Posted By: thatoneguyinslc
Date Posted: 8/28/2004 7:41:20 PM
I don't. It has always pissed me off that we got that job. I think we should go into things on a case by case basis. Let France help out..If they're not too busy eating cheese and surrendering that is

Posted By: Gideon MacLeish
Date Posted: 8/28/2004 7:52:23 PM
don't forget hanging by their tails....cheese eating surrender monkeys hang by their tails.

Urgh... Speaking of uninformed crap... History lesson: Ever since the Franks first took over the region we call France, France has bee conquered exactly ONCE. In their 1000+ year history, they have had to surrender, and in some cases surrender land; however, they still were conquered only once, which was a result of the German blitzkrieg storming across Europe, catching everyone unaware. It also didn't help that half of France rebelled and helped the Germans. Admittedly, the French handled the Maginot Line stupidly (only blocked Germany, not Belgium or Italy), but the point still stands- the French surrender is understandable to anyone who actually knows about that period of history.

And even when the French surrendered, they didn't sit complacently. French freedom fighters were in operation throughout the war, and they were the ones who actually took back Paris (which has only fallen once).

Let's look at America's military record, shall we? Won the American Revolution BECAUSE THE FRENCH WERE OUR ALLIES. Without the French navy supporting the revolutionary forces, America would have remained a British colony- with a large amount of oppression involved due to the rebellion. Fast forward- World War I. Guess where American troops fought? France. Guess who had held off the Germans for 4 years at that point? France, with the help of Britain. With Britain's blockade of Germany, France would have won eventually anyway- in a war of attrition, the one being blockaded is definitely gonna lose. I already covered WWII...

Ah, Korea. The first time that America didn't win a war. That war was fought to a standstill, then settled (sorta) with an armistice. Good thing, too- America probably would've gotten its butt kicked if they'd stuck around. Next up... well, several minor conflicts, then... Vietnam. America indisputably got smooshed in that one. America hasn't been capable of soundly beating a less advanced opponent since the end of its domination of the Native Americans. Even against Japan, they only won with a couple of nukes and lots and lots of body bags.

Moving on... Another series of minor conflicts... Fall of the Berlin Wall. Surely America had something to do with that, right? Wrong. The fall of the Berlin Wall (and the subsequent fall of the Soviet Union) was caused by huge deficits- hint hint- and general social unrest. By this time, the USSR was far, far better than it had been in previous years (not hard, but...). Hard-core communists were rapidly losing power- the real reason that it fell. Frankly, I don't think that America had much to do with it.

Really, we didn't even win the Cold War. Our economy may have just barely outpaced the Soviets', but it was (and is) weakened greatly. Don't believe me? Check your portfolio sometime.

Desert Storm- a victory, yes, but not much of one. Hussien remained in power, Iraq was still a brutal dictatorship, and the only reason that we won was because we didn't try to occupy, and because many of the Iraqi soldiers surrendered very quickly. If that was suppossed to demonstrate America's military might, then America ain't that mighty, is it?

Iraqi Freedom... Well, that's a whole other post.

Considering America's recent military record, making fun of France due to surrendering once in the past century isn't really that smart, is it?

P.S. It seems to me that eating cheese is a heck of a lot better than eating burgers, fries, sodas, and ketchup all the time. After all, which one has the higher heart attack rates?

Oh, my goodness. This is ridiculous.

I don't know about thatoneguy, but MY comment was an inside joke directed at a flame engineered on another thread. There's no need for a history lesson here. PC has DEFINITELY run amok!!!

Welcome to the middle. I'm the opposite in a lot of ways. but i'm sure we have common ground. My arguement in this post was that we may have differences, but there are more of us with similar beliefs than there are extremes on either side, unfortunately, because our president is so far to one side, the far left has went nuts trying to get their message out, which causes the far right to play the game, and so on and so on and so on, leaving those of us in the middle abandoned. It just kills me that the neo cons and the libs have come after me on this, because i won't go either way. I made my declaration and stand by it. No matter what. I'm in the middle!

All right. I understand what you mean. I agree with that. It's one reason I'll be happy when this election is over. Whether Bush is reelected or Kerry is elected, there'll be no need for the polarization (Cheney's not going to run for President after, right?).

I don't think any comment is needed on DeFlame's comment. I'll let stupidity speak for itself!

and HOLY CRAP! Me and Buu agreed for once!! WOW!