"Cyrille de Brébisson" wrote in message
...
hello,

and the Bushe's are texans and texan are part mexican, affricans, cow and
interbreeding, so bush can't properly be considered american...

cyrille

Aw you are just jealous that you are not Texan.

He is answering Dave. What is wrong with your news reader?


"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On 22 Jul 2005 12:19:09 -0700,
wrote:
Maybe not, but consider how the Gauls (remember Vercingetorix?) gave
the Romans fits. There was Napoleon, but that's another story. Again-

Who are you answering? You give no context.

In article ,
Dave Hinz wrote:

Well, it's not like they don't continue to do staggeringly stupid things
over and over.

And I'm sure many of the world believe we've done some staggeringly
stupid things as well - training and equipping Bin Laden or making such
a national flap over a leader's infidelities come to mind. Too, I'm sure
glad we showed those French how to put those Vietnamese in their places
when they failed.
--
Owen Lowe
The Fly-by-Night Copper Company
__________

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
Corporate States of America and to the
Republicans for which it stands, one nation,
under debt, easily divisible, with liberty
and justice for oil."
- Wiley Miller, Non Sequitur, 1/24/05

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:39:01 -0500, Prometheus
wrote:

1066. They conquered Britian.

What's "Britain" ?

England barely existed at that period - Britain certainly didn't.

Dave Hinz (in ) said:

| Well, it's not like they don't continue to do staggeringly stupid
| things over and over. And my knowledge is based on personal
| experience with several trips to France; I'm not just repeating
| what I've heard when I say that Paris is beautiful but smells
| awful, for instance. I'm also not just parroting something I've
| read or heard when I say that the French were astonishingly rude,
| both in Paris and Calais.

I've heard this from other visitors; and admit that I felt a certain
trepidation about traveling to France. I'd been told to expect a cold
rudeness and that I could expect to be looked down upon if I couldn't
speak French well (I don't.)

I've never cared much for major metroplexes. I appreciate what they
have to offer; and recognize that those offerings are only possible
because of their size and confluence of influences - but there have
only ever been two that I've been able to really like: Copenhagen and
Philadelphia. At one time Beirut would have been a third (although
it's never approached the sizes of these others). I'm certain that my
choices have much more to do with my own personality than with the
cities themselves - and with the fact that I grew up in a place where
a city with 40,000 people was considered huge. I was prepared to add
Paris to the list of cities that I really didn't much care for.

I guess I should add that I'm /not/ a good tourist. I burned out on
cathedrals and castles and relics of the distant past a half century
ago. My view is that most of the things that good tourists flock to
are much more easily seen in high-quality photographs and videos.
Certain places seem to demand that visitors present themselves - Paris
would seem to have more of these than many other cities - and I
dutifully paid my respects to a reasonable number of these.

But I'm much more interested in /people/ and how the way people in one
place see the world differently than people in other places - and I'm
interested in /why/ those differences exist. My visit to France was to
satisfy curiosity about its people and to discover anything at all
that might help me to broaden my horizons a bit.

I visited in September and October and it didn't smell awful. It
smelled better than Chicago when I was last in the Windy City. Perhaps
time of year or prevailing wind make a difference; and perhaps I was
just lucky.

I decided before I left that I would not, under any circumstances,
initiate the use of English in any converstation with the French -
that I would accept the embarassment of being a lousy linguist - and
that no one would be able to say that I didn't at least try to speak
their language. There were a few Frenchmen who did actually ask me to
speak English (/that/ was embarrasing!) but the rest were patient and
encouraging. The expected condecision for not being able to speak the
language well just wasn't there.

Early on (at the airport, actually), I noticed that the French
casually practiced formal manners with each other and with travelers.
Please, thank you, pardon me, bon jour (easily translated as "good
day" but used more generally than we'd say g'day), sir, madam, all
seemed to be truly important elements of dialog - more so than I was
used to. I mentally shrugged and greeted the customs inspector with a
smile and "Bonjour monsieur" - and was dumbfounded when he returned
the smile and the greeting. I can count on one finger the number of
times (out of at least a hundred) that a customs inspector has opened
with a smile and he was it. It was a strong clue, I got it, and it
served me well. I paid attention and noticed that people who opened by
stating their business (without smile and greeting) seemed to be
treated as if they'd "dissed" the person they were talking to. Mom was
right - manners /do/ matter - and the challenge is to pick up on the
nuances that aren't quite the same as back home.

I discovered that eye contact is also important; and that if you
/don't/ maintain good eye contact you can miss out on some really fun
stuff. This post is already too long; but one of my best memories of
Paris is an eye-contact episode that peripherally involved a ham and
cheese sandwich (pun intended).

| And, though I didn't write the line at the top of this post, I agree
| with it. Among the many categories that the French are useless,
| military ability ranks pretty high. They're great, though, at
| building open-air urinals, I'll give 'em that.

I didn't hang out with French troops. My XBIL trained French NATO
pilots to fly the F15E and he said their combat pilots were as good as
any he'd trained...

In a final effort to rediscover topicality, I'd like to announce that
my French vocabulary word for this week is /atelier(m)/ - workshop.
Mine was 95F this afternoon. I hope yours is cooler.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

Doug Miller wrote:

In article UrPDe.170606$_o.155947@attbi_s71, "Dave" wrote:

In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?


I think they won a few, with a woman in charge.



Yeah, and her reward was being burned at the stake!

;-)
Glen

John McCoy wrote:


In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?


Napolean did quite well, for most of the 20-odd years he was
in charge.


Wasn't he Corsican?

Glen

Glen wrote:
John McCoy wrote:


In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?


Napolean did quite well, for most of the 20-odd years he was
in charge.


Wasn't he Corsican?

Glen

Read back a bit. Corsica had been part of France for some time before
Nappy was born.

It's a lot like saying William The ******* was a Viking, when Normandy
was part of France before he was born there, and his parentage wasn't
all Norse, anyway.

In article et, wrote:
John McCoy wrote:


In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?


Napolean did quite well, for most of the 20-odd years he was
in charge.


Wasn't he Corsican?

Cors he was.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Charlie Self wrote:



Glen wrote:
John McCoy wrote:


In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?


Napolean did quite well, for most of the 20-odd years he was
in charge.


Wasn't he Corsican?

Glen

Read back a bit. Corsica had been part of France for some time before
Nappy was born.

Actually didn't Corsica win independence from Italy when Nap was a kid?
Didn't his father work wiht the rebels? I could be mis-remembering.

Saw Nappy's tomb at the Hotel Invalide couple years ago. Amazing.

--
Saville

Replicas of 15th-19th century nautical navigational instruments:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/backstaffhome.html

Restoration of my 82 year old Herreshoff S-Boat sailboat:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/SBOATrestore.htm

Steambending FAQ with photos:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/Steambend.htm

On 22 Jul 2005 15:28:54 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:39:01 -0500, Prometheus wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:47:00 GMT, "Dave" wrote:

In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?

1066. They conquered Britian. Probably other cases as well, but
that's the big one.

Um. You _do_ know that the Normans (Norse Men) were vikings hung out in
France for 2 generations before joining the Norwegian vikings to take
over England, right?

My grandpa came to the US from Austria in 1939, and then he and his
brothers went back to fight the Nazis as a member of the US military-
and he was the only one to survive. Two of my uncles and a cousin
from Czechoslavakia fought in Vietnam, and one of them gave his life
as well. So, does that mean that Americans are cowards as well, since
they had to have Austrians fight their wars for them? You don't just
kind of *hang out* in a country for multiple generations- they were
French.

Courage comes in different forms, and not all of them erupt from the
barrel of a gun.

Right. Tell me again how surrendering as quickly as humanly possible is
"couragous"?

You do not have to fight a war to have courage. Courage is being
willing to do something you feel is right, even if you are afraid of
the possible consequences- it's not directly linked to blowing things
up. When a country the size of Texas stands toe-to-toe with the sole
superpower on Earth and says no, it's courageous whether you agree
with them or not.

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:40:28 +0100, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:39:01 -0500, Prometheus
wrote:

1066. They conquered Britian.

What's "Britain" ?

England barely existed at that period - Britain certainly didn't.

All right, Andy. The smallish landmass on the northern side of the
waterway currently referred to as the "English Channel"- north of the
present-day province of Normandy. Better? Didn't mean to insult the
English and get into a matter of semantics, it just seems stupid to
constantly bag on the French because they don't care to grab their
guns and shoot the brown people of the world every time one of our
elected leaders yells "saddle up".

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:00:02 -0500, "Morris Dovey"
wrote:

Snip

Early on (at the airport, actually), I noticed that the French
casually practiced formal manners with each other and with travelers.

I'm sure you already know it, I'm just fleshing it out. It becomes
fairly obvious that manners are more important to them even when
learning to conjugate verbs in French. We do not have a formal (or
plural) "you" compared to an informal "you" that has a set of rules
attached to it's usage in American English (Though I think some
Anabaptist sects still use "Thou") Nor do we use surnames until
granted permission to do otherwise. If someone came to your home and
burped at the dinner table, stood uncomfortably close to you and
didn't bathe, I'd be willing to bet most Americans would be awfully
rude as well. Different strokes.

Please, thank you, pardon me, bon jour (easily translated as "good
day" but used more generally than we'd say g'day), sir, madam, all
seemed to be truly important elements of dialog - more so than I was
used to. I mentally shrugged and greeted the customs inspector with a
smile and "Bonjour monsieur" - and was dumbfounded when he returned
the smile and the greeting. I can count on one finger the number of
times (out of at least a hundred) that a customs inspector has opened
with a smile and he was it. It was a strong clue, I got it, and it
served me well. I paid attention and noticed that people who opened by
stating their business (without smile and greeting) seemed to be
treated as if they'd "dissed" the person they were talking to. Mom was
right - manners /do/ matter - and the challenge is to pick up on the
nuances that aren't quite the same as back home.

It becomes a different challenge when you pick up some mannerisms
from other cultures and then bring them into your area as well. My
wife is always getting on my case for being too formal. She says it
puts people off.

Anyhow, thanks Morris. You said all that a lot better than I would
have.

Dave Hinz wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:39:01 -0500, Prometheus wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:47:00 GMT, "Dave" wrote:


In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?

1066. They conquered Britian. Probably other cases as well, but
that's the big one.


Um. You _do_ know that the Normans (Norse Men) were vikings hung out in
France for 2 generations before joining the Norwegian vikings to take
over England, right?


Courage comes in different forms, and not all of them erupt from the
barrel of a gun.


Right. Tell me again how surrendering as quickly as humanly possible is
"couragous"?

1066 was an interesting year. First the Viking king Hadrada (aided by
Harold's brother) invaded from the north. Harold managed to defeat them
(killing both). He moved the remnants of his army south having received
word of William's landing. Perhaps one of the most devastating events
preceeding the battle was Harold's sudden awareness that he had been
excommunicated by the Pope, and that William was wearing the papal ring.
Talk about a bad day. Anyway the rest is history.

Another interesting idea is that of the three armies engaged in battle
for England that year, all were led by men of Viking ancestry.
mahalo,
jo4hn

Prometheus wrote:


All right, Andy. The smallish landmass on the northern side of the
waterway currently referred to as the "English Channel"-

ITYM "La Manche."

--

FF

Prometheus wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:40:28 +0100, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:39:01 -0500, Prometheus
wrote:

1066. They conquered Britian.

What's "Britain" ?

England barely existed at that period - Britain certainly didn't.

All right, Andy. The smallish landmass on the northern side of the
waterway currently referred to as the "English Channel"- north of the
present-day province of Normandy. Better? Didn't mean to insult the
English and get into a matter of semantics, it just seems stupid to
constantly bag on the French because they don't care to grab their
guns and shoot the brown people of the world every time one of our
elected leaders yells "saddle up".

Let's just not forget that the French did their fair share of shooting
darker colored people not all that long ago. It took Dien Bien Phu to
get them out of 'Nam (and us, unfortunately, in), and Algiers wasn't
exactly a picture perfect post. This time, they didn't go along. Other
times, they led the parade.

No country or people is perfect, regardless of what that country or its
people think. Include in that mass France and the U.S. and add every
place else you can think of. Then toss it up in the air and make a
choice (for those in the U.S.): is there anywhere else you're rather
live? Not me. But that doesn't mean I have to lie down and drown in
Bush's lies.

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:01:42 -0400, gregg wrote:

Saw Nappy's tomb at the Hotel Invalide couple years ago. Amazing.

In an "If Liberace liked granite" sort of style

On 22 Jul 2005 11:07:33 -0700, wrote:

Especially when you
consider they did NOT adopt American languages, religons, or
customs even after MANY generations.

Nor did the Normans - they preserved their old custom of invading
England.

The French have invaded Britain a couple of times - one being driven
away by Welsh women in red petticoats and tall hats, who they mistook
for uniformed soldiers, and once infamously leaving a monkey and his
organ-grinding uniform jacket behind.

Whom the inhabitants of Hartlepool promptly hung, as a spy,
- Ugly little chaps, these Frenchies.

"Prometheus" wrote in message
...
On 22 Jul 2005 15:28:54 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:39:01 -0500, Prometheus
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:47:00 GMT, "Dave" wrote:

In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?

1066. They conquered Britian. Probably other cases as well, but
that's the big one.

Um. You _do_ know that the Normans (Norse Men) were vikings hung out in
France for 2 generations before joining the Norwegian vikings to take
over England, right?

My grandpa came to the US from Austria in 1939, and then he and his
brothers went back to fight the Nazis as a member of the US military-
and he was the only one to survive. Two of my uncles and a cousin
from Czechoslavakia fought in Vietnam, and one of them gave his life
as well. So, does that mean that Americans are cowards as well, since
they had to have Austrians fight their wars for them? You don't just
kind of *hang out* in a country for multiple generations- they were
French.

Do you suppose the Normans considered themselves French? I really don't
know the answer, but I have my doubts.

Courage comes in different forms, and not all of them erupt from the
barrel of a gun.

Right. Tell me again how surrendering as quickly as humanly possible is
"couragous"?

You do not have to fight a war to have courage. Courage is being
willing to do something you feel is right, even if you are afraid of
the possible consequences- it's not directly linked to blowing things
up. When a country the size of Texas stands toe-to-toe with the sole
superpower on Earth and says no, it's courageous whether you agree
with them or not.

What did the French have to lose by saying "no"? It's not as if the stakes
were "agree with us or we start dropping bombs on Paris". Heck, I still
hold a grudge that we couldn't get clearance to fly over France to bomb
Khadaffi, and he definitely had it coming.

todd

I'm seeing a lot of bandwith being used here by some who are sometimes
bitch slapping those that don't stay on woodworking subjects.

So, come on guys... usually threads that run this long are only
reserved for whining about Craftsman tools, Norm and his brad guns, and
of course, the worst travesty brought down on the heads of all those
who believe in everything right and just...

Home Depot.

There, I said it.

Now things can get back to normal.

Robert

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:43:55 -0500, "Todd Fatheree"
wrote:


"Prometheus" wrote in message
.. .
On 22 Jul 2005 15:28:54 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:39:01 -0500, Prometheus
wrote:

Um. You _do_ know that the Normans (Norse Men) were vikings hung out in
France for 2 generations before joining the Norwegian vikings to take
over England, right?

My grandpa came to the US from Austria in 1939, and then he and his
brothers went back to fight the Nazis as a member of the US military-
and he was the only one to survive. Two of my uncles and a cousin
from Czechoslavakia fought in Vietnam, and one of them gave his life
as well. So, does that mean that Americans are cowards as well, since
they had to have Austrians fight their wars for them? You don't just
kind of *hang out* in a country for multiple generations- they were
French.
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:47:00 GMT, "Dave" wrote:

Do you suppose the Normans considered themselves French? I really don't
know the answer, but I have my doubts.

Neither do I, but I would think it would be awfully hard for them not
to. I've never considered myself a non-American because I'm only two
generations from Ellis Island- this is the place where I was born, and
it's where I live, why pretend to hold an allegance to some other
place I've never seen?

Courage comes in different forms, and not all of them erupt from the
barrel of a gun.

Right. Tell me again how surrendering as quickly as humanly possible is
"couragous"?

You do not have to fight a war to have courage. Courage is being
willing to do something you feel is right, even if you are afraid of
the possible consequences- it's not directly linked to blowing things
up. When a country the size of Texas stands toe-to-toe with the sole
superpower on Earth and says no, it's courageous whether you agree
with them or not.

What did the French have to lose by saying "no"? It's not as if the stakes
were "agree with us or we start dropping bombs on Paris". Heck, I still
hold a grudge that we couldn't get clearance to fly over France to bomb
Khadaffi, and he definitely had it coming.

Again, there is more to life than bombs and guns. Hell, there's even
more to war alone than that. Just because you don't bomb a city
doesn't mean that there aren't ways of punishing a country by other
means. Economic embargoes, tariffs, pressuring international
organizations to prevent people from gaining positions of influence,
withholding disaster assistance; you name it, someone has done it- and
some of those things are far more damaging than blowing up a city.
Going along to get along is much less courageous than standing in
opposition, no matter whether the stakes are lunch-money or
thermonuclear war.

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:43:55 -0500, "Todd Fatheree"
wrote:

Do you suppose the Normans considered themselves French?

Normandy was a duchy of France and at this period there was a "France"
ruled by a Capetian king that they could swear fealty to. Normandy was
only about 150 years old since they'd sailed up the Seine and first
demanded the land. They were "loyal" to France, in that they didn't
conflict with it as a state, but equally they were very distinct and saw
expansion and conquest (largely from their neighbours) as a reasonable
aim, which the rest of France generally didn't. The Normans also
invented the "feudal" system, that hallmark of medieval Europe that was
so good at allowing rulership at a distance. This was one of the world's
first real attempts at colonialism, as distinct from intermittent
raiding or occupation with permanent military force.

They were certainly part of France, but I don't think they'd have
"considered themselves" to be "French".

Here's a reasonable history of the period.
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/MA/NORMANS.HTM

You forgot the killer mail box.

wrote in message
ups.com...
I'm seeing a lot of bandwith being used here by some who are sometimes
bitch slapping those that don't stay on woodworking subjects.

So, come on guys... usually threads that run this long are only
reserved for whining about Craftsman tools, Norm and his brad guns, and
of course, the worst travesty brought down on the heads of all those
who believe in everything right and just...

Home Depot.

There, I said it.

Now things can get back to normal.

Robert

Andy Dingley wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:43:55 -0500, "Todd Fatheree"
wrote:


Do you suppose the Normans considered themselves French?


Normandy was a duchy of France and at this period there was a "France"
ruled by a Capetian king that they could swear fealty to. Normandy was
only about 150 years old since they'd sailed up the Seine and first
demanded the land. They were "loyal" to France, in that they didn't
conflict with it as a state, but equally they were very distinct and saw
expansion and conquest (largely from their neighbours) as a reasonable
aim, which the rest of France generally didn't. The Normans also
invented the "feudal" system, that hallmark of medieval Europe that was
so good at allowing rulership at a distance. This was one of the world's
first real attempts at colonialism, as distinct from intermittent
raiding or occupation with permanent military force.

They were certainly part of France, but I don't think they'd have
"considered themselves" to be "French".

Here's a reasonable history of the period.
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/MA/NORMANS.HTM

Historians seem to talk in terms of William and the Normans, plus
French, Breton, and Flemish soldiers making up his army.
j4

Prometheus (in ) said:

| On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:43:55 -0500, "Todd Fatheree"
| wrote:

|| Heck, I still hold a grudge that we couldn't get
|| clearance to fly over France to bomb Khadaffi, and he definitely
|| had it coming.

Well, that's one of the choices available - but grudges are terribly
consumptive and life is too short and precious to spend on resentment
that can't change past events. Khalil Gibran said it really well when
he wrote: "The moving finger writes and having writ moves on..."

If Zig Zigler was right when he said that the art of selling consists
of giving someone something to say "yes" to, then we obviously didn't
do an adequate job of selling. Perhaps we'd learn something worthwhile
if we could determine precisely why we didn't get the "yes" we wanted.

| Going along to get along is much less courageous than
| standing in opposition, no matter whether the stakes are
| lunch-money or thermonuclear war.

Yup. It's even easier to acquiesce when you're not directly affected
by the outcome. Saying "No" to a friend/ally generally requires
courage of conviction and the belief that there is something greater
at stake than a bruised ego.

Seems to me that it's exactly when a friend, an ally, or a spouse
looks us in the eye and says "No" that we need to regognize that
there's something important that we haven't taken into consideration;
and that we need to understand before proceeding.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

Todd Fatheree wrote:


Do you suppose the Normans considered themselves French? I really don't
know the answer, but I have my doubts.

Given that they adopted the French language, religion and customs
and intermarried with the Gauls, I tend to think they did think
of themselves as French. Just like the Norse who settled in Ireland
and in various parts of Europe rapidly assimilated themselves into
the loccal cultures.

....


What did the French have to lose by saying "no"?

They lost very little by saying 'no'. Had they said 'yes' they would
have signed on to a dishonest resolution, false to fact.

Personally, I think their reasons were more pragmatic, the French
wanted to retain their options on the Iraqi oil fields and maintain
good diplomatic relationships with other parts of the world ALSO
opposed, for various reasons, to the invasion.

However, when statesmen do take a morally correct course of action,
even if they have ulterior motives, the common people should praise
not condemn them.

It's not as if the stakes
were "agree with us or we start dropping bombs on Paris". Heck, I still
hold a grudge that we couldn't get clearance to fly over France to bomb
Khadaffi, and he definitely had it coming.

Maybe if our pilots had taken that shorter route they would have
been better rested and so woudl have had better aim. They might
not have hit the French embassy in Tripoli, for example. One
wonders if that particular bomb was a dud by accident or not ...

--

FF

Morris Dovey wrote:



Well, that's one of the choices available - but grudges are terribly
consumptive and life is too short and precious to spend on resentment
that can't change past events. Khalil Gibran said it really well when
he wrote: "The moving finger writes and having writ moves on..."


Except that Omar Kayham wrote about the moving finger......"nor all you
piety nor wit shall call it back to cancel half a line, nor all your
tears wash out a word of it."

Kalil Gibran wrote some moving words but those were not his. He was
several hundred years later.

Ed R

Ed Rinehart (in ) said:

| Morris Dovey wrote:
|
|
||
|| Well, that's one of the choices available - but grudges are
|| terribly consumptive and life is too short and precious to spend
|| on resentment that can't change past events. Khalil Gibran said it
|| really well when he wrote: "The moving finger writes and having
|| writ moves on..."
|
| Except that Omar Kayham wrote about the moving finger......"nor all
| you piety nor wit shall call it back to cancel half a line, nor all
| your tears wash out a word of it."
|
| Kalil Gibran wrote some moving words but those were not his. He was
| several hundred years later.

Ed...

You're absolutely right! I'd been thinking about Gibran's commentary
on the difficulty of sharing a vision; and short-circuited. Seems to
happen with greater and greater frequency these days.

Good catch - and thanks!

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 16:29:49 -0700, Fly-by-Night CC wrote:
In article ,
Dave Hinz wrote:

Well, it's not like they don't continue to do staggeringly stupid things
over and over.

And I'm sure many of the world believe we've done some staggeringly
stupid things as well - training and equipping Bin Laden or making such
a national flap over a leader's infidelities come to mind.

It wasn't about his infidelities, it was about him not having the balls
to own up to them. Looked right in the camera and told the world he
hadn't done it, remember? Then, did the same with congress.

Too, I'm sure
glad we showed those French how to put those Vietnamese in their places
when they failed.

Yes, sometimes things get ****ed up so bad that they can't be fixed by
an incompetant military strategy. I don't consider Johnson to be an
example of a great strategist, do you?

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:40:28 +0100, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:39:01 -0500, Prometheus
wrote:

1066. They conquered Britian.

What's "Britain" ?

England barely existed at that period - Britain certainly didn't.

And they weren't French, they were Vikings. Other than those minor
issues, he's right on though. Course, that leaves exactly nothing...

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:00:02 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:
Dave Hinz (in ) said:

| Well, it's not like they don't continue to do staggeringly stupid
| things over and over. And my knowledge is based on personal
| experience with several trips to France; I'm not just repeating
| what I've heard when I say that Paris is beautiful but smells
| awful, for instance. I'm also not just parroting something I've
| read or heard when I say that the French were astonishingly rude,
| both in Paris and Calais.

I've heard this from other visitors; and admit that I felt a certain
trepidation about traveling to France. I'd been told to expect a cold
rudeness and that I could expect to be looked down upon if I couldn't
speak French well (I don't.)

It's not just speaking French; you need to speak the _right_ French.
First time I was there, was Paris in 1986 or so. Went with a
French-speaking family from Belgium. Alas, they spoke the 'wrong
French'. But, it wasn't just our group that was getting the treatment;
the French were being rude to each other as well.

Calais, in 1992-93. Was there during an extended stay in England. We
went into several shops, looking for some souvenier-type items. Prices
were on the bottom, as was the country-of-origin stickers. No point in
buying a souvenier of France if it was made in China, y'know? So, the 3
or 4 of us were trying to pick out something to buy, not being loud or
disruptive, just _shopping_. Apparently looking at prices and countries
of origin is astonishingly rude in France, because the shop owner asked
us to stop touching the merchandise. This wasn't crystal glass or
anything even vaguely breakable, it was just your usual touristy-crap
stuff. We decided to shop elsewhere, and then get a bite to eat.

So, we found a restaurant with the menu posted outside, which matched
our price range (spendy but not obscenely so). As we're walking in, an
American couple was coming out, handed us a half-bottle of wine and half
of a loaf of bread, and said "Here, you'll need these". Took an hour
and a half before we were _acknowledged_ by the wait staff.

Maybe that's some cultural thing, but I kind of expect to be, you know,
acknowledged and seated when there are visibly open tables.

The taxis - well, I don't have time to describe that craziness.

I've never cared much for major metroplexes. I appreciate what they
have to offer; and recognize that those offerings are only possible
because of their size and confluence of influences - but there have
only ever been two that I've been able to really like: Copenhagen and
Philadelphia.

Never been to Philly, but yes, Kobenhavn is great, I also liked Oslo and
London rather a lot.

I guess I should add that I'm /not/ a good tourist. I burned out on
cathedrals and castles and relics of the distant past a half century
ago.

Ah, for me that's still fun. Best art for centuries was done for the
churches and kings.

But I'm much more interested in /people/ and how the way people in one
place see the world differently than people in other places - and I'm
interested in /why/ those differences exist. My visit to France was to
satisfy curiosity about its people and to discover anything at all
that might help me to broaden my horizons a bit.

What was your impression of the people?

I visited in September and October and it didn't smell awful. It
smelled better than Chicago when I was last in the Windy City. Perhaps
time of year or prevailing wind make a difference; and perhaps I was
just lucky.

(thinks) I was to Paris in July or August. I remember the odor of urine
and dog **** was overpowering. Beautiful buildings, though.

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 10:32:27 GMT, Glen wrote:
John McCoy wrote:


In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?


Napolean did quite well, for most of the 20-odd years he was
in charge.

Wasn't he Corsican?

Yeah, now cue the "Technically, Corsica was French territory when he was
born" folks.

Dave Hinz wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 16:29:49 -0700, Fly-by-Night CC wrote:

...making such
a national flap over a leader's infidelities come to mind.

It wasn't about his infidelities, it was about him not having the balls
to own up to them.

I disagree. It was about perjury.

Looked right in the camera and told the world he
hadn't done it, remember? Then, did the same with congress.

BFD, he said the same when deposed. That crossed the line
between dishonesty and illegality.


Too, I'm sure
glad we showed those French how to put those Vietnamese in their places
when they failed.

Yes, sometimes things get ****ed up so bad that they can't be fixed by
an incompetant military strategy. I don't consider Johnson to be an
example of a great strategist, do you?

Clearly Texas has yet to produce a President (at least a President
of the US) who was even marginally competent as Comander-in-Chief.

--

FF

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:28:00 +0100, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:01:42 -0400, gregg wrote:

Saw Nappy's tomb at the Hotel Invalide couple years ago. Amazing.

In an "If Liberace liked granite" sort of style

Never seen the tomb, but Andy, your description is a great example of
saying very much with very few words.

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 10:58:14 -0500, Prometheus wrote:
On 22 Jul 2005 15:28:54 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

Um. You _do_ know that the Normans (Norse Men) were vikings hung out in
France for 2 generations before joining the Norwegian vikings to take
over England, right?

My grandpa came to the US from Austria in 1939, and then he and his
brothers went back to fight the Nazis as a member of the US military-
and he was the only one to survive. Two of my uncles and a cousin
from Czechoslavakia fought in Vietnam, and one of them gave his life
as well. So, does that mean that Americans are cowards as well, since
they had to have Austrians fight their wars for them? You don't just
kind of *hang out* in a country for multiple generations- they were
French.

They didn't join the French culture. They didn't speak French. They
kept their Nordic naming conventions. The attacked in conjunction with
the Norwegian vikings. Other than language, culture, and alignment,
sure, I guess you could call them French. (sheesh)

Right. Tell me again how surrendering as quickly as humanly possible is
"couragous"?

You do not have to fight a war to have courage.

Right, just roll over and let Germany come on in, over and over, and let
others bail you out. That, my friend, is courageous. What do you
think, 2030 for the next time? That's my guess.

Dave Hinz wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:00:02 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:
...

I've heard this from other visitors; and admit that I felt a certain
trepidation about traveling to France. I'd been told to expect a cold
rudeness and that I could expect to be looked down upon if I couldn't
speak French well (I don't.)

It's not just speaking French; you need to speak the _right_ French.
First time I was there, was Paris in 1986 or so. Went with a
French-speaking family from Belgium. Alas, they spoke the 'wrong
French'. But, it wasn't just our group that was getting the treatment;
the French were being rude to each other as well.

Hmm, remind you of New York?

Moreover, Parisian French isn't spoken anywhere outside of Paris,
except by furriners who learned to speak French that way.

I was in Paris twice in January, 1973. The first time there was
a masive street demonstration, the second time a massive riot.

The Parisians were nice to me though, and my French was not the
best, though better than it is today. The tongue rusts.

--

FF

There is no soc.culture.norman (which should tell you something) so
I've crossposte this to soc.culture.french. Absent a discussion
of woodworking, perhaps future athors will drop rec.woodworking
from the distribution.

Dave Hinz wrote:


They didn't join the French culture. They didn't speak French. They
kept their Nordic naming conventions. The attacked in conjunction with
the Norwegian vikings. Other than language, culture, and alignment,
sure, I guess you could call them French. (sheesh)


So what was Guillaume's Nordic name?
Guillaume's invasion had the blessing of the Pope so surely you will
not
claim that they had not adopted the French religion. After the
invasion,
English picked up a lot of 'Norman French' words which seems improbable
if the Normans's didn't speak it either. The Dukes of Normandy swore
fealty to the Capetian Kings of France as did the Gaulic Lords.

The Norman French who invaded England were more French at that time
than the Americans who won the Revolutionary War were American at
that time.

'Americans' TODAY are still less American than those Norman French
were French.

--

FF

In article . com, wrote:

Clearly Texas has yet to produce a President (at least a President
of the US) who was even marginally competent as Comander-in-Chief.

You misspelled "Arkansas".

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article ,
Dave Hinz wrote:

It wasn't about his infidelities, it was about him not having the balls
to own up to them. Looked right in the camera and told the world he
hadn't done it, remember? Then, did the same with congress.

Of course it was about his infidelities - if it weren't it would never
have proceeded past Tripp's friendly act of taping her friend. It wasn't
Lewinski who was pressing for an investigation or making accusations. It
wasn't the Mrs. who was putting this under public investigation. Those
opposing Clinton tried for years and years to nail him, his wife and
those around him (to draw him in by association) by whatever
investigation they could scrape up - then they finally found his
Achilles crotch - which anyone would similarly deny infidelity. It was
the entire public investigation into his sexual activities that had much
of the world bewildered and bemused over the flap.

Anyone else see a parallel with the Plame debacle? If whoever it was who
was talking about her to the reporters had stepped forward two years ago
and accepted responsibility - whether what was said was unlawful or not
- then we could have likely saved 2 years of guessing, court time (up to
the Supreme Court), costs and jailing a reporter. Rove should had
publicly said, "Yes, I spoke with so'n'so about Plame and am willing to
accept responsibility for any part I may have played that may turn out
to be unlawful." It would have protected his "boss" and defused much of
the issue - not to mention, OK, I'll mention it anyway, furthering the
Bush mantra that this administration was going to be accountable - just
goes to show that they're just as political and adept at covering up as
any other administration.

What these people - Clinton included - don't see is that if they take
the advice all our parents told us, that "it's much better to confess
and face the consequences than for me to find out later that you did
indeed do it", they'd not have anywhere near the public outcry over the
actual transgression.
--
Owen Lowe
The Fly-by-Night Copper Company
__________

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
Corporate States of America and to the
Republicans for which it stands, one nation,
under debt, easily divisible, with liberty
and justice for oil."
- Wiley Miller, Non Sequitur, 1/24/05

In article ,
Dave Hinz wrote:

Yes, sometimes things get ****ed up so bad that they can't be fixed by
an incompetant military strategy. I don't consider Johnson to be an
example of a great strategist, do you?

Gee, I thought Nixon entered office in '69... that left almost 5 years
for a Republican president to straighten it out with his brilliant
military strategy.
--
Owen Lowe
The Fly-by-Night Copper Company
__________

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
Corporate States of America and to the
Republicans for which it stands, one nation,
under debt, easily divisible, with liberty
and justice for oil."
- Wiley Miller, Non Sequitur, 1/24/05