17:17 AM
Somalia

U.N.'s Boutros-Ghali Proposes Armed Intervention in Somalia (http://www-tech.mit.edu/V112/N61/somalia.61w.html)

Quote
UNITED NATIONS

An international military operation, probably led by the United States, must intervene forcibly in Somalia to disarm its warring factions if that East African country is to be saved from further massive starvation and bloodshed, U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali told the Security Council Monday....

Boutros-Ghali said that traditional U.N. peace-keeping efforts have failed to halt the famine and anarchy devastating Somalia. He analyzed five possible courses of action that the world body might take and concluded that only "a country-wide show of force" by outside troops can guarantee deliveries of food and humanitarian aid in the face of attacks by warring militias.


Yugoslavia

 US slams Germany for Yugoslav war (http://www.klick-nach-rechts.de/germany/croatia.htm)

Quote
Meeting of EU foreign ministers in the Hague in November 1991:

At that meeting, the then German foreign minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher (FDP), announced without any prior notice Germany's intention to recognise the regime of Franjo Tudjman in Croatia.

This peremptory declaration, which stunned Germany's EU partners, set the seal on any last surviving chance of either preserving the Yugoslav state - which, even at that stage, the USA, France and Britain believed could be achieved - or of preventing the eruption of the conflicts within Yugoslavia into full scale war.

The regime which Genscher was so keen to recognise has an unbroken line of continuity from the Ustashi murderers of Ante Pavelic during the Second World War. The Croat government's complexion has escaped much attention because of international media attention on its rival gangsters and killers in Serbia.

The fact is, however, that Franjo Tudjman is a hard-line antisemite, proud that his wife "is neither Jewish nor Serbian". Tudjman has links with the French fascist Front National leader Jean-Marie Le Pen in France, has kept open house for nazis from across Europe, including the infamous nazi Black Legion mercenaries, and has himself written a book. Wastelands - Historical Truth denying the Holocaust and defending Hitler.

Such niceties mean little in Bonn and the tactic that bulldozed the EU into following Germany's line, with recognition of Tudjman on 15 January 1992, and drove the USA into reversing its former pro-Yugoslav unity position has since been ruthlessly applied in Bosnia-Herzegovi-a, which, though dubbed "an artificial state", had actually symbolised the multi-nationality Yugoslav experiment....

Quelle SEARCHLIGHT special "Reunited Germany - The New Danger" pp28



THE WESTERN EUROPEAN UNION, YUGOSLAVIA, AND THE (DIS)INTEGRATION OF THE EU (http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/lwsch/journals/bciclr/24_1/02_TXT.htm)
Quote
Although all WEU members could agree that their organization should dispatch a monitoring force to isolate the sources of conflict and ensure an orderly transitional process without influencing the outcome,101 ultimately the fear of casualties, Soviet denunciation of any planned Western intervention, and a continuing and fundamental inability to synchronize a CFSP led to the failure to task the WEU even to the support of EC-planned humanitarian relief operations.

Unable by late September 1991 to fulfill even a minimalist role in advancing the cause of European security and defense, the WEU could not hope to accomplish more than the provision of largely symbolic assistance to the implementation of future UN resolutions.102

In its first serious post-Cold War foreign policy endeavor, United Europe, despite collective possession of the overwhelming military capacity to forcibly and decisively intervene to prevent genocide,103 “thanks to the curious alchemy of German leadership, Italian support for it, British [*PG33]limitation of it, [and] French ambition . . . [created an] alloy of common foreign policy . . . inescapably less than gold.”104
[/b]

Korea

United Nations and Republic of Korea Forces  (http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/kowar/un-rok/un-rok.htm)

Quote
Ultimately, fifteen other UN members sent armed forces to participate in the conflict. First into action, and always providing the greatest total numbers, were the British and other members of the Commonwealth, including Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa...
 
Other nations providing forces included brigade or regimental size ground elements from Turkey, Thailand and the Philippines. Belgium, Columbia, Ethopia, France, Greece and The Netherlands sent battalions and little Luxembourg contributed a company.

Denmark, India, Italy, Norway and Sweden had medical units in the combat zone. The contribution of the Japanese, still under Allied occupation when the Korean War began, included many invaluable LSTs and inshore minesweepers, plus a significant contingent of merchant ships, stevedores and other hired support personnel in and around Korea, plus the extensive base system in the Japanese home islands.


Seems it wasn't just the US interested in the "domino" theory.

VietNam

Geopolitical Control Zone? Control of what?

It was just our mistake; we bought into Kennedy's inauguration speech and Johnson got really carried away with it. You can't GIVE freedom to anyone. We may be about to repeat this mistake in Iraq.



Cuba

Quote
Naso: Lol, sorry but I never heard that US is supporting Castro


It was more anti-Battista, but it was there.

CUBA (http://www.flashpoints.info/countries-conflicts/Cuba-web/Cuba_briefing_main.html)

Quote
The US initially welcomed the 26th of July revolution, until it emerged that Castro embraced communist ideology, at a time when America was terrorized by the "Red Peril". The rebels executed many Batista followers, as others escaped to the US. As Cuba pursued land reform and nationalized the economy, American interests were at risk.



U.S. - Cuba History (http://www.uscubacommission.org/history3.html)

Quote
July 30, 1957 - U.S. Ambassador Smith, who has been supportive of the Batista regime, now calls the violence excessive after he observes Batista's police beat up women at the funeral of a slain revolutionary.
 
 
March 14, 1958 - General Batista continues his reign of torture and killing of suspected rebels and their sympathizers and his bombing raids on villages. The Eisenhower Administration under increasing pressure to withdraw their support from Batista, declares a Cuban arms embargo against the protest of Ambassador Smith.  
 
 
November 1958 - In an effort to maintain government stability, Ambassador Smith suggests that a free election be held in Cuba in the hope that it would produce an alternative to both Castro and Batista. However Batista's candidate wins in an election that even Ambassador Smith concedes was rigged.
 
 
December 9, 1958 - William D. Pawley, an emissary from the Eisenhower Administration, meets secretly with General Batista to try and persuade him to leave office and accept exile in Florida. The emissary proposes that the government be left in charge of a U.S. approved junta. Batista refuses the offer and three weeks later flees Cuba as revolutionary forces led by Fidel Castro take over the government.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: X2Lee on February 12, 2003, 06:20:25 AM
Quote
Originally posted by lord dolf vader
assum

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


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



just plain barbaric and neither cool nor inspiring to me.


I think he was saying in a nice way....
Any of our lady marines can kick a french solders arse at burger king?

At least thats how I read it     :D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Naso on February 12, 2003, 06:35:54 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Seems it wasn't just the US interested in the "domino" theory.


No, not only US, all the western countries, including mine.

I tought it was assumed.

Quote

It was just our mistake; we bought into Kennedy's inauguration speech and Johnson got really carried away with it. You can't GIVE freedom to anyone. We may be about to repeat this mistake in Iraq.


No comment.

Quote

Cuba


It was more anti-Battista, but it was there.



Very interesting infos.

But this confuse me, Batista was'nt friend of the US? :confused:

Thanks for infos, anyway.

Lol, as a joke, we can say that the embargo is Batista's heritage? ;)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Toad on February 12, 2003, 07:10:47 AM
Obviously the relationship with Batista changed over time. It's an interesting read; initially (in the '30's) the US didn't support him. However, they dealt with him due to his clear overwhelming influence in Cuban politics.

Truman recognized Batista's coup almost immediately in 1952. By 1958 Eisenhower had enacted an arms embargo against Batista's government due basically to "human rights" problems.

So, no Batista wasn't always a "friend" of the US.

However, I understand your confusion.

A lot of people on this board seem to think that international relationships are stable and never change over time. Just as they seem to think that people/politicians are always what they appear to be and also do not change over time.

History books are stuffed full of the tales of nations that were once allied becoming enemies. Along with tales of nations that were once enemies becoming allied. It's the history of man.

Thus, I find many of the comments here........ humorous.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Naso on February 12, 2003, 07:23:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
...Thus, I find many of the comments here........ humorous.


Sometime, they are.... scaring :eek:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 12, 2003, 07:54:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by SFRT - Frenchy
LOL:D  ... what's next, you believe what CNN is telling you Ripsnort? Oh man ... that made my day. thx, I had a great laugh.


At least *someone* understood it was a joke!  Christ, never leave a line unattended in this forum, you get some of your biggest fish on an unattended line!

LOL Mandoble, is your cheek sore this morning? :D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 12, 2003, 08:47:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by AKIron
Tucker Carlson said it well on Crossfire tonight. "Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordian".



an accordian player who has nuke powered subs...nuke powered ships....ICBM's.....Ship Missile's(already proven they work...ask the limeys)...good Jets....Advanced dev. of jets.....Arian5....bla bla bla

apart from your toys....ya got nothing as soldiers:eek: ....somalia proved that....vietnam proved that...Korea proved that....and you came after the battle of britain when germans where already fighting the white bear.....keep thinking your the best....and i'll keep bustin your inflated bubble brain

Your monkey brain prez wants the war(and his oil buddies)....ask the american majority and you'll have a different vote
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Monk on February 12, 2003, 08:52:56 AM
Son......you need to take that SEAL qoute off your sig.
Thank you.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Dowding on February 12, 2003, 08:53:52 AM
lol I agree with the first paragraph slo, but the rest drops off pretty quickly. :D

Are you a SEAL, Monk? Besides, that's not a SEAL 'quote', it's been around for a million years.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 12, 2003, 08:56:37 AM
Damn Slowbrain, thats alot of chum in the water.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Monk on February 12, 2003, 09:00:29 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Dowding
lol I agree with the first paragraph slo, but the rest drops off pretty quickly. :D

Are you a SEAL, Monk? Besides, that's not a SEAL 'quote', it's been around for a million years.


exactly: This is a quote" The only easy day, was yesterday."
and no sir I'm  not or was, just know quite a few.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 12, 2003, 10:06:46 AM
hope that's ok daddy monk(sig)......oh an btw....I ain't your son...If I was....I'd be kickin ya big fat head  :eek:


an rip-short....gimme a break...so much French bashing....twas time to bash your inflated american brains....

read x2lee's quote....we don't need Canada...naw you just let good ol'drugged up boys fly jets an drop bombs on my countries soldiers....keep bashing some1 else's opinion an i'll keep bashin your seld-centered attitudes....we are no.1...we are no.1 :rolleyes:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Monk on February 12, 2003, 10:20:53 AM
"DaddyMonk"
Sort of like that......thanks.

Oh ya, if you going to  kick my fathead....oops BIG fat head.
why did you remove the Navy SEAL sig.

:confused:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 12, 2003, 10:26:41 AM
was only jokin daddy-monk....as for the SIG...thought it offended you
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: muckmaw on February 12, 2003, 10:54:18 AM
KISS is a term in the brokerage business.

And seeing as how this thread has degenerated into a flame fest...

There was a report on CNN about French Military Advisors being dispatched to Iraq as early as this week.

They are there to train the Iraqi's in the proper method of Surrender.:D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Furious on February 12, 2003, 12:22:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Hades55
Money its a point, but not The point...

...If a president of Usa sees his self as a Ceasar thats his problem.(or hiden Hitler)  The support of some Americans to this War its the same as the support of the prewar Germans to Hitler.  At least in the eyes of the Europeans...

...WWII was a war of honor.  We had a bad guy ( hitler ) and we ( allies ) was fighting for the good of humanity.  We, (europeans), now,remain the good guys But Bush have take the possition of hitler.


hehe.  

Greece next?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: muckmaw on February 12, 2003, 12:28:07 PM
Hmmm...Greece....Lemme check the schedule...

Iraq...March 1st-15th
North Korea...March 15th - 30th.

Hmmm...April...

Ahh. France, April 3rd, 11am through 11:45....

I think we can squeeze Greece in on the way home...Hows April 4th for you?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: maxtor on February 12, 2003, 12:29:09 PM
Screw em.  Who cares what they think anyway?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Rude on February 12, 2003, 12:32:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by SLO
understand 1 thing.....americans DO NOT control ever1's thought.

France see's Differently then the US....AND THERE MAKIN THERE OPINIONS KNOWN

why does that tickle your funny bone?


at least france is not doin what the Germans did...that is calling BUSH a little Hitler....go figure.

its to be expected...when your opinion differs then that of americans...your branded as a traitor...and whine whine whine

personnelly...I want Saddam out....but i think BUSH is pushing it to far by makin the "UN" look un-important.....

my country will follow the UN..not the US

personnelly i don't give a watermelon what monkey brains(Bush) thinks about that...or you for that matter


Your issue is with Bush and not reality....be honest next time.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Rude on February 12, 2003, 12:33:32 PM
Quote
Originally posted by midnight Target
I had flames in 10 in the over-under. Wooo Hoooo!


Now that's funny:D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Rude on February 12, 2003, 12:34:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Hangtime
Most apt BBS handle I ever saw.


Now that's even funnier still:D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 12, 2003, 12:58:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Rude
Your issue is with Bush and not reality....be honest next time.



so what your sayin is Bush ain't real:D

I totally agree....but what I think is funny is you all follow what isn't real:p

muckmaw...you already tried with N.Korea during 3 years(1950 to 53)...and promplty got your tulips kicked...you gonna try again.....you lost cause ya couldn't use your atomic toys....like I said....you got nice toys....but ya soldiers suck without those toys:eek: ....sorry for repeatin myself
Title: Treachery!! TREACHERY MOST FOUL!!!
Post by: Hangtime on February 12, 2003, 01:04:41 PM
Ok.. lets sum up just a bit..

The french have been a NATO 'associate' since the mid 60's.. this means that they have had access to war planning, military hardware capabilities, command and control structures, etc.. but are not required to supply troops, material, equipment or funding to any NATO enterprise.

During this period, and post 1991 in particular, the french government owned military cartels have been equipping and supporting adversaries of the other NATO powers. It's been demonstrated that they have in the past and intend in the future to back that hardware up with on-site technical support.

Repeatedly, the french have taken an obstructionist role in our efforts to curb and contain the spread of terror and have continued to maintain hardware as well as emplace new hardware in states that have been identified as sponsoring terror.

Just WHAT does it take to get the west and europe to understand the french are NOT playing on our team? How many american and NATO troops dying at the hands of the French supported, trained and equipped Iraq military will it take to get FRANCE identified formally as a terror supporting state?

Again.. what will be the official PC response when our boys start gettin killed thanks to French?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 12, 2003, 01:16:12 PM
hangtime you got to be the most ignorant person i've had the pleasure of knowing......

they hit the US not the French...your so called terrorist....what!!! the world trade center didn't go BOOM loud enough for you...but yet you persist talking about the french and irak....


China trades weapons with irak.....N.Korea trades with Irak....France trades with Irak...Germany trades with Irak....and the US of Ignorant dweebs like yourself traded with Irak...durin Iran/Irak war....stop closing your eyes...yes yes open em now...can you see:eek:


start thinkin of n.korea...who says they DO HAVE PLUTONIUM...and who do sell to terrorist...they said it...not me

your eyes still open hangtime....but your ignorance will keep you from understanding...your just gonna keep talking about France
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: muckmaw on February 12, 2003, 01:24:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by SLO
so what your sayin is Bush ain't real:D

I totally agree....but what I think is funny is you all follow what isn't real:p

muckmaw...you already tried with N.Korea during 3 years(1950 to 53)...and promplty got your tulips kicked...you gonna try again.....you lost cause ya couldn't use your atomic toys....like I said....you got nice toys....but ya soldiers suck without those toys:eek: ....sorry for repeatin myself


*laughs*

You're so right, Slo. I could not agree more. Thank god for the Canadian Armed forces, keeping the western hemisphere safe for democracy!

On a more serious note, I have often wondered, do they have "Short" buses in Canada? I can't imagine how else you'd get around, so I always assumed they do.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 12, 2003, 01:33:31 PM
SLO, you enjoying your personal mental masturbation?

If yer lookin to me for a reach-around here, give it up.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 12, 2003, 01:42:22 PM
lmao short-bus....

that was funny....as for keepin it safe...we've done our part....but yours was to get 1/2 the world hating us....western hemisphere that is...and you've done a most excellent job of bein self-centered morons....now 1/2 the world does hate the western hemisphere......not bad for a short bus rider...wouldn't ya say :p


ain't gonna waste no more time on your ignorance hangtime....have fun bein ignorant :eek:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 12, 2003, 01:50:36 PM
About WMD ...
I've spent my whole day farting ina bottle to sent it to Saddam to show this poor mate my unconditionnal support :D

Does anyone know if FedEx can send parcel to Iraq ?

(I won't use french postal service it's unreliable)

I forgot my new sig :

French Drunk Bastard Wanabee
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Rude on February 12, 2003, 01:53:23 PM
SLO is just scared....scared to do whats right.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 12, 2003, 01:55:36 PM
je suis tanner de ces ignorant qui chiale toujour contre la France......il etait temps que je mets l'heure juste avec eux....gangs de bebe:eek:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 12, 2003, 01:56:57 PM
i am rude.....

i'm playin devils advocate with you irgnorant war mongerers.....
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: MANDOBLE on February 12, 2003, 02:24:39 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Soup Nazi
Yeah but that same Marine will ask no questions when protecting the rights of Democracy, even for you Mandoble.;)


I suppose you know that Spain has been under dictatorship from 40s (end of spanish civil war) to 70s (death of general Franco) while being a primary US ally and US military equipment customer at the same time.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 12, 2003, 02:29:39 PM
Quote
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
I suppose you know that Spain has been under dictatorship from 40s (end of spanish civil war) to 70s (death of general Franco) while being a primary US ally and US military equipment customer at the same time.


So, you're saying Spain was as dumb as the People of Iraq for 30 some years?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: muckmaw on February 12, 2003, 02:33:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by SLO
as for keepin it safe...we've done our part....but yours was to get 1/2 the world hating us....western hemisphere that is...and you've done a most excellent job of bein self-centered morons....now 1/2 the world does hate the western hemisphere......not bad for a short bus rider...wouldn't ya say :p


"We've done our part"

OH MY GOD, THAT IS THE BEST LAUGH I'VE HAD ALL WEEK!!! Thank you Slo. Really, no sarcasm. From the bottom of my heart, thanks. Oh Lord, I can't breath!

Meanwhile,  last time I checked, ummmm it was our country that was attacked. I don't recall Canada being referred to as the great Satan.

How many Canadians were killed on 9/11?

Don't worry, Slo. No one's gonna hurt your country...because your what we call a none-event.

Give me a ring when they level that Space Needle thing. We'll talk. Until then, step aside and let your big brother handle this one.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 12, 2003, 02:35:27 PM
ouch :(

Rip are you sure to kown what mean dictature ?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 12, 2003, 02:41:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by straffo
ouch :(

Rip are you sure to kown what mean dictature ?


Nope, don't know what a dic tastes like. (Go away Straffo, the current is swifter downstream :D )
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 12, 2003, 03:06:18 PM
Stop using complex vocabulary with me !

and I don't want to know the meaning of "soap" "shower" and other american invention/abomination !
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 12, 2003, 03:09:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by straffo
Stop using complex vocabulary with me !

and I don't want to know the meaning of "soap" "shower" and other american invention/abomination !


Oh, thought you were asking me if I knew what a dictaster was. :D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 12, 2003, 03:50:16 PM
mummy said long ago that I was not supposed to know that taste :)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: MANDOBLE on February 12, 2003, 04:38:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
So, you're saying Spain was as dumb as the People of Iraq for 30 some years?


What I'm saying is clear, "democracy defense" is and has been just a very poor excuse for US military interventions along the world. For more than 30 years, spaniards have been well outside the "democracy rules", but spanish dictator was an US ally, and USA supported military the spanish dictatorship along these years with no interest at all in what the spanish people would think about the lack of freedom. To be more precise, USA was the first country to support that goverment but later all the european goverments supported it too.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Mathman on February 12, 2003, 04:43:54 PM
Solution:

p.s.  for the overly sensitive Europeans and granola types out there, this is a joke, and it should be taken as such.  If you get your panties in a wad, good, because your squeaking will provide hours of entertainment and laughter from my side of the computer screen
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Habu on February 12, 2003, 06:52:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by muckmaw
"We've done our part"



How many Canadians were killed on 9/11?

Don't worry, Slo. No one's gonna hurt your country...because your what we call a none-event.

Give me a ring when they level that Space Needle thing. We'll talk. Until then, step aside and let your big brother handle this one.


First off SLO is in Quebec the French part of Canada and their opinion on world events is much more like Europe than like the rest to Canada.

Secondly Canadians were killed in 9/11. Lots of them. I know one in particular was a former Ski Patroller from the resort where I am a Ski Patroller (Blue Mountain in Collingwood).

Thirdly. Canada has made massive contributions to every war in the 20th century and was a major reason for the turn of the war in WW1, the taking of Italy in WW2, they had airforce pilots that were the best of the best in all the wars (Bishop, Barker, Buerling etc). They have fought beside the US in every war (and fought in WW1 and 2 well before the US entered) and even in Vietnam many Canadians served.

If you want to bash our stupid corrupt French Canadian Prime Miinister and his government do so, but leave our armed forces (what little is left of them) out of it.

Oh and by the way, France sucks.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 12, 2003, 07:08:54 PM
ok... but if we take over, can I have SLO clean the FDB latrines for oh.... say... eternity?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Habu on February 12, 2003, 07:11:39 PM
lol
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Habu on February 12, 2003, 08:05:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by bounder
Apparently:  appearing as such but not necessarily so.


Funny Bounder how you keep emphasizing the word "apparently" instead of looking at the sentence that follows...


Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems. Without the technical help and collusion from the government of France—Britain’s NATO “ally”—it is improbable that Argentina would have been able to employ its most devastating weapon. [/b]18


I guess if that journal article is not enough to convince you that the French technicians helped the Argentines then there is not much hope you will ever agree that evidence from Iraq is enough to justify miltary action.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Rude on February 12, 2003, 11:13:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by SLO
i am rude.....

i'm playin devils advocate with you irgnorant war mongerers.....


Ya see....you judge others too quickly....I'm not a warmonger....I just don't believe in encouraging bad folks thru appeasement.

You won't be happy until another 3000 or more Americans are dead....it doesn't cost you anything to wait....it will cost us more innocent lives.

To you, 10 years of skirting UN mandates is ok.

The US will do it's best to deal with Iraq, NK and Osama.....all the while you can sit behind your monitor and tell us how wrong we are. Feels good to be you eh?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hades55 on February 13, 2003, 04:06:45 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Furious
hehe.  

Greece next?


Heh, i take it as joke, because we are allies from WWI, WWII,
Korea untill today.
But about little greece you have to remember that it take three
days for hitler to conquer france, 2.5 months to conquer greece.
After we had defeat italians ofcourse.
Greece was the first victorius allie against the axis, if you dont remember. 28 Oct 1940.
Chaurchill had say that << from now on, we shall not say that
the Greeks fight like heroes, but, the heroes fight like Greeks >>.
Consider that we had not tanks, and our fighters was some 20-30
PZLs and with this trush we had some ME-109s blown out of the sky.
Also something not very known, the bigger Ace of UK was fighting
in the greek skies with Hurry. He died here.
He have our respect and our thanks. Paddle was his name.
He had some 52-55 kills. Spring 1941.
He died 2 km from the place where i write to you.
Over the sea of Eleusis.

But, if you want to come you are welcome.
I need some more skulls for my colection :) hehe
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hades55 on February 13, 2003, 04:30:32 AM
==Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems. Without the technical help and collusion from the government of France—Britain’s NATO “ally”—it is improbable that Argentina would have been able to employ its most devastating weapon. [/b]18==

The technicians who helped Argeninians to make Exosets work
was not french. They was Israelis. For Big money.
I wonder, where all of you learn history or news.
And something more, when France was selling S Etedarts and exosets to argentina was not knowing what will happen.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 13, 2003, 09:22:43 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Rude
Ya see....you judge others too quickly....I'm not a warmonger....I just don't believe in encouraging bad folks thru appeasement.

You won't be happy until another 3000 or more Americans are dead....it doesn't cost you anything to wait....it will cost us more innocent lives.

To you, 10 years of skirting UN mandates is ok.

The US will do it's best to deal with Iraq, NK and Osama.....all the while you can sit behind your monitor and tell us how wrong we are. Feels good to be you eh?



rude...you suck.....now little boy...go out yourself and defend me...do you understand that...SHUUUUUUDDDDDUUUUUPPP. ..you little punk bellybutton squeak.....stand guard.....gogogogogogo....kil l kill kill
well move it little girl:rolleyes:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Habu on February 13, 2003, 09:32:11 AM
Quote
Originally posted by SLO
rude...you suck.....now little boy...go out yourself and defend me...do you understand that...SHUUUUUUDDDDDUUUUUPPP. ..you little punk bellybutton squeak.....stand guard.....gogogogogogo....kil l kill kill
well move it little girl:rolleyes:


Ok I officially declare Rude the winner in this debate. After this outburst it is obvious that poor old SLO just does not have any logical arguments and is letting his emotions get the better of him. Like the great country of France he wants everyone to listen to him but when you do you realize he has nothing to say.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 13, 2003, 09:45:30 AM
errr was this a debate....:rolleyes:
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 13, 2003, 10:16:15 AM
No, actually it was a display of intelligence, reasonable judgement, and character...seems you actually "won"!
:D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: SLO on February 13, 2003, 10:41:13 AM
intelligence = relative(i think your stupid)(meme en francais l'epais)

reasonable judgement = perception(in my judgement...your a jerk)

character = do you really now me to define my character rip(here i'll define yours......moron)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 13, 2003, 10:46:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by SLO
intelligence = relative(i think your stupid)(meme en francais l'epais)

reasonable judgement = perception(in my judgement...your a jerk)

character = do you really now me to define my character rip(here i'll define yours......moron)


The voting for next years award doesn't begin for another 363 days, SLO.;)
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Habu on February 13, 2003, 11:04:59 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Hades55
==Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems. Without the technical help and collusion from the government of France—Britain’s NATO “ally”—it is improbable that Argentina would have been able to employ its most devastating weapon. 18==

The technicians who helped Argeninians to make Exosets work
was not french. They was Israelis. For Big money.
I wonder, where all of you learn history or news.
And something more, when France was selling S Etedarts and exosets to argentina was not knowing what will happen. [/B]


Well it was posted where I got my information. Perhaps you could post where you got yours from?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Habu on February 13, 2003, 11:25:21 AM
 :(
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: StSanta on February 13, 2003, 01:00:48 PM
Give the US military to Denmark.

With limited resources, we did wonders back in the Viking era. There are even French prayers saying 'oh save us from the wrath of the Northmen'.

Yanks; lend us a carrier. Let us put our shields on its side and give us a month; the French shall annoy you no more :D.

Sorry Straffo. Hell, we might even be related - my great great great great great great great great great great great great grandfather may have raped your great great great great great great great great great great great great grandmother.

Did I say raped? I meant 'involuntary consentual intercourse'.

I speek PC goodt.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Hangtime on February 13, 2003, 01:20:03 PM
I vote AYE!!

Santa.. nothin woulld warm my cockles more than to see our mothballed ships and hardware placed into the hands of folks like yours. Remember the Free Poles ala WWII?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 13, 2003, 01:24:03 PM
French military history
>
>
>> The Complete Military History of France: Not going to
>> play? Who Gives a Rat's Ass?
>>
>> * 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?"
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Dowding on February 13, 2003, 01:26:27 PM
Already posted Ripsnort.

It was HILARIOUS!
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 13, 2003, 01:50:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Dowding
Already posted Ripsnort.

It was HILARIOUS!


Dang, someone beat me to it! (Dear Diary...):D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: blitz on February 13, 2003, 02:02:34 PM
Ahoi:)

The reasons for attackin Iraq that bush administration is givin us i are just plain rediculous. The USA isn't threathened by iraq in any way.

The world cannot devided into  'The evil and the good' and
'Who's not with us are against us' That's roadkill. World is a little bit more complicated.

USA, as the last remaining Super Power cannot play the 'worlds police man'.  In fact, no single country can do so because there always  own country interests involved which might be very different from many other countries interests.

What we see now is a very short eyed and bad politic by Bush gouvernment.

They try to manipulate  the UN and the nato for their very own interests.

The moment US stated that they will attack iraq with or without the United Nations the whole thing has gone down the tube.

What has to be done is to strenghen the UN on long terms.

Veto rights for the winners of WW2 has to be fall.

Hats off to France , Belgium and Germany for a little resistance.



Talkin about turkey? They torture people on a regular base in their police stations. Iraq killed 5000 kurds? Ask turkey how many they killed the last 10 years.Definately way more than that. These peeps should be kicked out of nato asap.

Regards Blitz

btw. Was to go on a 2 day holyday tommorrow evin. Cancelled it to join Anti iraq war demonstration in Berlin on sat 12:00.
Hope we're at least a few thousand to get our bellybutton frozen  :D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Ripsnort on February 13, 2003, 02:07:39 PM
Quote
Originally posted by blitz
Ahoi:)

The reasons for attackin Iraq that bush administration is givin us i are just plain rediculous. The USA isn't threathened by iraq in any way.

The world cannot devided into  'The evil and the good' and
'Who's not with us are against us' That's roadkill. World is a little bit more complicated.

USA, as the last remaining Super Power cannot play the 'worlds police man'.  In fact, no single country can do so because there're always have  own country interests involved which might be very different from many other countries interests.

What we see now is a very short eyed and bad politic by Bush gouvernment.

They try to manipulate  the UN and the nato for their very own interests.

The moment US stated that they will attack iraq with or without the United Nations the whole thing has gone down the tube.

What has to be done is to strenghen the UN on long terms.

Veto rights for the winners of WW2 has to be fall.

Hats off to France , Belgium and Germany for a little resistance.



Talkin about turkey? They torture people on a regular base in their police stations. Iraq kiiled 5000 kurds? Ask turkey how many they killed the last 10 years. These peeps should be kicked out of nato asap.

Regards Blitz

btw. Was to go on a 2 day holyday tommorrow evin. Cancelled it to join Anti iraq war demonstration in Berlin on sat 12:00.
Hope we're at least a few thousand to get our bellybutton frozen  :D


Why do you think we're going to war Blitz?
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: blitz on February 13, 2003, 02:11:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Why do you think we're going to war Blitz?

You evil, don't ya make jokes on me ;D

Regards Blitz
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: ra on February 13, 2003, 02:15:23 PM
If we aren't careful this thread will go to 3 pages.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 13, 2003, 02:23:53 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Habu
Well it was posted where I got my information. Perhaps you could post where you got yours from?


why should he bother ?
your only reference was flawed


I'll even give a hint : apparently

@ra : I'll do my best :D
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Habu on February 13, 2003, 02:27:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by straffo
why should he bother ?
your only reference was flawed


I'll even give a hint : apparently

@ra : I'll do my best :D


Apparently you do not speak English very well or you would understand the reason for using that word in that particular sentence. And it has nothing to do with your claim of innocence.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 13, 2003, 02:36:55 PM
So I'll give you an usage of apparently :

http://www.skeptic.com/01.2.harris-dead.html

THE SOCIETY FOR THE RECOVERY OF PERSONS APPARENTLY DEAD
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: Habu on February 13, 2003, 02:45:22 PM
Quote
Originally posted by straffo
So I'll give you an usage of apparently :

http://www.skeptic.com/01.2.harris-dead.html

THE SOCIETY FOR THE RECOVERY OF PERSONS APPARENTLY DEAD


See that is the problem when you are not a native English speaker. You do not understand how the type of document you are reading and its language are very much related.

It is not your fault, but a french or german person who learns English will never have the understanding necessary not to come off as a fool occasionally.
Title: A Flame Free Discussion on France
Post by: straffo on February 13, 2003, 03:04:09 PM
We were sending technical help to the Argentinian and the ironice part is that they used to fly with British Airway.

You use one unique source to say : french helped the Argentinian to screw the brit (and frankly this source don't give a single accountable proof)

Did you try to know why some french flottille spent so much time doing fake exocet passes at british fleet ?

Just to show them how they will die ?