|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
The French: Why do they hate us?By Chris Suellentrop Posted Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 4:27 PM PT In the aftermath of Sept. 11, Americans rushed to bookstores and libraries in search of the answer to the question that had been thrust upon them: Why do they hate us? But who knew that we should have been boning up on the history of France, not Islam? A funny thing happened on the way to the war: Our old allies the French, rather than our new Muslim foes, have become the caricatured foreigners of the war on terrorism. The French are tarred in the New York Post, among others, as the leaders of the "Axis of Weasel." National Review's Jonah Goldberg has made "cheese-eating surrender monkeys"—a Groundskeeper Willie line from an episode of The Simpsons—the rallying cry of Francophobes everywhere. After France's ambush of Colin Powell at last week's U.N. Security Council meeting, where the French foreign minister declared that military intervention in Iraq "would be the worst possible solution," it can't be long before someone declares the need for regime change in Paris. The debate over French anti-Americanism centers on the same question as the debate over Islamic radicalism: Do they hate us because of who we are, or what we do? As with the Middle East, the right takes the former tack, arguing that the French can be cowed into submission only by shows of strength. (The president also makes a point of claiming not to care why anyone hates us—least of all the French.) The left, on the other hand, tends to argue that we need to be more solicitous of France's needs. Their argument, in a nutshell: "It's our foreign policy, stupid." Most recently, Eric Alterman laid out the liberal case in this week's cover story for The Nation. Alterman's explanation: The Bush administration's unilateral policies, both before and after 9/11, explain the French distaste for the United States. In fact, the French don't even dislike the United States, Alterman argues. Rather, they dislike its leader. President Bush's religiosity, self-righteousness, and indifference to allies justify France's low opinion. Alterman is essentially saying to Americans what Bush told Iraqis in the State of the Union address: "Your enemy is not surrounding your country—your enemy is ruling your country. And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation." If President Clinton—or even Ronald Reagan—were in charge instead of Busharoo Banzai, the French would embrace America with open arms. It sounds convincing—after all, lots of Europeans have been complaining about Bush of late. But it's not true. The French never really liked the Clinton administration, either. In June 2000, during President Clinton's last year in office, France was the only one (talk about unilateralism) of 107 countries to refuse to sign a U.S. initiative aimed at encouraging democracy around the world. A year earlier, State Department spokesman James Rubin complained, "We do find it puzzling and passing strange that France would spend so much energy and focus so much attention on the danger to them of a strong United States rather than the dangers that we and France together face from countries like Iraq." The French oppose the United States, quite simply, for what it is—the most powerful country on earth. If Britain's "special relationship" with the United States is to pal around with it and work to influence its policies from within, France thinks it has an equally special relationship with the U.S.: Its sacred duty is to check American power by publicly and ostentatiously objecting to it from without. The French are so concerned by the dominance of American power—militarily, economically, culturally, and technologically—that a former French foreign minister felt the need to coin a new word to describe it: hyperpuissance, or "hyperpower." Think of it this way: France thinks the United States has so much power that the French language didn't have a word for it. Much of the French opposition to American power arose after the fall of the Soviet Union made the United States the only power in a unipolar world: According to one poll, the percentage of the French who viewed the United States "with sympathy" dropped from 54 to 35 percent between 1988 and 1996. But French grumbling over U.S. power predates the end of the Cold War, too. As Philip H. Gordon outlined in the National Interest in 2000 (during the Clinton administration), "resentment and frustration" have marked French-American relations since the end of World War II. When Charles de Gaulle became president of the Fifth Republic, he was still resentful that FDR had refused to recognize his Free French resistance over the Vichy regime during the war. De Gaulle decided never to depend on the Americans again, and though he was an ally of the United States, he was an exceptionally cranky one, pursuing détente with the Soviet Union, withdrawing militarily from NATO, and establishing an independent French nuclear force. Perhaps the most astonishing description of the rocky French-American relationship comes from the French diplomat who, in 1983, told the Atlantic that a particular change in U.S. policy "makes us wonder whether we can count on American administrations—just as we've been wondering since Congress refused to endorse the Treaty of Versailles." Americans don't have this sort of historical consciousness—at least, not for anything that happened abroad before World War II. It's as if an American diplomat said, "Well, we had to beat the frogs in the French and Indian War to lay the groundwork for national unity and manifest destiny, and well, we've been beating them ever since." Or, "You know, we've known ever since the XYZ Affair that you couldn't trust the French. That's why we've been sparring with them since the Quasi-War." But history is at the core of the tensions between France and America. Donald Rumsfeld's comment last week about "old Europe" was telling: Americans see France as akin to Portugal, a once-great power now in decline. But as part of its own "special relationship" with the United States, France refuses to cede the world stage to the Americans. French identity is similar to American identity—France sees itself as a great nation worthy of power, the birthplace of democracy, and a culture and system of government that the world would be wise to emulate. Which is why, in the end, France will go along with the Bush administration on Iraq. If France vetoes a Security Council resolution, and the Bush administration goes to war anyway, France will have been proved powerless. But if it accedes to the war after demanding more evidence, it will be able to claim that it influenced American policy—whether it's true or not. Germany will likely stand on principle and oppose the war. But France would never do such a thing. As a U.N. diplomat said last week, "It matters to matter for France."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
I think there is an element of truth to that. The French are very contrary, but like to show they still have influence.
(The comment on Bush was interesting, but the thing about Bush's government is that it provides a focus for French distain of America, rather than being the underlying cause.)
I'd bet France will join l'Anglophones in war against Iraq, partly to show its might and influence in world affairs. Already, Chirac has dispatched an aircraft carrier to the region.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
a question:
why is france still such a prominent member of the world (namely, one of only a small few permanent members of the security council)?
im not trying to make a biased opinion here (at least, with the above question) -- but i just dont honestly understand why france, of all places, is considered a superpower (or "big power") in today's world.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Rob Kamphausen:
a question:
why is france still such a prominent member of the world (namely, one of only a small few permanent members of the security council)?
im not trying to make a biased opinion here (at least, with the above question) -- but i just dont honestly understand why france, of all places, is considered a superpower (or "big power") in today's world.
I think I listed most of the reasons in the opening to this thread, from memory. Much of it is historical (India, Germany, Brazil and Japan have all expressed an interest, but its too tricky to amend the UN rules to allow them to become SC members. All 4 of those countries have valid claims to sit on the SC, but no way would France give up its seat)
But otherwise.....France has extraordinary influence in Afrique (witness the recent French brokered settlement in Cote d'Iviore) and Indo-Chine, primarily because French is the dominant languages in much of those two regions. It is a nuclear power, with a big army. It has a huge economy - with Germany, it is one of the two powerhouses of the EU. It has the world's largest tourism trade, bar none.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,469 Likes: 37
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,469 Likes: 37 |
David Letterman, in the opening monologue for his show just said:
"I understand that the French feel there still isn't enough evidence to invade Iraq, they still want more evidence. The LAST time France waited for more evidence, it rolled through downtown Paris !"
Which was met with wild cheering and applause from the audience, that even astonished Letterman himself. He finally reacted with a "Well alrighty, then... !"
American contempt for the French truly knows no bounds.
I think it largely stems from widespread perception of the French as arrogant, and a widespread knowledge of their contempt for us.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
...its pretty simple France historically as today is apprehensive about committing to stopping trouble, just like WW1 and 2, and now, when Iraq allows the chemicals and bio agents to wreak havoc in the world theyll be ready to jump on board, but of course it will be too late as with the Nazi's, the world was able to repel the Nazi's and Japan just barely, I'm afraid once the pandora's box of weapons of mass distuvtion is opened it will be too late, who will France come beg for help then?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545 |
France hasn't been much since WWI. I think all around the world there is a love-hate mentality when it comes to America. When a country needs help, not just military might, they love us. On the other hand when we set to defend ourselves, they hate us. This country lost 3000 innocent people on 9\11 and we should stand up and do what we need to do to show those whom choose to attack us, we will not sit idle.
When you look at what America has achieved in 226 years there will be those whom hate us for that alone. America is the greatest nation the world has ever known. I'm not ashamed of that. As a matter of fact I'm damn proud of it.
[ 02-08-2003, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Lesbo ]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 680
= 500+ posts
|
|
= 500+ posts
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 680 |
A week ago I was with France in being against a war with Irac. I didn't see the point. I don't blame Irac for Sept. 11th.
Then I had the chance to talk at length to a Gulf War veteran...........I'm not one easily swayed, but he told me quite a lot about Irac and I find him trust worthy
Now my opinion is Fuck Sadamm......those people need liberation....and I just hope the aftermath doesn't make a vacuum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545 |
I wanna go back to the start of this board. The French are no world power. They are a speed bump at best today. I was amazed at how they, the French, stood on the side of the road and let Hitler march in with no fight at all! Yep, "coward" does fit. I saw a lot of people cry though. I love the History Channel. A picture is worth a thousand words. I wonder what WWII video clips are worth when it comes to words? How quick the French forget. Oh well.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 43
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 43 |
Just from my personal experience from visiting France--the young Parisans were very rude. Here I was, a young American girl just trying to study a Humanities course there, and they were just ugly to me. Now, I found the elderly people and middle-aged people outside of Paris (namely Dijon) quite polite. Maybe its just a genteration mentaility. The leaders and youth of urban France--without a doubt the loudest voices over there--are very anti-American weasles.
Sonhaven, I'd love to hear the points the Gulf War veteran made to you. You might want to post them on a more relavent topic so, but I'll check them all to see what he had to say. I had a favorite uncle in the Navy during the Gulf War and it has been hinted that he might be going to Iraq in the next few months.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Lesbo:
I wanna go back to the start of this board. The French are no world power. They are a speed bump at best today. I was amazed at how they, the French, stood on the side of the road and let Hitler march in with no fight at all! Yep, "coward" does fit. I saw a lot of people cry though. I love the History Channel. A picture is worth a thousand words. I wonder what WWII video clips are worth when it comes to words? How quick the French forget. Oh well.....
You haven't read a thing I wrote, have you?
Not too many countries can step in and stop a civil war within the space of weeks, as France just did with Cote d'Ivoire.
As for the Blitzkrieg, the French get a bad rap: all of continental Europe got blown away by fast moving tank offensive. The French relied upon the Marginot Line, which was overwhelmed with paratroopers. Only the English avoided invasion, because of the Channel.
The US had the Atlantic and Australia had the other side of the world as a barrier: otherwise, both of our countries would have fallen just as rapidly before such a novel form of warfare.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Lesbo:
France hasn't been much since WWI. I think all around the world there is a love-hate mentality when it comes to America. When a country needs help, not just military might, they love us. On the other hand when we set to defend ourselves, they hate us. This country lost 3000 innocent people on 9\11 and we should stand up and do what we need to do to show those whom choose to attack us, we will not sit idle.
And you avenged your 3000 in Afghanistan. Please draw the link between 11 Sept and Iraq for me.
The love-hate relationship you describe is well-documented: people generally admire US freedoms and liberties, but detest US foreign policy. As I have said here many times before, after 11 Sept, the American people now have no reason to be ignorant of the effects of American foreign policy.
quote:
When you look at what America has achieved in 226 years there will be those whom hate us for that alone. America is the greatest nation the world has ever known. I'm not ashamed of that. As a matter of fact I'm damn proud of it.
I quite admire American patriotism, myself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by britneyspearsatemyshorts:
...its pretty simple France historically as today is apprehensive about committing to stopping trouble, just like WW1 and 2, and now, when Iraq allows the chemicals and bio agents to wreak havoc in the world theyll be ready to jump on board, but of course it will be too late as with the Nazi's, the world was able to repel the Nazi's and Japan just barely, I'm afraid once the pandora's box of weapons of mass distuvtion is opened it will be too late, who will France come beg for help then?
The French have seen their power in the world generally but also in their playground of Africa seriously undermined through the exercise of US power, and they need to get over that: a lot of French action recently seems to be motivated by the intention of being contrary for the sake of it. I think the French will end up coming onside, personally, otherwise their status as a world power will be reduced to irrelevancy. If you're not in the game, you're not a player.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
plus the love for Jerry Lewis is just creepy......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
or so the French would have us to believe!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
a lot of French action recently seems to be motivated by the intention of being contrary for the sake of it. I think the French will end up coming onside, personally, otherwise their status as a world power will be reduced to irrelevancy. If you're not in the game, you're not a player.
i agree. but i dont think thats anything new -- thus my question about their current high-ranking status.
aside from simple consistancy, could the answer really be that france part of the council because its better than the rest of the choices, and not necessarily that it supports its own claim?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
and now, France and germany oppose planning for Turkey's defense, I say kick em outta NATO.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
both of whom are more than likely entirely doing it for economical reasons (above and beyond france's apparent anti-american way of life), all while hiding behind a humanitarian visage. here, check this out. hizzow!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 11
1 post
|
|
1 post
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 11 |
France, as much as England, could be considered a European "parent" of America. I think that most of the strife is akin to a household with a teenager. No matter how cool everybody is most of the time, sooner or later, somebody wants to punch somebody.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
quote:
Originally posted by Jack B Everywhere:
France, as much as England, could be considered a European "parent" of America.
north america, perhaps. i.e; canada. as far as the states go, france has nothing on england in terms of "parenting." yes, there are areas of the south east that are firmly afixed with a taste of french culture, however the english dominance on the country is more than apparent.
even still, if you want to contend that france helped birth the states, what type of horrible parental figure is it now?
quote:
Originally posted by Jack B Everywhere:
I think that most of the strife is akin to a household with a teenager. No matter how cool everybody is most of the time, sooner or later, somebody wants to punch somebody.
this, i really just dont understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 11
1 post
|
|
1 post
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 11 |
Culturally, England left more of an imprint (I suspect that's to our detriment as Americans), that's true. But the philosophical and economic foundations of the revolution came from France. The bulk of Americans at that time might have been more English than French, but in character, I think that the Founding Fathers were more the product of France than of England.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
I totally agree with that. The French Revolution positively inspired the founding fathers of the US: bad governance from England negatively inspired the founding fathers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
...in fact just to take that one step further, France and the US are very very similar in a number of ways, which might account for why the two countries have abrasive relations.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545 |
The problem I have with France is their blind eye to history. Hitler should have never reached the point he did. He broke one little rule after the next until he became so powerful no one could stop him. Lets also not forget the stab in the back the French pulled. Do you know what country France stuck a knife in? I think it would be Poland. I'm not sure but I do know they had an agreement to stand with this country and then France signed with Germany behind everyone's backs and they fell in less than six weeks once Germany turned on them.
The more we let other nations break UN regulations the more chance we will allow history to repeat itself. I admit "coward" is to strong a word but at the same time the French allowed Germany to become a super power. The more nations with violent leaders we allow to arm themselves the less safe the world becomes for all of us. If there should be a nation that should understand this simple fact one would think France would be at the top of the list.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Lesbo:
The problem I have with France is their blind eye to history. Hitler should have never reached the point he did. He broke one little rule after the next until he became so powerful no one could stop him. Lets also not forget the stab in the back the French pulled. Do you know what country France stuck a knife in? I think it would be Poland. I'm not sure but I do know they had an agreement to stand with this country and then France signed with Germany behind everyone's backs and they fell in less than six weeks once Germany turned on them.
I think you're getting France mixed up with Russia. France and England guaranteed Poland's borders about 6 months before the Germans invaded Poland. When that happened, France and England declared war on Germany. France was overwhelmed in the Blitzkrieg, and the First Expeditionary Army, sent from England, was cut off and had to escape through Dunkirk.
Russia had signed a non-aggression pact with Germany -the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (to everyone's surprise because of the ideological differences between the two countries) which Germany later broke when it invaded Russia.
quote:
The more we let other nations break UN regulations the more chance we will allow history to repeat itself. I admit "coward" is to strong a word but at the same time the French allowed Germany to become a super power.
Huh? Germany became a power despite massive reparations from WW1, a hyperinflation problem and a global depression which knocked everyone flat. I dare say the French were too busy tryng to sort their own economy out, but more to the point, don't underestimate German resourcefulness. The fact that the Germans were able to recover so quickly from a devastating war and from everything else just shows how capable they are.
quote:
The more nations with violent leaders we allow to arm themselves the less safe the world becomes for all of us. If there should be a nation that should understand this simple fact one would think France would be at the top of the list.
Former UN weapons inspector Richard Butler agrees with you and says that the developed world, such as France, should set an example and disarm its weapons of mass destruction, and so should the US.
You see, the argument amongst these smaller states is that if the big powers have nukes, then why can't we since we are their sovereign equals? (Why is why the Non-proliferation Treaty is so important, incidentally.) North Korea certainly shows how much weight a country can carry if it has nukes: NK has a shithouse economy, a starving population and is in the arse end of China, yet it growls and grumbles and the world pays attention. And no one can touch them because they'll rain fire on Seoul or Tokyo.
See the attraction to tinpot dictators elsewhere?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
quote:
Originally posted by Jack B Everywhere:
Culturally, England left more of an imprint (I suspect that's to our detriment as Americans), that's true..
ill go on record to profoundly disagree with the detriment aspects of that comment.
quote:
Originally posted by Jack B Everywhere:
But the philosophical and economic foundations of the revolution came from France. The bulk of Americans at that time might have been more English than French, but in character, I think that the Founding Fathers were more the product of France than of England.
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
I totally agree with that. The French Revolution positively inspired the founding fathers of the US: bad governance from England negatively inspired the founding fathers.
a french revolution did occur at a similar time as the american, sure. there are some similar schools of thought, sure. franklin was able to stir up anti-british sentiment in france and convince their help, sure.
but does a mutual (at the time) hatred of britain make france an american parent? or a step brother? (preferably a cousin. a distant cousin.)
we drive on the right side of the road and were given great icons like gambit, the lovable, card-tossing mutant. but thats prolly all ill concede.
still, i dont understand how that gets us to where we are now with your parental theory.
quote:
Former UN weapons inspector Richard Butler agrees with you and says that the developed world, such as France, should set an example and disarm its weapons of mass destruction, and so should the US.
as does that little boy from superman IV
but then... who will stom the atomic man?
certainly not france.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545 |
The Blitzkrieg became a reality because those in Europe let Hitler time and time again break resolution after resolution, much like Iraq is doing today. Hitler was a 2-bit dictator wanna be until around 1937-'38. By then it was to late. How many resolutions have been passed because the UN allow Iraq to get by with non-compliance to UN demands. Now tell me why that is? Perhaps there is money being made selling weapons to Iraq by a few UN countries. Hummmm, I wonder.
Also, I have to question why Germany, France, Russia, and China do not want to protect a fellow UN member, Turkey? Also, the longer Germany, France, Russia, and China hold off military action the more time the Iraq military will have to move into civilian areas. If there are high civilian loss of life these four countries should shoulder the blame.
[ 02-11-2003, 05:39 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Lesbo ]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Lesbo:
The Blitzkrieg became a reality because those in Europe let Hitler time and time again break resolution after resolution, much like Iraq is doing today. Hitler was a 2-bit dictator wanna be until around 1937-'38. By then it was to late.
No the Blitzkrieg became a reality because of German ingenuity. Even when appeasement failed Hitler still went and did what he wanted (invade Poland, attack Russia and conquer France).
quote:
How many resolutions have been passed because the UN allow Iraq to get by with non-compliance to UN demands. Now tell me why that is? Perhaps there is money being made selling weapons to Iraq by a few UN countries. Hummmm, I wonder.
The only country recently busted selling weapons to Iraq was Tajikstan, which denied selling (but clearly did sell) a radar system to Iraq.
Incidentally, I do agree with your argument about UN resolutions, and note that they are equally applicable to Israel. Israel has defied UN resolutions to withdraw from Palestinian and Syrian territory for decades. This is another European and Arab argument: if you're going to cause a fuss about not meeting UN resolutions, why not do the same with Israel?
quote:
Also, I have to question why Germany, France, Russia, and China do not want to protect a fellow UN member, Turkey? Also, the longer Germany, France, Russia, and China hold off military action the more time the Iraq military will have to move into civilian areas. If there are high civilian loss of life these four countries should shoulder the blame.
Russia and China have no reason to protect Turkey - they have no military alliance with the Turks. Being fellow members of the UN means nothing: the US and Iraq are both members of the UN. Germany and France are another matter, as they are in NATO with Turkey.
Also your logic again makes no sense: 4 countries which refuse to participate in a war should shoulder the blame for civilian casualties?!? WTF?!?!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Rob Kamphausen:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jack B Everywhere:
[qb]a french revolution did occur at a similar time as the american, sure. there are some similar schools of thought, sure. franklin was able to stir up anti-british sentiment in france and convince their help, sure.
but does a mutual (at the time) hatred of britain make france an american parent? or a step brother? (preferably a cousin. a distant cousin.)
we drive on the right side of the road and were given great icons like gambit, the lovable, card-tossing mutant. but thats prolly all ill concede.
still, i dont understand how that gets us to where we are now with your parental theory.
The French Revolution certainly inspired the American Revolution, with the emphasis on "Liberte, Equalite, Fraternite". While Americans speak English, the political undertones of the US constitution are profoundly French. Voltaire and Robiespierre's democratic notions are self-evident in the US constitiution.
(I'm a bit surprised I didn't recognise this before, but I was led astray by the English language bit.)
[ 02-12-2003, 03:26 AM: Message edited by: Dave ]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
again, i dont see how a mutual hatred (at the time) of the british shows a parental connection of america to france.
the american revolution certainly shared similarities and even inspiration to that of the french revolution, but id think there's a very strong "vice versa" to follow, which shows a great "parental" relationship in reverse.
further, for every french-influenced instance in the US fore-father's and their doctrines, there are certainly dozens of equally staunch british influences.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Rob Kamphausen:
again, i dont see how a mutual hatred (at the time) of the british shows a parental connection of america to france.
the american revolution certainly shared similarities and even inspiration to that of the french revolution, but id think there's a very strong "vice versa" to follow, which shows a great "parental" relationship in reverse.
further, for every french-influenced instance in the US fore-father's and their doctrines, there are certainly dozens of equally staunch british influences.
Like what?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 545 |
Some people just don't get it. No wonder this country is a reality. God Bless America! Go Yanks!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
some british influences on early america: (which still isnt answering my questions) - above and beyond all else, language
- most all of american's initial millitary strategies or planning
- journalism
- criminal systems (sans the king)
- american law (based mostly on british "common law")
- most all of jefferson's "federalist papers"
- religious beliefs and value (that king james guy, and his bible)
- architectural design
- colonies
- the nominclature of territories (some of which exist to this day, in new england, new york, etc).
- fashion
- art
im not denying a french influence (nor would i a german or spanish one). and, yes, obviously an anti-british revolution in america would resemble an anti-british revolution in france. there are indisputable similarities, and direct, influenced results in both directions (as pointed out).
however i dont think its a fair assesment to state that france is even remotely the "father" to america that england was.
those similarities, combined with a decline and rebellion of british culture through the 18th century does not instantly link up france and america "by default"
as said, france, if anything, would be much more the brother or cousin -- or perhaps, france was the drunken father that ran off years ago (with that german trollop!).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
All of those things are part of the deal (althought the Federalist papers are more French than English, from what little I know of them, in their philosophy: and the English don't have "states and "territories" as there is no formal division of Great Britain into sub-states (setting aside Tony Blair's recent initiatives) - its the French who have "provinces"), but the emphasis in US politics, and "philosophy" is upon liberties, as enshrined in your constitution.
American and French laws give you the ability to do anything, except what the law prescribes. The British Commonwealth gives you the right to do anything the law allows you to do. Tthat's a fundamental historical difference in the essence of the UK and the US.
American revolutionaries were inspired by the French: the shared idealogy was one of the reasons why the French were willing to help the Americans in the War of Independence.
Language is a really big factor, I agree - you can thank England for that. The legal system is important in defining a country, too, and the US legal system is more closely aligned with the English common law than the French civil code. But politics is the other big factor, and you guys are pure French on that point.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826
cobra kai 15000+ posts
|
|
cobra kai 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 45,826 |
before i go digging thru all my references to counter with all british political and/or philisophical influences on the american life... (and i loathe researching stuff -- specifically my studies)
what are you actually saying? that, after each of the british items i listed, you still feel france is equal (to england) in terms of "parenting" the US? is it a 3-to-1 split (france being 1/3 the influence that england was)? 25-to-1?
and, if yer basing this belief merely on similar idealologies (as both rebelled from england), does that make ireland or scottland a parent to france?
[ 02-13-2003, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: Rob Kamphausen ]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
I'm looking at the fundamental issue of how your country works and what its underlying philosophy is:
-shift of governance by the people for the people (French concept),
-how this is enshrined in a constitution (French concept)
-with inalienable rights to all citizens (French concept),
-of a republic (French concept)
-led by a President (French concept),
-and how this was established and is supportable by armed revolution (French initiative - one could say Corsican but no-one remembers them).
The British don't have a written constitution; its governance by a representative democracy derived from the power of the royal family and not the people; it is not a republic; armed revolt is treason even against a tyrannous government. This is shared by all British Commonwealth countries (except those which are now republics). You share with the English a language and a system of law, but the fundamental philosophy comes from France.
I'm certain that its historical - the timing to the French Revolution is too close: Robiespierre and Voltaire were too influential at the time to be ignored.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,342
Peacock Teaser 3000+ posts
|
|
Peacock Teaser 3000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,342 |
For the record...this e-mail I'm posting is meant to be humorous.
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 ever 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
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,539
I'm just sayin' 10000+ posts
|
|
I'm just sayin' 10000+ posts
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
