TERROR ALERT IN FRANCE

Paris, July 7, 2005- AP and UPI reported that the French government has
raised its terror alert level from RUN to HIDE on their four level danger
scale.

The two higher French danger levels are Surrender and Collaborate. According
to informed sources, the rise was precipitated by a fire yesterday which
destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing its military.

Every time I see one of these, I try to remember which country it was who
came to the aid of the colonies in their efforts to rid themselves of
British rule.

Ironic isn't it, we fought the Germans twice and the Japanese, accused them
of horrendous war crimes, now the U.S. is one of if not the largest trading
partner with both of those countries. During World War 2 we allied
ourselves with the French people, who unlike any American, then or now, knew
firsthand the effects of being occupied by a foreign power. Apparently those
war criminals we fought so bravely against are ok so long as they're
manufacturing something we want to buy.

I wonder if the reticence of the French to back Mr. Bush's folly in Iraq had
anything to do with their experiences in WW2? Or perhaps they remember
better than we do the tremendous waste of lives in that little conflict in
Indochina.

I'd also like to see some brave internet keyboard warrior tell a French
Foreign Legionnaire to his face that he's a coward.

John Emmons

"Leon" wrote in message
. ..
TERROR ALERT IN FRANCE

Paris, July 7, 2005- AP and UPI reported that the French government has
raised its terror alert level from RUN to HIDE on their four level danger
scale.

The two higher French danger levels are Surrender and Collaborate.
According
to informed sources, the rise was precipitated by a fire yesterday which
destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing its
military.

"John Emmons" wrote in message
...
Every time I see one of these, I try to remember which country it was who
came to the aid of the colonies in their efforts to rid themselves of
British rule.

They only jumped on board because they hated the British, and 2 against 1
looked better for the French rather than going it alone.

Are you implying that a country might have ulterior motives when allying
themselves to another?....I'm shocked...

So I guess if you help someone but you have an ulterior motive it's like you
didn't help them at all, is that it?


"Leon" wrote in message
. ..

"John Emmons" wrote in message
...
Every time I see one of these, I try to remember which country it was
who
came to the aid of the colonies in their efforts to rid themselves of
British rule.

They only jumped on board because they hated the British, and 2 against 1
looked better for the French rather than going it alone.

"John Emmons" wrote in message
...
Every time I see one of these, I try to remember which country it was who
came to the aid of the colonies in their efforts to rid themselves of
British rule.

And it was out of their sheer love and admiration for us. No, really.

Ironic isn't it, we fought the Germans twice and the Japanese, accused
them
of horrendous war crimes

Are you saying they weren't responsible for war crimes? Quick...someone get
the Nuremburg War Crimes tribunal on the phone.

now the U.S. is one of if not the largest trading partner with both of
those countries.

Actually, we're 2nd on both lists behind China (Japan) and France!
(Germany). Where the hell are you going with this?

During World War 2 we allied ourselves with the French people, who unlike
any American, then or now,
knew firsthand the effects of being occupied by a foreign power.

They've certainly been occupied by the best.

Apparently those war criminals we fought so bravely against are ok so long
as they're
manufacturing something we want to buy.

I'm guessing most of the war criminals from WWII are busy pushing up daisies
right now. And I still don't know where the hell you're going with this.

I wonder if the reticence of the French to back Mr. Bush's folly in Iraq
had
anything to do with their experiences in WW2? Or perhaps they remember
better than we do the tremendous waste of lives in that little conflict
in
Indochina.

Or perhaps they were getting a sweetheart deal if the Oil for Bribes,
errrr....I mean Food program.

I'd also like to see some brave internet keyboard warrior tell a French
Foreign Legionnaire to his face that he's a coward.

You're aware that roughly 70% of Legionnaires are not French, yes? Kinda
undermines whatever point you were attempting to make.

John Emmons

todd

In article , "John Emmons" wrote:
Every time I see one of these, I try to remember which country it was who
came to the aid of the colonies in their efforts to rid themselves of
British rule.

That aid was based on their desire to damage the British, not on any
particular desire to help us. In any event, we paid them back in WW1.

Ironic isn't it, we fought the Germans twice and the Japanese, accused them
of horrendous war crimes, now the U.S. is one of if not the largest trading
partner with both of those countries. During World War 2 we allied
ourselves with the French people,

More accurate to say that we opposed the countries that made war on them...

who unlike any American, then or now, knew
firsthand the effects of being occupied by a foreign power.

And whose fault is that, anyway?
Q: Why are the streets of Paris lined with trees?
A: So the German army can march in the shade.

Apparently those
war criminals we fought so bravely against are ok so long as they're
manufacturing something we want to buy.

Ummmm.... the people we're doing business with are not the same ones we fought
against. The war ended sixty years ago, you know.

I wonder if the reticence of the French to back Mr. Bush's folly in Iraq had
anything to do with their experiences in WW2? Or perhaps they remember
better than we do the tremendous waste of lives in that little conflict in
Indochina.

Might've had more to do with the billions of dollars of business they were
doing under the table with Saddam in the so-called "Oil for Food" program.

I wonder what explains France's refusal to allow American aircraft based in
England to fly over French territory on their way to kick Moammar Qaddafi's
butt twenty years ago. Could it be that they just don't like the U.S.?

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

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

"John Emmons" wrote in message
...
Are you implying that a country might have ulterior motives when allying
themselves to another?....I'm shocked...

So I guess if you help someone but you have an ulterior motive it's like
you
didn't help them at all, is that it?

Did you not ever study world history?

After all this circuitous "logic"- which can set one spinning, back to
the apparent initial assumption- that France can be dissed because it
wouldn't tag along with W's let's-have-a-war party. "Freedom fries"
and all that.

Maybe they take a longer historic view of the downside of war? Like
what happened at Verdun? And elsewhere. Maybe they, like the Pope,
saw the folly of what W was selling. Maybe they like to think for
themselves.

Nobody can claim perfection. Those we dissed in the pre-war period,
like Hans Blix, it turns out were seeing and telling the truth about
Saddam's weapons. Sure gives them a leg up on our beloved leaders.

J

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


wrote in message
oups.com...
After all this circuitous "logic"- which can set one spinning, back to
the apparent initial assumption- that France can be dissed because it
wouldn't tag along with W's let's-have-a-war party. "Freedom fries"
and all that.

Maybe they take a longer historic view of the downside of war? Like
what happened at Verdun? And elsewhere. Maybe they, like the Pope,
saw the folly of what W was selling. Maybe they like to think for
themselves.

Nobody can claim perfection. Those we dissed in the pre-war period,
like Hans Blix, it turns out were seeing and telling the truth about
Saddam's weapons. Sure gives them a leg up on our beloved leaders.

J

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.

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

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

"Dave" wrote in message
news:UrPDe.170606$_o.155947@attbi_s71...
In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?
Yes, a boat load, and we have lost a load too...

- gauls lots to the romans
- capetians got the romans out
- lots of wars that ended up with carolus magnus (800ish) got the french
county (which was rather small at the beginning) to expand from spain to
germany/austria
- split of the kingdom as his Hairs were each given 1/3 of the country, some
more wars some lost, some won that got the coutnry to fluctuate for a couple
100 years..
- Guillaume le conquerant (william the conqueror) won england
- england turns against france, lots of more wars and political games that
got the country boundaries fluctuating a whole lot again...
- end of dark ages
- france boundaries are pretty much what they are now...
- start of expantion of the country through overseas conquests, africa,
canada, US, far east, helped the US to get the brits out...
- most of the overseas territories are lost overtime, from american
possessions (lots to wars and treaties, such as selling of lousiana),
popular uprising (africa, far east)
- while we are in the far east, we got our arse kiked in Vietnam (Dien Bien
Pou) and left, the US said: We are the best and will take care of the punny
little thing... France told them don't! US said: We will show you... we know
the rest....
- napoleon did lots of damages in europe expanding france tremendously, but
at the end, it went back to where it was...
- 1878 do not remember if it was our last king or napoleon 3, but lost a
little bit of the territory on the east, got it back after WW1...

france had lots of victories and lots of defeats too, but at the end, france
is still one of the most influent country in the world, it's territoray is
definitly larger than the small land of the original king (huges capet)
kingdom, so some things must not have been that bad...

Cyrille


wrote in message
oups.com...
After all this circuitous "logic"- which can set one spinning, back to
the apparent initial assumption- that France can be dissed because it
wouldn't tag along with W's let's-have-a-war party. "Freedom fries"
and all that.

Maybe they take a longer historic view of the downside of war? Like
what happened at Verdun? And elsewhere. Maybe they, like the Pope,
saw the folly of what W was selling. Maybe they like to think for
themselves.

Nobody can claim perfection. Those we dissed in the pre-war period,
like Hans Blix, it turns out were seeing and telling the truth about
Saddam's weapons. Sure gives them a leg up on our beloved leaders.

J

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 03:15:36 GMT, "John Emmons"
wrote:


I'd also like to see some brave internet keyboard warrior tell a French
Foreign Legionnaire to his face that he's a coward.

John Emmons

Most of the French Foriegn legion are actually not French.

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:45:04 GMT, Wee Jock Poo Pong McPlop wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 03:15:36 GMT, "John Emmons"
wrote:


I'd also like to see some brave internet keyboard warrior tell a French
Foreign Legionnaire to his face that he's a coward.

John Emmons

Most of the French Foriegn legion are actually not French.

Hence the name?

"Wee Jock Poo Pong McPlop" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 03:15:36 GMT, "John Emmons"
wrote:


I'd also like to see some brave internet keyboard warrior tell a French
Foreign Legionnaire to his face that he's a coward.

John Emmons

Most of the French Foriegn legion are actually not French.

Funny how Mr. Emmons totally shoots himself in the foot with this
Legionnaire comment. I guess the "Foreign" part of French Foreign Legion
went over his head. In fact, from what I read, the French that *are* in
have to say they're from somewhere else (or at least they had to at one
time).

todd

Dave Hinz wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:45:04 GMT, Wee Jock Poo Pong McPlop wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 03:15:36 GMT, "John Emmons"
wrote:


I'd also like to see some brave internet keyboard warrior tell a French
Foreign Legionnaire to his face that he's a coward.

John Emmons

Most of the French Foriegn legion are actually not French.

Hence the name?

IIRC, the Foreign Legion was called that because it had standing orders
to NEVER be stationed on homeland French soil.

For real toughness, without bluster, I would go for the British Royal
Marines. I met a few of them when I was in USMC. Impressive types,
almost no bull**** or chicken****, just well trained and rugged.

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
ups.com...


Dave Hinz wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:45:04 GMT, Wee Jock Poo Pong McPlop
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 03:15:36 GMT, "John Emmons"
wrote:


I'd also like to see some brave internet keyboard warrior tell a
French
Foreign Legionnaire to his face that he's a coward.

John Emmons

Most of the French Foriegn legion are actually not French.

Hence the name?

IIRC, the Foreign Legion was called that because it had standing orders
to NEVER be stationed on homeland French soil.

That was also the case. Until 1962, the Legion headquarters were in Algeria
and the Legion was not to be stationed in France except during times of war.
The current headquarters are in Aubagne, France. However, the name comes
from the fact that enlistees were mostly non-French.

todd

Doug Miller (in ) said:

| Could it be that they just don't like the U.S.?

I don't think that's the case. They don't seem to have any problem
with individual Americans; but do seem to have issues with the
direction our political leaders are headed.

A week after the 9-11 attacks I saw little memorials (almost like
little shrines) for the American victims set up in many places - often
in little "Mom and pop" stores away from the normal tourist track. In
Epinal I stopped in a MacDonalds for a bag of /pommes frites/ (fries)
and was, of course, immediately recognized as an American. The lady
behind the counter grabbed both my arm and spent about a half hour
tearfully telling me how devastated she was over the attacks. She was
interrupted several times by other customers who had to take time to
tell me how sorry they were about what had happened. It was the same
everywhere I went. The least demonstrative was an old gentleman in the
open market in Auxonne who identified me as an American (How do people
/do/ that?), grabbed my arm to get my attention, looked me in the eye
and wished me (I think perhaps /all/ of us) "Courage" (with a soft
"g") - and then disappeared into the crowd.

A couple of days before I returned to the States, I self-consciously
apologized to a Paris store clerk for my (surely horrible) American
accent - it'd been 40 years since I'd studied French in high school
and I hadn't spoken a word of French before this trip - and she
laughed and told me (to my everlasting surprise) that many French
women considered an American accent sexy - and seemed bemused when I
told her that it worked exactly the same way in reverse. Perhaps it
was true or perhaps she was just trying to make me feel good - but
even if just the latter, she succeeded.

None of my experiences - *none* - even hinted that we aren't liked. I
suspect they're having a lot of difficulty trying to figure out what
we think we're trying to accomplish as a nation - and I suspect
they've decided that we're making unwise choices for reasons they
can't see.

But I haven't seen or heard anything that would lead me to believe I'd
feel unliked if I made the same trip today.

Having had that experience, I find this whole "Freedom Fries" thing
worse than silly. It strikes me as the small and mean-spirited
behavior of people who can't figure out who their friends are.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm going to brush up my French -
and *keep* my American accent :-)

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

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

In "all of history" would you, by any chance include the History
of the Holy Roman Empire, the Norman invasion of England, and the
Napoleonic Wars?

--

FF

"Dave" wrote in news:UrPDe.170606$_o.155947@attbi_s71:

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.

Since then, France's military efforts have tended to have
disappointing results.

(side note to John Emmons - the first country the US went
to war against, after the revolution, was France. Evidently
the folks back then didn't feel they owed the French much :-)

John

"Morris Dovey" wrote in news:N3TDe.59$Bv1.1121
@news.uswest.net:

Doug Miller (in ) said:

| Could it be that they just don't like the U.S.?

I don't think that's the case. They don't seem to have any problem
with individual Americans; but do seem to have issues with the
direction our political leaders are headed.

A week after the 9-11 attacks I saw little memorials (almost like
little shrines) for the American victims set up in many places - often
in little "Mom and pop" stores away from the normal tourist track. In
Epinal I stopped in a MacDonalds for a bag of /pommes frites/ (fries)
and was, of course, immediately recognized as an American. The lady
behind the counter grabbed both my arm and spent about a half hour
tearfully telling me how devastated she was over the attacks. She was
interrupted several times by other customers who had to take time to
tell me how sorry they were about what had happened. It was the same
everywhere I went. The least demonstrative was an old gentleman in the
open market in Auxonne who identified me as an American (How do people
/do/ that?), grabbed my arm to get my attention, looked me in the eye
and wished me (I think perhaps /all/ of us) "Courage" (with a soft
"g") - and then disappeared into the crowd.

A couple of days before I returned to the States, I self-consciously
apologized to a Paris store clerk for my (surely horrible) American
accent - it'd been 40 years since I'd studied French in high school
and I hadn't spoken a word of French before this trip - and she
laughed and told me (to my everlasting surprise) that many French
women considered an American accent sexy - and seemed bemused when I
told her that it worked exactly the same way in reverse. Perhaps it
was true or perhaps she was just trying to make me feel good - but
even if just the latter, she succeeded.

None of my experiences - *none* - even hinted that we aren't liked. I
suspect they're having a lot of difficulty trying to figure out what
we think we're trying to accomplish as a nation - and I suspect
they've decided that we're making unwise choices for reasons they
can't see.

But I haven't seen or heard anything that would lead me to believe I'd
feel unliked if I made the same trip today.

Having had that experience, I find this whole "Freedom Fries" thing
worse than silly. It strikes me as the small and mean-spirited
behavior of people who can't figure out who their friends are.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm going to brush up my French -
and *keep* my American accent :-)

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



nicely said..

The whole 'French Fries'/ freedom fries story is comical when you
understand that French fries are *not* French, never have been. The name
derives from when the term 'french' was an americanism for fancy, the
idea being that at the time (1800's) the French where somehow more
sophisticated. Some would argue that's still the case..

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 20:13:47 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy wrote:
"Dave" wrote in news:UrPDe.170606$_o.155947@attbi_s71:

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.

From Wikipedia, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napolean
Early life - Family and Childhood

He was born Napoleone Buonaparte (in Corsican, Nabolione or Nabulione)
in the city of Ajaccio on Corsica. He later adopted the more
French-sounding Napoléon Bonaparte, the first known instance of which
appears in an official report dated 28 March 1796.

I would suggest that a foreign leader running the army doesn't qualify
as France "winning a war by themselves".

"Charlie Self" wrote in message

For real toughness, without bluster, I would go for the British Royal
Marines. I met a few of them when I was in USMC. Impressive types,
almost no bull**** or chicken****, just well trained and rugged.

Once you know the score, you can tell immediately when you meet one of the
type.

I happened to make the acquaintance of a BRM last summer when I was over
there for my oldest daughter's wedding. Older guy, at least older than the
bride and groom's friends gathered for the occasion, in his mid forties or
so. His quiet, but somehow solid demeanor and penetrating look reminded me
immediately of the "sneaky pete's" I knew along the Cambodian border in the
late 60's ... the guys who operated. _alone_ in the jungle for weeks at a
time. No matter who trains them, these guys all seem to have that same look
in their eye. AAMOF, in an aside after first meeting him, I asked my SIL if
Del was in the military, and that's when I got the story on his history.

You somehow instinctively know that this is someone you want on your side
....

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 7/12/05

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 03:15:36 GMT, "John Emmons"
wrote:

Every time I see one of these, I try to remember which country it was who
came to the aid of the colonies in their efforts to rid themselves of
British rule.


"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"





Tom Watson - WoodDorker
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)

wrote:



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

In "all of history" would you, by any chance include the History
of the Holy Roman Empire, the Norman invasion of England, and the
Napoleonic Wars?


Hmmmmm. The guys who staged the successful invasion of England were
the descendents of Viking settlers who had earlier over-run the native
population of Normandy. So the French can't really claim the invasion
of England as theirs.

.....and didn't some guy called Wellington put an end to Boney's wars
too.

--
Geoff Beale
Extract digit to email

On 21 Jul 2005 13:10:34 -0700, wrote:

the Norman invasion of England,

They were Scandinavians though, not French.

Geoff Beale wrote:
wrote:



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

In "all of history" would you, by any chance include the History
of the Holy Roman Empire, the Norman invasion of England, and the
Napoleonic Wars?


Hmmmmm. The guys who staged the successful invasion of England were
the descendents of Viking settlers who had earlier over-run the native
population of Normandy.

They adopted the local language and culture becoming, as was
typical of the Norse wherever they settled, more French than
the French themselves. My best guess would be that by the
time of the invasion of England, there had also been much
intermarriage between the Northmen and the Gauls, as well
as non-marital copropogation hence Guillaume le batard.

Perhaps the Normans benefitted from hybrid vigor...

So the French can't really claim the invasion
of England as theirs.

Care to rethink that? Becuase, if your point is valid
then the US can't really claim to have won WWII either as
the 'Americans' who won that war were almost exclusively
Europeans or descendants of Europeans who had earlier
overun the native population of North America WITHOUT
even adopting to any significant extent American languages
or cultures as had the Northmen in France.

Even more so for the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the
Mexican-American War, the Spanish American War, and WWI,
to name only the declared wars.


....and didn't some guy called Wellington put an end to Boney's wars
too.

Napoleon lost two major battles in his carreer. Waterloo
was one, the Battle of Nations the other. He also lost
major campaigns, in Egypt and in Russia despite not
losing any major battles in either. If you want to regard
the Napoleanic wars as a single war, he lost. If you regard
them as a series of wars, he won many, conquering Italy
and the Austrian-Hungarian empire twice, for two examples.

Of course as others have noted, Napoleon was not French
by birth. He never quite got the hang of speaking French
without an accent. But the Napoleanic Wars were French
Wars, notwithtanding the foreign origins of their Emperor.
The French won many of those, often against numerically
superior forces and after long marches.

--

FF

Andy Dingley wrote:
On 21 Jul 2005 13:10:34 -0700, wrote:

the Norman invasion of England,

They were Scandinavians though, not French.

By the time the Norman French invaded England they had
adopted the French language and culture and had intermarried
with the native Gauls to the point where they were far more
French than almost any 'American' is American today.

Of course Guillaume did have some Flemish along with him.

--

FF

Dave Hinz wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 20:13:47 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy =
om wrote:
"Dave" wrote in news:UrPDe.170606$_o.155947@attbi_s71:

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.

From Wikipedia, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napolean
Early life - Family and Childhood

He was born Napoleone Buonaparte (in Corsican, Nabolione or Nabulione)
in the city of Ajaccio on Corsica. He later adopted the more
French-sounding Napol=E9on Bonaparte, the first known instance of which
appears in an official report dated 28 March 1796.

I would suggest that a foreign leader running the army doesn't qualify
as France "winning a war by themselves".

Your suggestion has little merit.

Corsica was claimed by France before Napoleon was born
there, and may have even already been annexed, by the time
of his birth--I'm not clear on the relative timing of those
two events. His father, who had unsuccessfully fought the
French for Cosican independence sent Napoleon to the Military academy
in Paris and his brother to the Naval academy in a
very deliberate effort to 'Frenchify' them, although it is
said that Napoleon always maintained his Corsican accent.

By the time Napoleon began winning battles, he and
France had pretty well adopted each other.

Napoleon's situation in France was similar in concept to
that of a naturalized citizen.

--=20

FF

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.

But then again, who gives a crap? What war has Switzerland ever won-
do you hate them too? They don't agree with the US- but I fail to see
why that is such a major source of irritation for so many people.
It's not like they're getting ready to invade Maryland. Just because
they don't want to tear down their cafes to make room for a Walmart
with a McDonald's in it, and would rather be French than an American
colony is no crime.

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

wrote in message
roups.com...
After all this circuitous "logic"- which can set one spinning, back to
the apparent initial assumption- that France can be dissed because it
wouldn't tag along with W's let's-have-a-war party. "Freedom fries"
and all that.

Maybe they take a longer historic view of the downside of war? Like
what happened at Verdun? And elsewhere. Maybe they, like the Pope,
saw the folly of what W was selling. Maybe they like to think for
themselves.

Nobody can claim perfection. Those we dissed in the pre-war period,
like Hans Blix, it turns out were seeing and telling the truth about
Saddam's weapons. Sure gives them a leg up on our beloved leaders.

J

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.

But then again, who gives a crap? What war has Switzerland ever won-
do you hate them too? They don't agree with the US- but I fail to see
why that is such a major source of irritation for so many people.
It's not like they're getting ready to invade Maryland. Just because
they don't want to tear down their cafes to make room for a Walmart
with a McDonald's in it, and would rather be French than an American
colony is no crime.

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

wrote in message
roups.com...
After all this circuitous "logic"- which can set one spinning, back to
the apparent initial assumption- that France can be dissed because it
wouldn't tag along with W's let's-have-a-war party. "Freedom fries"
and all that.

Maybe they take a longer historic view of the downside of war? Like
what happened at Verdun? And elsewhere. Maybe they, like the Pope,
saw the folly of what W was selling. Maybe they like to think for
themselves.

Nobody can claim perfection. Those we dissed in the pre-war period,
like Hans Blix, it turns out were seeing and telling the truth about
Saddam's weapons. Sure gives them a leg up on our beloved leaders.

Since WWII, Frances has pretty much gone its own way, often to the
detriment of world possibilites, IMO, but always serving what the
leaders at a particular time saw as French interests.

Currently, they are going their own way about Iraq, among other issues,
and, again IMO, I have to wish we'd gone the same way. We have no
justifiable reason for being there beyond that fact that our entry
created brutal chaos to replace a brutal dictatorship.

That said, the French have no high-falutin moral issues about staying
out. Their lack of involvement is based on oil, as is our involvement.
Whether or not corruption was a major motivating factor at either end
is impossible to say, at least right now. When the heat cools, say in a
couple decades, more of you will know who lied the most and stole the
most. I don't expect to be here, and probably won't much care if I am
still around.

You know, the irony of all these battles over oil is really found in
places other than the immense human tragedy. It is found in the immense
amounts of oil wasted to allow access to what are hoped to be greater
amounts. From the lowliest grunt hummer to the biggest oil line
sabotage, the waste is incredible.

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"?

Dave Hinz wrote in
:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 20:13:47 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:
"Dave" wrote in
news:UrPDe.170606$_o.155947@attbi_s71:

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.

From Wikipedia, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napolean
Early life - Family and Childhood

He was born Napoleone Buonaparte (in Corsican, Nabolione or Nabulione)
in the city of Ajaccio on Corsica. He later adopted the more
French-sounding Napoléon Bonaparte, the first known instance of which
appears in an official report dated 28 March 1796.

I would suggest that a foreign leader running the army doesn't qualify
as France "winning a war by themselves".

Corsica was a part of France at the time (and, aside from a brief
period of British rule, it's remained part of France since then),
and Napolean's family actually had some claim to a minor title in
the French nobility.

So it's somewhat silly to suggest Napolean wasn't French. You
could make a stronger arguement that the army, at least in it's
later years, was not French, since Napolean recruited/conscripted
soldiers from Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Switzerland, various
parts of what's now Germany, etc.

John

"Cyrille de Brébisson" wrote in
:

- Guillaume le conquerant (william the conqueror) won england

Point of order - William the Conquerer (and his army) were Normans.
The Normans (Northmen) were 2nd or 3rd generation Vikings, and
can't properly be considered French.

John

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?

I think you people are missing the point of all of this. It's FUN to
belittle someone else. Call it a bully syndrome, call it pre-judging, call
it whatever you want. But slagging the French is an internationally promoted
English pastime. Americans belittling France, English speaking Canadians
belittling Quebecers. That's the way it's always been and always will. I
know a number of French Canadians that are friends and that I truly admire.
Turn that around 180° and I freely admit I loath the separatist part of the
Quebec government and those who support them. When it comes to their
attempts to break up my country, I go out my way to deride and insult them
at every opportunity.

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:37:30 -0400, Upscale wrote:
"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
In all of history has France ever won a war by themselves?

I didn't write that. Please attribute with more care.

I think you people are missing the point of all of this. It's FUN to
belittle someone else.

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.

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.

Dave "In an urban setting. WTF is _that_ all about?" Hinz

John McCoy wrote:
"Cyrille de Br=E9bisson" wrote in
:

- Guillaume le conquerant (william the conqueror) won england

Point of order - William the Conquerer (and his army) were Normans.
The Normans (Northmen) were 2nd or 3rd generation Vikings, and
can't properly be considered French.


If the Normans, who adopted the French language, religion, and
customs prior to their invasion of England cannot be considered
French because they were 2nd or 3rd generation Vikings, then
I guess that Americans who were 2nd or 3rd generation Europeans
can't properly be considered American. Especially when you
consider they did NOT adopt American languages, religons, or
customs even after MANY generations.

--=20

FF

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 18:43:26 GMT, Cyrille de Brébisson wrote:

(top-posting fixed)

"John McCoy" wrote in message
.. .
"Cyrille de Brébisson" wrote in
:

- Guillaume le conquerant (william the conqueror) won england

Point of order - William the Conquerer (and his army) were Normans.
The Normans (Northmen) were 2nd or 3rd generation Vikings, and
can't properly be considered French.

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

How is your anti-Bush rant related to the fact that you're falsely
giving the French credit for a viking military victory? As a
diversionary tactic, well, that's pretty ineffective.

Imagine my surprise. No, really.

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

"John McCoy" wrote in message
.. .
"Cyrille de Brébisson" wrote in
:

- Guillaume le conquerant (william the conqueror) won england

Point of order - William the Conquerer (and his army) were Normans.
The Normans (Northmen) were 2nd or 3rd generation Vikings, and
can't properly be considered French.

John

Maybe not, but consider how the Gauls (remember Vercingetorix?) gave
the Romans fits. There was Napoleon, but that's another story. Again-
a lot longer history than we're familiar with, and more time to
experience learning curve about results of war. If "no" does that
imply some sort of diminished acceptability? Or is it quite
irrelevant?

Let me turn it around. In all of history, has any one individual made
the decision to commit a nuclear-armed country to war against a far
smaller one, equipped, to boot, with russian military hardware? But
wait, there's mo without understanding the implications and costs of
winning such a war, in spite of advice from SecState.

"Bring it on."

TTFN4

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.