French bashing is so 9 months ago.
Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
French bashing is so 9 months ago.
Originally posted by: freegeeks
whatever
Originally posted by: preslove
When irate people who are just being argumentative and violent are talked to rationally, they get even more incensed. We wanted somebody to bomb cause we were still hurting from 9/11. France said "hey, saddam had nothing to do with 9/11." Which was the rational, evenheaded response. Our irate and incensed response was "How dare you defend a madman, you must be soft on terror!" And we bombed and invaded anyway. It's like trying to talk somebody out of a bar fight, a lost cause.
Can you hear the echo?Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: preslove
When irate people who are just being argumentative and violent are talked to rationally, they get even more incensed. We wanted somebody to bomb cause we were still hurting from 9/11. France said "hey, saddam had nothing to do with 9/11." Which was the rational, evenheaded response. Our irate and incensed response was "How dare you defend a madman, you must be soft on terror!" And we bombed and invaded anyway. It's like trying to talk somebody out of a bar fight, a lost cause.
yeah, and 12 years of dodging and breaking 16 UN resolutions had nothing to do with it, right? The mind of a simpleton is quite hollow.
Originally posted by: preslove
That's a really well reasoned little response you got there. If the war was really about UN resolutions why did the US not wait for another resolution to back the use of force? The problem is that the rest of the world knew that Saddam was not a viable threat and had no capacity whatsoever to inflict a major attack on us in the half hour or whatever that Blair so adamantly maintained. They said, "hey, we think you are overstating the threat of an extremely poor country with no apparent offensive capabilities. LET'S GIVE THE INSPECTORS MORE TIME." But hey we found the WMD, right? We were right all along, right?
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: preslove
When irate people who are just being argumentative and violent are talked to rationally, they get even more incensed. We wanted somebody to bomb cause we were still hurting from 9/11. France said "hey, saddam had nothing to do with 9/11." Which was the rational, evenheaded response. Our irate and incensed response was "How dare you defend a madman, you must be soft on terror!" And we bombed and invaded anyway. It's like trying to talk somebody out of a bar fight, a lost cause.
yeah, and 12 years of dodging and breaking 16 UN resolutions had nothing to do with it, right? The mind of a simpleton is quite hollow.
Originally posted by: dpm
Certain forms of French-bashing just make me exasperated (now if you'd gone straight for the 'typical french -spend more days on strike than they do working!' line, I'd have been ok. Cos thats true )
Its so indicative of pettyness, and intellectual stupor. Does anyone read history anymore? The French military has been on strike for 150 years? Now I realise that you just pulled this number for exaggeration purposes, but.... tch!
The french lost two wars. get over it.
1) Indochine. Well, we all know that losing a war in Vietnam is easy to do.
2) WW2. They got rolled over and surrendered. Man, thats a blow to the national pride, but if you just read the comments today you'd think that they were the worst army in the world back then, and surrendered before the germans had even got out of bed the first morning.
People overlook the fact that Germany at the time had the finest land fighting organisation in the world, with a new strategy that was nothing less than a RMA - far better that that of Britain or France, and certainly far better than the USA. People overlook the fact that Britain would certainly have been defeated too, if it hadn't been for the English Channel. If the US hadn't had the atlantic between them and mainland europe, there's a good chance that they'd have surrendered too. (I know, I know, things would have been different, but still)
Bear in mind, that when the US first came to fight the Germans, in North africa , they still got their asses handed to them on a plate (to use a colourful american impression.) -- even after a couple of years to study the germans and practise. The Germans were simply damn good at what they were doing, and the rest of the world had to struggle to catch up.
We today are just lucky that we for the existance of the english channel and the atlantic ocean, thats all.
And before anyone asks - I'm not french. But I have lived in both France and America, so I think I'm pretty unbiased here.
Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: preslove
When irate people who are just being argumentative and violent are talked to rationally, they get even more incensed. We wanted somebody to bomb cause we were still hurting from 9/11. France said "hey, saddam had nothing to do with 9/11." Which was the rational, evenheaded response. Our irate and incensed response was "How dare you defend a madman, you must be soft on terror!" And we bombed and invaded anyway. It's like trying to talk somebody out of a bar fight, a lost cause.
yeah, and 12 years of dodging and breaking 16 UN resolutions had nothing to do with it, right? The mind of a simpleton is quite hollow.
The resolutions, IMO, had absolutely nothing to do with why we went to war. There is a world of difference between going to war because of resolutions and going to war using resolutions as a reason.
they still got their asses handed to them on a plate (to use a colourful american impression.)
Originally posted by: Gaard
No. Tell me.
I don't think you understand me.
Originally posted by: Zebo
they still got their asses handed to them on a plate (to use a colourful american impression.)
It's "on a platter".. and colorful expression