What about the rest of Great Britain that fought as well England isn't the only country in Great Britainwannabe_tank_whore wrote:
The only 2 victorious leaders/warriors *I can think of* are Charlemagne and Napoleon. The rest they did lose. To the Frenchman, France would no longer be a country if it weren't for the US and England.
It does NOT help that America is more civilians with their bombs than terrorists at a ratio of about 10 to 1.lowing wrote:
Nope, you are correct........The free world needs to win the hearts and minds of the middle easterners...and that will never happen.......you are also correct in my opinion, that developing alternative energies sources and moving away from oil is the only way the free world can be "uninvolved" in the crisis over there.... Oil is the only bargaining chip they have, and it is the only means they have to finance terror.....take away the need for oil and you have cut them off at the knees. then, perhaps, then they will calm down and listen to reason..but I seriously doubt itsherlock4111 wrote:
there's no chance to eradicate terrorism the way the west is trying it now. it has to be found a way to talk those guys or at least to understand what is happening(I know it sounds crazy). but many people in the middle east think of terrorists as freedom fighters. as long as this will happen terrorism will have the support (or sympathy) of many in that region. i suppose many in the middle eastern region feel intimidated by the conflicts and the involvement that were caused by the west (first by the split up of the osman empire (france - uk) -> israelo-palestina problem, later the involvement of the west to secure resources (oil or even the protection of the suez-channel -i intentionally don't name the US only!).lowing wrote:
no I agree with you.....it is very naive to think that it will ever happen.......but the only alternative is to sucumb to threats and be turned into puppets on a string......America will never do that.
Fighting for your country is 1 thing......we never called germany or Japan terrorists. same with the mujahadeen they were never terrorist back then. there country was invaded and they fought back....noone looks at the French resistance as terrorism.......The discription of 911 and the happenings around the world IS terrorism by any definition......
dictionary.com......Terrorism--The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
NOt freedom fighters or insurgents....these groups of people are killing their own countrymen to intimidate them to bend to their will. period...thx Jepeto87
at least western countries could find a way to negotiate. perhaps understand why those madmen do what they do. perhaps being more independent of oil as Sweden has aimed to do recently could be a solution.
i hope nobody will tk me for this... ;-)
---
TY for reminding about Charlemagne...
---
The 'kickbacks' thing is a poor explanation.
WE got kickbacks. (a la AWB)
WE still went.
---
3rd page. Satire always attracts discussion.
---
That's odd. A few generations ago, you and France were such friends that France gave the US a big BIG BIG green statue.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
I wouldn't want to fight the French. They only lose politically. Ala clinton & Somalia.
Their Army has always been very professional. They win Battles. They lose Wars.
israel is an example of leadership that will back their fighting men and women. So israelites fight hard and well knowing their leaders wont sell them out like Democrats would sell out US Soldiers to take back the White House at any cost.
israel is an example of a strong willed leadership.
France is an example of what liberals can do to your country.
Their Army has always been very professional. They win Battles. They lose Wars.
israel is an example of leadership that will back their fighting men and women. So israelites fight hard and well knowing their leaders wont sell them out like Democrats would sell out US Soldiers to take back the White House at any cost.
israel is an example of a strong willed leadership.
France is an example of what liberals can do to your country.
Because a lot of liberals want to ban the headscarf. *cough*Horseman 77 wrote:
I wouldn't want to fight the French. They only lose politically. Ala clinton & Somalia.
Their Army has always been very professional. They win Battles. They lose Wars.
israel is an example of leadership that will back their fighting men and women. So israelites fight hard and well knowing their leaders wont sell them out like Democrats would sell out US Soldiers to take back the White House at any cost.
israel is an example of a strong willed leadership.
France is an example of what liberals can do to your country.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Would like to see the reference you used to come up with this 10:1 ratio on bombing civiliansSpark wrote:
It does NOT help that America is more civilians with their bombs than terrorists at a ratio of about 10 to 1.lowing wrote:
Nope, you are correct........The free world needs to win the hearts and minds of the middle easterners...and that will never happen.......you are also correct in my opinion, that developing alternative energies sources and moving away from oil is the only way the free world can be "uninvolved" in the crisis over there.... Oil is the only bargaining chip they have, and it is the only means they have to finance terror.....take away the need for oil and you have cut them off at the knees. then, perhaps, then they will calm down and listen to reason..but I seriously doubt itsherlock4111 wrote:
there's no chance to eradicate terrorism the way the west is trying it now. it has to be found a way to talk those guys or at least to understand what is happening(I know it sounds crazy). but many people in the middle east think of terrorists as freedom fighters. as long as this will happen terrorism will have the support (or sympathy) of many in that region. i suppose many in the middle eastern region feel intimidated by the conflicts and the involvement that were caused by the west (first by the split up of the osman empire (france - uk) -> israelo-palestina problem, later the involvement of the west to secure resources (oil or even the protection of the suez-channel -i intentionally don't name the US only!).
at least western countries could find a way to negotiate. perhaps understand why those madmen do what they do. perhaps being more independent of oil as Sweden has aimed to do recently could be a solution.
i hope nobody will tk me for this... ;-)
---
TY for reminding about Charlemagne...
---
The 'kickbacks' thing is a poor explanation.
WE got kickbacks. (a la AWB)
WE still went.
---
3rd page. Satire always attracts discussion.
---
That's odd. A few generations ago, you and France were such friends that France gave the US a big BIG BIG green statue.
Lowing, French Intelligence bombed the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior in 1985 whilst it was alongside in Auckland, NZ.lowing wrote:
Please explain......I am curiousPubic wrote:
Comitted an act of state terrorism in my country.herrr_smity wrote:
why don't you quit dissing the french what ever have they don to you.
Here is a link to the story for anybody interested:
http://www.greenpeace.org.au/rainbow_wa … intro.html
Wow, very interesting........thanks for the link............but what is more amazing about this story and respectable to some degree, is the fact that France stood up and took responsibility for this.....now.......I love my country and am proud of all the good she does.......but, I can state with quite certainty that the US never would have admitted to doing this...It would have become a scandalous cover up that would occupy every conspiracy theorist for the next 200 years.VspyVspy wrote:
Lowing, French Intelligence bombed the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior in 1985 whilst it was alongside in Auckland, NZ.lowing wrote:
Please explain......I am curiousPubic wrote:
Comitted an act of state terrorism in my country.
Here is a link to the story for anybody interested:
http://www.greenpeace.org.au/rainbow_wa … intro.html
You know dumbass, friendly fire happens all the time in the field. Every military in the world who has been in a battle in recent years has suffered some form of friendly fire. So how many casualties has france suffered? Better question, how much information has france given to enemies of other countries in the time of battle? How many times has france sat back and talked crap about other countries getting involved. France sits on the gd fence, feeling comfortable that it plays all the angles. The reason France gets so much crap is because they have never taken a stand. Hell Sweden has more say because at least they claim neutralism and stand by it.sheggalism wrote:
You want me to answer with stupid stuff too ? so "ha ha American soldiers kill each other, they're the best teamkillers of all the time", "they bomb their own troops, they're trigger-happy, they're coolless, if they see a human shade, stunned by fear or by a total lack of self-control, they empty their magazines on it and kill a teamate". That kind of stuff is really stupid and I don't agree with the things written above cause I never judge people at first glance and by basing my thoughts with stereotypes.
France has a significantly higher ratio of arab citizens, which given the financial backing and the business interest represented there makes for an understandably strong lobby. I daresay the US backing of Israel and/or the jewish cause in general can be traced back in part at least to the influence they hold in our country's business world. I think it's fair to say that the US conducts it's own foreign policy with a steady eye on their economic ties, and i will be the last to criticize that seeing as it affords me the comfortable lifestyle i'm accustomed to, however i think it only just to at least acknowledge any other countries right to do the same. I refuse to believe any country goes to war or chooses to remain "neutral" on the basis of higher moral judgment rather than the bottom line dollar amount. The Swiss banking system obviously didn't have any moral objection with accepting tons of gold teeth from their nazi account holders.
The French have their reasons for not going to war, reasons no more or less noble than our own I imagine, and every bit as valid, reasons that won't draw criticism on my part until they start bitching about the consequenses of their inaction. Until then, I will respect their right to do as they see fit and at least try and understand why that might be. However many wars France may or may not have lost, cowardice would still seem an awfully unjust claim, and as for being ungrateful, which I believe is the other accusation leveled at the French, that one could be said about the US as well.
On a more personal note, if Bill O'Reilley's whining constitutes fair and balanced news coverage the state of our media is even shittier than i thought (Isn't he still eating freedom fries?). All else aside, simply disagreeing with the president doesn't automatically imply rampant liberalism, anymore than agreeing with him makes you a warmonger. The media will most always side with the popular opinion, and the group that feels left out will always whine and scream about rampant liberalism/conservatism out of frustration everyone else doesn't subscribe to their own personal world view.
The French have their reasons for not going to war, reasons no more or less noble than our own I imagine, and every bit as valid, reasons that won't draw criticism on my part until they start bitching about the consequenses of their inaction. Until then, I will respect their right to do as they see fit and at least try and understand why that might be. However many wars France may or may not have lost, cowardice would still seem an awfully unjust claim, and as for being ungrateful, which I believe is the other accusation leveled at the French, that one could be said about the US as well.
On a more personal note, if Bill O'Reilley's whining constitutes fair and balanced news coverage the state of our media is even shittier than i thought (Isn't he still eating freedom fries?). All else aside, simply disagreeing with the president doesn't automatically imply rampant liberalism, anymore than agreeing with him makes you a warmonger. The media will most always side with the popular opinion, and the group that feels left out will always whine and scream about rampant liberalism/conservatism out of frustration everyone else doesn't subscribe to their own personal world view.
Uhm, did you actually read Sheggalism's post until the end? If not I marked the relevant part in bold for you.sfg-Ice__ wrote:
You know dumbass, friendly fire happens all the time in the field. Every military in the world who has been in a battle in recent years has suffered some form of friendly fire. So how many casualties has france suffered? Better question, how much information has france given to enemies of other countries in the time of battle? How many times has france sat back and talked crap about other countries getting involved. France sits on the gd fence, feeling comfortable that it plays all the angles. The reason France gets so much crap is because they have never taken a stand. Hell Sweden has more say because at least they claim neutralism and stand by it.sheggalism wrote:
You want me to answer with stupid stuff too ? so "ha ha American soldiers kill each other, they're the best teamkillers of all the time", "they bomb their own troops, they're trigger-happy, they're coolless, if they see a human shade, stunned by fear or by a total lack of self-control, they empty their magazines on it and kill a teamate". That kind of stuff is really stupid and I don't agree with the things written above cause I never judge people at first glance and by basing my thoughts with stereotypes.
He did say that he didn't agree with the stuff he wrote above, since that would be stupid to judge people with stereotypes or by just a first glance.
And what is this about France not standing for anything? They decided to not get involved into the war in the Gulf, they stated so, they stood by their decision even though they got a crapload of flak from their "friends", who should respect different opinions if they really were friends.
It is not friendship if it comes to "If you do not share my opinion then you are not my friend anymore."
That is something little kids to on the playground, stomping their feet and yelling "We play my way or you are not my friend!"
Let us pretend for a moment that the world is a school yard. Every nation is a pupil there:
Hans, Pierre, John and Hamal are standing around. Hans, Pierre and John stand in a corner, talking about this and that, exchanging bubblegum and smoking a cigarette. Hamal stands a little off and starts to fart around. The three friends get annoyed by that. Hans and Pierre tell Hamal off for his rude behaviour. John flexes his muscles and says "Hamal, stop it or else..." Hamal sticks out his tongue at John and belches into John's face.
"I bet he hides a knife somewhere" John says.
Hans and Pierre look at John. "You have any prove for this?" John shakes his head.
Along comes another pupil. He is a member of a group that walks across the schoolyard to help prevent fights. Everyone knows him by his nickname "Blixi". So Hans, Pierre and John tell Blixi "Hamal misbehaves, he is rude and maybe has a knife". Blixi walks over to check if Hamal really is armed. He starts to search the schoolbag, since he is allowed to do so.
While Blixi is still searching the bag Hamal pushes the bag around with his foot, making faces at Blixi, who still tries to remain calm and search the bag despite the problems Hamal causes with shoving the bag around.
Then Blixi stands up, pretty annoyed now and tells Hamal to stop the fuss and let him search the bag.
Suddenly John drops his cigarette to the floor and tells Hans and Pierre "Ok, I will give Hamal a knocking on the head now and search him for the knife. Are you with me?" Hans and Pierre reply "Let Blixi do his job, if Hamal has a knife he will find it."
John looks at his friends "What? So you are not going to help me? Fine friends you are!" Then he walkes over to Hamal who now flips the bird at John.
John grabs Hamal by the neck and hits him in the face and kicks him in the groin. Hamal doubles over, since he is not as strong as John. John searches Hamal while he is on the ground, nose bleeding.
No knife. Hamal tries to stand up and John beats him and kicks him. Then he puts a foot on Hamal's chest to pin him down, looking at Hans and Pierre.
"Pierre, I am very disappointed, I thought we were friends. But I guess you are just a weakling! I hate you! We aren't friends anymore!"
Hans and Pierre look at each other in disbelief.
"John, we have been friends since first grade and now you say I am not your friend anymore, because I didn't want to beat up Hamal with you? You didn't find the knife you said Hamal had, did you? I agreed with you that Hamal was being rude and annoying. But that was not enough of a reason to beat him up for me."
"Shut the heck up!" John replies and turns his back at Pierre.
Of course this is just a simplified version of what happened, see it as parable.
Regarding the "Rainbow Warrior": It was not acceptable what the french did. But tell me one (and I really ask for only one!) nation that doesn't have some stain on the white vest or skeleton in the cupboard or however you want to call it. Just one.
See ya,
vonSteuben
Last edited by vonSteuben (2006-03-15 02:14:09)
nice parabel, but i have a strong feeling you're going to take some flak for it lol
Woah. Well done. What a brilliant analogy. A+. Perfect Marks.
Every American should read this.
Every American should read this.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Upon questioning the teacher later we learn that the four boys were all pretty much just "friends with benefits" really. Secretly Pierre thought John was an asshole to begin with, which was coincidentally the reason he didn't want to beat up Hamal in the first place. John had a terrible ego problem, and Pierre a history of disagreeing with everyone and everything if for no good reason, than just for shits'n'giggles. Well, that and Hamal still owed him money. Not that Hamal wasn't a prick or anything, he had only yesterday told John he had a bigger penis. That might explain why John noticed the buldge in Hamal's pocket which he mistook for a knife at the time. In the end there was no knife, and no huge package either. Hamal wasn't packing, either way you look at it. However, both seemed content at achieving what they each considered the higher moral ground, John having bitch-slapped the schoolyard ass, knife or no knife, he was a bitch, and Pierre abstaining from violence for all the right reasons (all the wrong reasons aside). Secretly they all enjoyed the political reach-around and Hans wrote a book.
THE END
THE END
lol, von Steuben, nice story. someone should show that to GWB...
@vonSteuben
You failed to include the UN sanctions that Hamal broke. All which stated lethal force could be used once broken.
You failed to include the UN sanctions that Hamal broke. All which stated lethal force could be used once broken.
That anology was child like and simplistic, Typical of the Liberal mind set.Spark wrote:
Because a lot of liberals want to ban the headscarf. *cough*Horseman 77 wrote:
I wouldn't want to fight the French. They only lose politically. Ala clinton & Somalia.
Their Army has always been very professional. They win Battles. They lose Wars.
israel is an example of leadership that will back their fighting men and women. So israelites fight hard and well knowing their leaders wont sell them out like Democrats would sell out US Soldiers to take back the White House at any cost.
israel is an example of a strong willed leadership.
France is an example of what liberals can do to your country.
" Let them out of Jail and they won't be crimanals "
" If we had no Prisons, there wouldnt be any inmates, Dosn't GWB and is friends realize that ? "
" If we didnt have an Army there would be no Wars "
" Why does the Navy need to practice Bombing in Vieques Porto Rico ? there is no WAR "
This is the kind of shit we have to battle day in and out with kerry clinton and friends
And what do you mean about head scarfs ?
Cheers for the post vonSteuben ! Awesome, that's the word ! You master "metaphor", "parabole" and "allegory" very well.
what about the battle of agincourt in the middle ages didnt the english beat the frogs there as well . dont worry im english and half french too so i can call em frogs.
Ok, to include it:wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
@vonSteuben
You failed to include the UN sanctions that Hamal broke. All which stated lethal force could be used once broken.
Hamal had been called to the principal several times for his rude behaviour and was told that he would be kept after school or would face severe detention if he didn't stop farting and belching in other people's faces.
The principal had told him that the teachers or the pupils that had the status of (form) prefect could punish him with a cane for his behaviour in the future.
(the is still applied in analogy with the "school yard" in my post above, in no way do I want to say that Saddam's behaviour was as harmless as "farting" or "belching")
John, Hans and Pierre, Hamal all were pupils, but not prefects or teachers.
See ya,
vonSteuben
Last edited by vonSteuben (2006-03-15 07:31:16)
You forgot " bate " he mastur 'd that a lotsheggalism wrote:
Cheers for the post vonSteuben ! Awesome, that's the word ! You master "metaphor", "parabole" and "allegory" very well.
wtf....you are getting out of line here, horseman, at least to my account.Horseman 77 wrote:
You forgot " bate " he mastur 'd that a lotsheggalism wrote:
Cheers for the post vonSteuben ! Awesome, that's the word ! You master "metaphor", "parabole" and "allegory" very well.
no need for personal attacks
This is why I know to keep my Germans and French seperate.
I guess I'll have to lengthen my fuse abit and read all the posts that piss me off. My apoligies.
Now, VonS, your version is very much reality. The basics are there. As far as being liberal. Hell I'm not sure if people realize what liberals are. I tend to listen to those who DO NOT automaticly claim something wrong based on those who support it. Such "simplistic" views are the reasons we have wars. Damn people are so full of themselves and thier "opinion" (ie someone elses opinion) that they cannot even open thier minds to other ideas.
As far as the French go though, while the people seem ok in small groups or so, the goverment I can't understand.
Now, VonS, your version is very much reality. The basics are there. As far as being liberal. Hell I'm not sure if people realize what liberals are. I tend to listen to those who DO NOT automaticly claim something wrong based on those who support it. Such "simplistic" views are the reasons we have wars. Damn people are so full of themselves and thier "opinion" (ie someone elses opinion) that they cannot even open thier minds to other ideas.
As far as the French go though, while the people seem ok in small groups or so, the goverment I can't understand.
Major props, vonSteuben! Awesome job there.
Not quite sure why you're attacking me over those things. I don't support ANY of them.Horseman 77 wrote:
That anology was child like and simplistic, Typical of the Liberal mind set.Spark wrote:
Because a lot of liberals want to ban the headscarf. *cough*Horseman 77 wrote:
I wouldn't want to fight the French. They only lose politically. Ala clinton & Somalia.
Their Army has always been very professional. They win Battles. They lose Wars.
israel is an example of leadership that will back their fighting men and women. So israelites fight hard and well knowing their leaders wont sell them out like Democrats would sell out US Soldiers to take back the White House at any cost.
israel is an example of a strong willed leadership.
France is an example of what liberals can do to your country.
" Let them out of Jail and they won't be crimanals "
" If we had no Prisons, there wouldnt be any inmates, Dosn't GWB and is friends realize that ? "
" If we didnt have an Army there would be no Wars "
" Why does the Navy need to practice Bombing in Vieques Porto Rico ? there is no WAR "
This is the kind of shit we have to battle day in and out with kerry clinton and friends
And what do you mean about head scarfs ?
"Let them out of jail and they won't be criminals." May work sometimes. But you're missing the point of jail. It's to protect society from those that might harm them, and to deter other criminals.
"If we had no Prisons, there wouldnt be any inmates, Dosn't GWB and is friends realize that ?" Ditto.
"If we didnt have an Army there would be no Wars" You don't need an army to have a war. And also, if some rogue rebel attacks you...
"Why does the Navy need to practice Bombing in Vieques Porto Rico ? there is no WAR" No idea here. I'll leave that to you guys.
The Headscarf thing: In France, the government is/was considering to ban people openly displaying symbols of their religions in public. This means that Muslim headscarves, the Jewish caps etc. etc. are all banned from schools etc. etc.
Not the line that liberals generally take.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman