French Warfare History - Page 3

Arshune · 2003-02-13, 09:59 PM

In all my time making fun of french people, I have never seen so thorough a punk nor a throwdown of a harder core. TOP NOTCH! Right now they're probably all saying:

"Nous sommes le sux0rz."

Or is sux0rz feminine...?

Edit: Upon reading this post, I even called myself a nerd.

Lexington_Steele · 2003-02-14, 01:24 AM

Originally posted by Bighoss
cultures were too different at the time. They evolved into the french but they were a Barbarian tribe at first. Franks and French are different

French culture is very different than it was 200 years ago, but they were french then and french now. So which aspect of their culture makes the french french, and the franks not french?

So if the french got less smelly would they be any less french?

JacenX · 2003-02-14, 04:54 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/14/opinion/14LEVI.html (read that

)

Originally posted by Manitou
Gaellic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by, of all people, an Italian.

So we lost the gaellic wars but Charlemagne doesn't count, interesting

After the Revolution some countries decided to attack us while France was pure chaos, but we won. Some years later Napoleon came and created a little empire for more than 10 years. We won a lot of wars against almost everyone, but Napoleon was quite crazy and he decided to go to Russia... Well you all know what happened after. (In the other hand it seems Hitler didn't know, so why should you?)

I'm quite afraid by what i see from USA, are newspaper, republican senators and other people saying what they say about France cause they really hate us, or cause they're too stupid to see that not only France but 75% of the european people are against war in Iraq?

"French people are smelly". Funny, i heard that in Brazil too... it seems it comes from the picture america (south and north) got from french people coming from Europe in boats in the XVIII century. Now i ll agree with you in a point : having so much good perfumes is quite suspicious :o

"French are cowards". Well, after our 1,6 millions dead in the WW1, we were quite traumatized. Unfortunatly ou leaders were traumatized suckers with no tactical sense. Ironically before WW2 de Gaulle wrote a book about that, and how our army had bad strategies in the 30s... unfortunatly he was quite right. Our ashaming "Maginot line" was "sod***zed" by the nazi forces, the rest of our army had to go backwards until beaches in the north. Many died, fortunatly many were saved by british ships, but we lost all the equipment we still had as the brits couldn't take it in the boats. To make things best, UK destroyed all our remaining fleet in Mers-El-Kebir, killing more than thousand french sailors. "Ho, thanks brits, you are wonderfull allies, now we re still more motived to fight with you"

. Marechal Petain, a 80 years old crazy man, last Hero of the WWI still alive, was called by some ppl to "save France"... He decided to surrender, wich was accepted as many people didn't want to fight anymore, principally cause UK was (logically) very very bad seen...
But in fact some still fighted and gave their life for France, of course, this would have been irrevelent without the americans sacrifices.

Say whatever you want, but we helped you against UK.

You helped our Ass two times in the 20th century. Does this mean that now, like those silly government from the Eastern Europe, we should say yes to whatever you say? Come on, we went with you (symbolically of course, but what do you expect from a lil 60 millions ppl country? ) in almost every recent conflict from Gulf War in 91 to Afghanistan in 2001 passing by Bosnia and Kosovo. But, then Bush came with this idea of attacking Iraq.
And he doesn't even say what? There s no proof they are links between Iraq and Al qaeda, wich is for us, the biggest threat, just before come North Korea...
Come on, Hawks are like "Iraq should gave proofs that we don't have any proofs against them". Saddam is bad, Saddam is ugly, Saddam is even worst than that. But at the moment, war is not the only solution we have to kick his ass. It will take some time, but at least we'll have chance to show to the muslims we haven't anything against them, and we'll have a chance to build a democracy in Iraq, and maybe then in other countries. Now, if really there's no choice we'll go there, but we'll not bomb civilians just cause "may be 10 years ago an al qaeda terrorist did a tourist trip in Iraq"... And we'll not bomb civilians to get more oil....

So i must say i'm quite disappointed with US attitude atm, you are supposed to defend democracy but you see yoursel as the world cowboy who are the only ones able to see what s good and what s bad (Ho yeah, omg, Kyoto protocol was a real bad thing bleeehhh )

Just try to listen to what Yurop and your french friends are saying.

Then if you support and immediate attack against Iraq, i'll ask you to give us back Statue of Liberty cause we don't share anymore the same values :o

The funny thing is, there this huge mediatic attack against France just cause we don't agree in how and when to use military power against Saddam... This scares me, do american people really dislike France?

P.S: Sorry for the bad english, i'm french :o

mistled · 2003-02-14, 05:18 PM

I'll go ahead and warn you. You are in the wrong forum to be defending France.

First off, asking for a present back is rude, no matter the reason. Saying something like that merely perpetuates the idea that the French are rude.

Second, no one is asking France to do anything. France could have agreed to disagree with the US and simply said that its forces would not participate in the attack. France still would have been labeled as cowards, but we'd get over it. The problem is that the French and Germans are trying to stop the US from defending itself. If Saddam ever gets nuclear weapons or a chance to use chemical weapons against the US, he will do it, there is no doubt about that for anyone who has been following this man's history for the past ten years. The US either strikes him soon, or we just sit back and wait to die. It's a very simple concept. The American people's current anger towards France is that they see France as attampting to help people who want to kill us.

If Iraq was building weapons with the intent of killing you and the US told you to sit still and chill quietly, how would you feel about it??

Navaron · 2003-02-14, 05:36 PM

It is nice to finally see a french person around here to give the forums some depth.

"do american people really dislike France? "

I have to say that many of us do.

"And he doesn't even say what? There s no proof they are links between Iraq and Al qaeda,"

Yes there is. It's out there, hell some of it has been posted to the UNSEC. France simply refuses to use force. Ever.

"you are supposed to defend democracy"

We will defend ourselves first. You say the French are defending democracy also. What allows democracy? Strength and freedom. If the French are so pro freedom, why are they threatening Veto on NATO to protect Turkey's borders?

"war is not the only solution we have to kick his ass. It will take some time, but at least we'll have chance to show to the muslims we haven't anything against them, and we'll have a chance to build a democracy in Iraq"

So we're supposed to ask Saddam to just give up his power? I don't see him just retiring.

BTW - "Kyoto protocol was a real bad thing bleeehhh"

Yeah it was. The whole thing regulates US industry, even though over 90% of the polution in the world comes from 2 and 3rd world countries. What's the point of regulating the cleanest most efficient industries - those in North America - while not doing any thing about those who actually do the polluting. Yeah, I can see why we didn't sign that.

Anyway, it takes balls to come out in a forum like this, so you've got a pair, that's for sure.

ABRAXAAS · 2003-02-14, 06:05 PM

Originally posted by {BOHICA}mistled
I'll go ahead and warn you. You are in the wrong forum to be defending France.

it??

Hey dont go there dont take part in a thread dissin french and then try to say there not aloud to post here that seems verey inapropriate.

you guys are bashing the french , expect altleast someone to stand up for themselves

Navaron · 2003-02-14, 06:17 PM

Yet again, Abrax proves he's a moron. He wasn't saying don't post, he was giving him a heads up. It's nice to know if you're walking into a shit storm.

JacenX · 2003-02-14, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by {BOHICA}Navaron

Anyway, it takes balls to come out in a forum like this, so you've got a pair, that's for sure.

Thanks :o
Well i'll like sharing my point of view and principally knowing what other ppl think, that s why i'm here.

I'll try to answer point by point...

"I'll go ahead and warn you. You are in the wrong forum to be defending France."
Well, should i be defending France in a pro-France forum? (Yes, there are pro france forums! :o )

"First off, asking for a present back is rude, no matter the reason. Saying something like that merely perpetuates the idea that the French are rude."
It was a joke, and i find it less rude than all your bad jokes about we being antisemetistis, we being cowards, we being this and that, old "cliches" in fact...

"Second, no one is asking France to do anything. France could have agreed to disagree with the US and simply said that its forces would not participate in the attack. France still would have been labeled as cowards, but we'd get over it. The problem is that the French and Germans are trying to stop the US from defending itself. If Saddam ever gets nuclear weapons or a chance to use chemical weapons against the US, he will do it, there is no doubt about that for anyone who has been following this man's history for the past ten years. The US either strikes him soon, or we just sit back and wait to die. It's a very simple concept. The American people's current anger towards France is that they see France as attampting to help people who want to kill us."

I agree with you : the NATO veto was dumb.

Now I do believe that the people in real danger, atm, are the Iraqis, cuz they're sure to get some "high precision tactical laser guided by gps and shit bombs", jsut beacause recon will mistake a bunker and a school...
We don't want to help Saddam, we want to protect Iraquis, that s why the only arguement i accept for war atm is "We should free the iraquis". For sure many of them are in a bad way... but the problem is we're not sure, are we going to bomb and kill more of them just to check if we were right? I have to admit i'd not have the balls to take such a hard decision, in the other hands sometimes we have to act.
Actually, i'm really "happy" now, cause what you say is something I didn't get at all, even by trying to read nytimes, and other americans news.
I really didn't think you see Saddam Hussein as such a threat. For you, Saddam is a danger and we should bomb him. For us, european, and not only France (just have a look at polls), the principal threat is far to be Saddam Hussein. We're anxious (as i said it) about Al quaeda, about North Korea etc.
Here, in Europe, we see Saddam Hussein as a little dictator, who had his ass heavily kicked 10 years ago, while he was supposed to own "The 4th biggest army in the world". Plus, since 10 years he was under constant UN and US survey. So we really find it hard to see Saddam Hussein as such a Threat. The link with al quaeda? Well, "everyone" know Iraq s regime is the only
arab 100 % laic and secular regime atm, it's hard for us to believe he has an actual link with such a fanatical like Bin Laden. The only thing they have in common is the fact they're both arabs...
I'll add another things... In Europe we're very laic, secular etc, we like to separate clearly politics and religion. Seeing Bush, in his "crusade", scare us. We're like "wtf? we're not in 11th century! Does Bush want, like Bin Laden, to make this become artificially a civilization war?". Last example i see was about Columbia tragic accident. Bush spoke about how those 7 astronauts would be welcomed by the creator blablabla. What about all the iraquis civilians he's going to kill?
Then we see him as a wanna be cowboy. "You're with us (and thus you do everything we do) or you aren't with us". Well, can u believe, and it's not a joke, that we maybe allies and disagree in how to handle a problem? Can't we open our muthes without being insulted? Do you find normal to say the president of an allied country is "Saddam's bitch"? I don't. Ha, let me add another thing. Staline and Mao were great fans of this "With us or against us" theory :sarcastic:

So again, we don(t see Iraq as a threat, thus we don't see why we should take the risk of killing them. Worst, we don't have an idea of how the muslmims will react to this attack. Many in Europe are afraid to transform more young muslims in fanatical islamists ready to bomb themselves to rejoin Allah's kingdom. And this is a real problem.

We have the impression Bush don't see how critical is the situation there, how will arabs react when we'll bomb iraquis civil "to free them"? And i'm not talking of the iraquis who will be actually free with the help of America, i'm talking about those muslims who are near to hate America and are open to all kind of manipulation coming from Terrorist. Don't you think the attack of Iraq by USA will be an excellent way to "proof" that his is a civilization war?
Call us whatever you want, but we believe we're actually helping you. You see us as people who don't want to let you protect yourself. We see you as a great but hurted Nation, who's blinded by its sadness and don't see how worst the things will be if they play with their guns as they want to.

"If Iraq was building weapons with the intent of killing you and the US told you to sit still and chill quietly, how would you feel about it??"
As you, but seeing that US was our ally for more than 200 years i'd think a little about what more than 150 millions friendly persons are saying.

"do american people really dislike France? "

"I have to say that many of us do. "

Well, that s a shame, but as many European dislike americans, i can only say we'll stop this bullshit by knowing each other. With internet i met a lot of nice american people, and this helped me changing my mind.

""And he doesn't even say what? There s no proof they are links between Iraq and Al qaeda,"
Yes there is. It's out there, hell some of it has been posted to the UNSEC. France simply refuses to use force. Ever. "
I already spoke about al qaeda and IRaq link, but i'll add something. We Europeans, hate to see how USA try to manipulate information. How do you want to look like trusty, when Powel shows 10 years old photoes, and praise a britain paper which is a copy of a 12 years old american student report totally irrelevent? (even the gramar fault were copied...) .

We don't have the great US forces, but we do what we can, in Gulf war our one of our Aircraft carrier was there as some other stuff, in Bosnia and Kosovo we used mirages 2000, and our aeronaval task force (with the Foch carrier, a nuclear sub and some frigates), in Afganistan we used our newest (and first european) nuclear carrier, the Charles de Gaulle which permited more than 700 missions from recon to bombing.

I really don't see how you could see us as people who never use force.

Again, may i remember you, we're far to be able to have such an army like you...

"We will defend ourselves first. You say the French are defending democracy also. What allows democracy? Strength and freedom. If the French are so pro freedom, why are they threatening Veto on NATO to protect Turkey's borders?"
I agree with this one, NATO veto was dumb. (Even if an israeli friend me today patriot anti missiles are a joke wichch couldn't defend Israel from Iraqi scuds in 91)

"So we're supposed to ask Saddam to just give up his power? I don't see him just retiring."
We're supposed to pressionate Saddam, to force him to destroy all his mass destruction weapons, and to show the world we praise every kind of lifes, from americans to arabs... What you said is horrible "better them than me". I can't accept this from someone with good education to say such a thing. We're supposed to be the most civilzed blablabla, we have to show the example, trying to solve the issue in civilizated ways. If you want to keep the "fear us lil arabs with unvaluable lifes, we have bigger guns, we deserve to life in a decent way and you don't" stay tuned to watch more WTCs in america.

"The whole thing regulates US industry, even though over 90% of the polution in the world comes from 2 and 3rd world countries. What's the point of regulating the cleanest most efficient industries - those in North America - while not doing any thing about those who actually do the polluting. Yeah, I can see why we didn't sign that."

USA = 40% of the world polution.
Actually, I'm french brazilian, so as a brazilian i'll say you that lot of unclean industries in the 3rd world countries belong directly or indirectly to americans company. Thanks a lot for supporting our economy btw. Lol, just look at the maquilladoras. In the us parts they're 21th century buildings with 2 toilets by person, while in mexico they're 10th old century buildings, with 1 toilet for 200 peeps. Come on, give me a break

Then if you don't want to change your way of production, just make your big enormous cars use less gas, like ours. It could be usefull for our children. And who knows, maybe you'll not need anymore Iraqui oil...

ABRAXAAS · 2003-02-14, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by {BOHICA}Navaron
Yet again, Abrax proves he's a moron. He wasn't saying don't post, he was giving him a heads up. It's nice to know if you're walking into a shit storm.

Shut up you little cocksuckin bitch im gettin sick of your bitchy little ass, you no longer have the right to speak to me.

And on that note I will remove myslef from these proceedings

JacenX · 2003-02-14, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by ABRAXAAS
Shut up you little cocksuckin bitch im gettin sick of your bitchy little ass, you no longer have the right to speak to me.

And on that note I will remove myslef from these proceedings

Say me you are american, PLEASE :o

Arshune · 2003-02-14, 07:04 PM

Few points I'd like to make-

The only reason the Iraqi people are in danger from bombing would be that Saddam refuses to evacuate his cities when he knows he'll be attacked, he puts civilians in MILITARY BUNKERS specifically to make the US look like a bunch of gung-ho trigger fiends.

All those countries opposed to war in Iraq are entitled to their opinions, but they should really express them by keeping their nose out of the whole mess. You don't think he's a threat? Fine, then leave him alone, the people who do will take care of it.

Washington needs to take its head out of its collective ass, North Korea is threatening to start a nuclear war and is suspected to have missiles that can reach the Western United States. Iraq is merely hiding some nerve gas that can't get anywhere near us. Anyone else think that's just a little bit out of order?

Edit: I should also note that I think the French are on to something, war with Iraq will cost money, something the American economy REALLY FRIGGIN NEEDS right now. They're just helping us in their own unintentional way.

Sputty · 2003-02-14, 07:04 PM

Abrax is CDN

ABRAXAAS · 2003-02-14, 07:14 PM

Im candian

I know thats not verey canadian of me but He's been on my ass since I got here and even now that ive been being good he still takes every chance he can get to cut me down and even a well tempered polite canadian like me has to snap sometime

mistled · 2003-02-14, 08:27 PM

The US is not 40% of the world's population. There are 6 billion people on the planet. 287 million of them are American. (source) That's a little under 5%.

Like was mentioned, the US doesn't plan to attack civilians. But civilians will die. They always do in war. Such the saying, "war is hell."

I'm glad you agree about the vetoes.

You're correct that we see Saddam as a threat. I think part of the problem in where people are looking. We are looking at a couple of things. One is Saddam's potential at getting WMDs in the future. We see this as a great enough possibility to warrant removing him from power. Especially since he has done nothing but lie about his weapon programs for over a decade.
Two is his potential to help terrorists. While I believe that he already has, you can't deny that a regime with that strong a hatred for the US would love to help terrorists strike the US, especially if they think they can get away with it. After all, they wouldn't be attacking the US directly, so why would we attack them?? We simply see no reason to let him continue to lie to the world until he gets enough technology to release anthrax or smallpox into LA or somewhere.

On to Korea. Now I personally don't know this, but neither does anyone else except the North Korean leaders. I don't think they will attack anyone with their nukes. You only announce that you have nukes for two reasons.
One is for your own defense. Much like MAD between the US and Russia, by saying you have nukes, you tell anyone who plans to attack you that you can retaliate with extreme prejudice.
Two is as a political bargaining chip. They come to the UN and basically try to bully themselves some leverage, making threats for aid of some sort. It's this one that I think North Korea is doing now.
The people to be afraid of are the one's who get nukes and don't tell anyone. They are the people who will actually use them. What better way to attack an enemy than with a much greater weapon than they think you have?? Once Korea announced that they were publicly breaking the treaty, they didn't bother me anymore. It's the nations that break the treaties, but tell you that they aren't that you should be worried about.

Arshune · 2003-02-14, 09:36 PM

You should be very worried about Korea, they've gone so far as to reject U.N. authority over them and have also stated that they will wage war with the US unless we comply to their terms. I guess someone forgot to tell them that being able to reach the western limits of the country doesn't exactly compare with being able to sink their entire peninsula.

Edit: I should mention that the "statements" I'm referring to are things their officials have said to numerous news agencies. Korea is making public threats, while Saddamn is practicing reluctant compliance. One of the reason we're going after him is his defiance in 1998, something that Korea is effectively emulating with its expulsion of UN inspectors.