# French Attack?



## Annie (Jan 5, 2009)

First they do this:

AFP: France foils two Somali pirate attacks, holds 19: Paris



> France foils two Somali pirate attacks, holds 19: Paris
> 1 day ago
> PARIS (AFP)  A French warship Sunday foiled attempts by Somalian pirates in the Gulf of Aden to seize two cargo vessels and intercepted 19 people, the French president's office said.
> "Three days after a French vessel thwarted an attack on a Panamanian cargo ship" the frigate Jean de Vienne conducted a "decisive action" against "two new attacks" it said in a statement.
> "The 19 Somali pirates who tried to seize the two boats were intercepted," it added, saying they carried weapons, ammunition and material for boarding ships....




Then this:

The Associated Press: Pirates attack French vessel off Nigerian coast



> Pirates attack French vessel off Nigerian coast
> 4 hours ago
> PARIS (AP)  Pirates hijacked a French boat and took its nine crew members hostage in the latest attack in some of the world's most dangerous waters off oil-rich southern Nigeria, the boat's owner said Monday.
> The captain of the Bourbon Leda was able to speak with the boat's owners Sunday and said that all nine crew members were unharmed, according to a statement by the company, Bourbon, which provides specialist boats for the oil and gas industry. It said in the statement Monday that it was working to free the crew...



Can't catch a break...


----------



## DavidS (Jan 5, 2009)

The French military is an oxymoron.


----------



## elvis (Jan 5, 2009)

Is this the first French attack since Waterloo?


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 6, 2009)

Ah the continuing calumny about the French military.  Remember the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing?  They retaliated against Islamic militants.  

But heck don't let facts spoil the party


----------



## mightypeon (Jan 6, 2009)

Well, "We who are the rest of the people raised our heart and eyes to heaven crying for God to have compassion upon us, and to turn away from us the power of the French."

Who said that?

This completely unfounded "France cannot fight" thing is about as bad as the "Russian hordes" stereotype, closely followed by "Germans like to go to war".

For the record, France most common activity since the rennaisance was kicking around most of continental Europe, especially Germany. Russias main historical problem was a shortage of manpower, and the individual German states were totally incapable of going to war since they lacked significant force projection capacities. Heck, the Habsburgs, the strongest Germans, friggin inherited their territorial gains as opposed to fighting for them.

There is no nation with a long enough history that does not have its share of catastrophic defeats, and Americans strongly adhere to the old PR strategem "After a war, overstate your enemies and belittle your allies".


----------



## editec (Jan 6, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> Ah the continuing calumny about the French military. Remember the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing? They retaliated against Islamic militants.
> 
> But heck don't let facts spoil the party


 
Yes, some Americans are told a load of francophobic nonsense and of course since it suits their preconceived prejudices after years of Anglophilic propaganda, naturally they buy it whole clothe.


----------



## catzmeow (Jan 6, 2009)

editec said:


> Yes, some Americans are told a load of francophobic nonsense and of course since it suits their preconceived prejudices after years of Anglophilic propaganda, naturally they buy it whole clothe.



I don't think it is Anglophilic propaganda to suggest that the French beat themselves with defeatest attitudes in May, 1940.



> The Panzer Corps now slowed their advance considerably but had put themselves in a very vulnerable position. They were stretched out, exhausted and low on fuel; many tanks had broken down. There now was a dangerous gap between them and the infantry. A determined attack by a fresh large mechanized force could have cut them off and wiped them out.
> 
> The French high command, however, was reeling from the shock of the sudden offensive and was stung by a sense of defeatism. On the morning of May 15, French Prime Minister Paul Reynaud telephoned newly minted Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Winston Churchill and said "We have been defeated. We are beaten; we have lost the battle." Churchill, attempting to console Reynaud reminded the Prime Minister of the times the Germans had broken through allied lines in World War I only to be stopped. However, Reynaud was inconsolable.
> 
> Churchill flew to Paris on May 16. He immediately recognized the gravity of the situation when he observed that the French government was already burning its archives and preparing for an evacuation of the capital. In a somber meeting with the French commanders, Churchill asked General Gamelin, "Where is the strategic reserve?" which had saved Paris in the First World War. "There is none," Gamelin replied. Later, Churchill described hearing this as the single most shocking moment in his life. Churchill asked Gamelin when and where the general proposed to launch a counterattack against the flanks of the German bulge. Gamelin simply replied "inferiority of numbers, inferiority of equipment, inferiority of methods".



Reynaud and Gamelin essentially handed France over to the Germans.


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 6, 2009)

The Complete Military History of France 

Gallic Wars
- Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian. [Or at ths time in history, a Roman -ed.]

- Hundred Years War
- Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman." Sainted.

- Italian Wars
- Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.

- Wars of Religion
- France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots

- Thirty Years War
- France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

- War of Revolution
- Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

- The Dutch War
- Tied

- War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War
- Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.

- War of the Spanish Succession
- Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.

- American Revolution
- In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when America does most of the fighting."

- French Revolution
- Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

- The Napoleonic Wars
- Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

- The Franco-Prussian War
- Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

- World War I
- Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States [Entering the war late -ed.]. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

- World War II
- Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

- War in Indochina
- Lost. French forces plead sickness; take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu

- Algerian Rebellion
- Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; "We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.

- War on Terrorism
- France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.

The question for any country silly enough to count on the French should not be "Can we count on the French?", but rather "How long until France collapses?"

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. All you do is leave behind a lot of noisy baggage."

Or, better still, the quote from last week's Wall Street Journal: "They're there when they need you."



With only an hour and a half of research, Jonathan Duczkowski provided the following losses:

Norse invasions, 841-911.
After having their way with the French for 70 years, the Norse are bribed by a French King named Charles the Simple (really!) who gave them Normandy in return for peace. Normans proceed to become just about the only positive military bonus in France's [favour] for next 500 years. 

Andrew Ouellette posts this in response:

1066 A.D. William The Conquerer Duke and Ruler of France Launches the Largest Invasion in the history of the world no other was as large until the same trip was taken in reverse on June 6th 1944 William Fights Harold for the Throne of England Which old king Edward rightfully left to William but Harold Usurped the throne Will fights the Saxons (English)wins and the French Rule England for the Next 80 Years. then the French start the largest building and economic infrastructure since the fall of the Roman Empire the Norman Economy skyrockets and the Normans inadvertantly start England to become a major world Power Vive La France- 

Matt Davis posts this in response to Andrew Ouellette above:

Oh dear. We seem to have overlooked some basic facts. Firstly, Philip the First (1060 - 1108) was King of France at the time of the Norman invasion of 1066 - William was Duke of Normandy and, incidentally, directly descended from the Vikings. William was, therefore, as alien to France as the experience of victory. Since Philip did not invade England, the victory at Hastings was Norman - not French. Normandy may be a part of France now but it most certainly wasn't in 1066. Therefore, William's coronation as King of England had nothing whatsoever to do with the French. As usual, they were nowhere near the place when the fighting was going on. The mistaken belief that 1066 was a French victory leads to the Third Rule of French Warfare; "When incapable of any victory whatsoever - claim someone else's". 

Mexico, 1863-1864.
France attempts to take advantage of Mexico's weakness following its thorough thrashing by the U.S. 20 years earlier ("Halls of Montezuma"). Not surprisingly, the only unit to distinguish itself is the French Foreign Legion (consisting of, by definition, non-Frenchmen). Booted out of the country a little over a year after arrival. 

Panama jungles 1881-1890.
No one but nature to fight, France still loses; canal is eventually built by the U.S. 1904-1914. 

Napoleonic Wars.
Should be noted that the Grand Armee was largely (~%50) composed of non-Frenchmen after 1804 or so. Mainly disgruntled minorities and anti-monarchists. Not surprisingly, these performed better than the French on many occasions. 

Haiti, 1791-1804.
French defeated by rebellion after sacrificing 4,000 Poles to yellow fever. Shows another rule of French warfare; when in doubt, send an ally. 

India, 1673-1813.
British were far more charming than French, ended up victors. Therefore the British are well known for their tea, and the French for their whine (er, wine...). Ensures 200 years of bad teeth in England. 

Barbary Wars, middle ages-1830.
Pirates in North Africa continually harass European shipping in Meditteranean. France's solution: pay them to leave us alone. America's solution: kick their asses ("the Shores of Tripoli"). [America's] first overseas victories, won 1801-1815. 

1798-1801, Quasi-War with U.S.
French privateers (semi-legal pirates) attack U.S. shipping. U.S. fights France at sea for 3 years; French eventually cave; sets precedent for next 200 years of Franco-American relations. 

Moors in Spain, late 700s-early 800s.
Even with Charlemagne leading them against an enemy living in a hostile land, French are unable to make much progress. Hide behind Pyrennes until the modern day. 

French-on-French losses (probably should be counted as victories too, just to be fair): 

1208: Albigenses Crusade, French massacared by French.
When asked how to differentiate a heretic from the faithful, response was "Kill them all. God will know His own." Lesson: French are badasses when fighting unarmed men, women and children. 

St. Bartholomew Day Massacre, August 24, 1572.
Once again, French-on-French slaughter. 

Third Crusade.
Philip Augustus of France throws hissy-fit, leaves Crusade for Richard the Lion Heart to finish. 

Seventh Crusade.
St. Louis of France leads Crusade to Egypt. Resoundingly crushed. 

[Eighth] Crusade.
St. Louis back in action, this time in Tunis. See Seventh Crusade. 

Also should be noted that France attempted to hide behind the Maginot line, sticking their head in the sand and pretending that the Germans would enter France that way. By doing so, the Germans would have been breaking with their traditional route of invading France, entering through Belgium (Napoleonic Wars, Franco-Prussian War, World War I, etc.). French ignored this though, and put all their effort into these defenses. 

Thomas Whiteley has submitted this addition to me:

Seven year War 1756-1763
Lost: after getting hammered by Frederick the Great of Prussia (yep, the Germans again) at Rossbach, the French were held off for the remainder of the War by Frederick of Brunswick and a hodge-podge army including some Brits. War also saw France kicked out of Canada (Wolfe at Quebec) and India (Clive at Plassey). 

Richard Mann, an American in France wants to add the following:

The French consider the departure of the French from Algeria in 1962-63, after 130 years on colonialism, as a French victory and especially consider C. de Gaulle as a hero for 'leading' said victory over the unwilling French public who were very much against the departure. This ended their colonialism. About 2 million ungrateful Algerians lost their lives in this shoddy affair.


----------



## mightypeon (Jan 6, 2009)

Thats what I call typical francophobe rubbish. 

100 year war mostly lost? Please have a look at the English possession before and after the war. Before: Aquitane? Normandy? Half of southern France? Jup, all English. After: Calais. period. Over. And they only kept it because Burgundy prevented French military access. 
Saying that France lost the 100 year war is about as stupid as saying that the USSR lost World War 2. 

Barbary campaing? You know, exactly why do you think did the french go into Algeria (and stayed there, I dont remember American colonies in North Africa), jup, had a lot of things to do with wiping out the Barbary pirates they allegedly bribed.

30 years war: You know, before the French intervention, the Habsburgs have beaten back the Danes, bought off the Swedes and kicked the total snot out of the German minors. They more or less turned all of Germany into their puppet states, Brandenburg/Prussia et. al were no longer allowed to negotiate with foreign powers etc. than france came in and after it was through with the Habsburgs they had to accept the return to the status quo ante bellum. Delayed German unification by another 200 years.

What about the Battle of Bouviennes, France decisivly trounces a German/Anglo Alliance, leading to france eventually becoming a centralised state while royal authority evaporated in Germany.

Anyone wanting to reiterate about Carl martell? The first battle of European Knighthood?

For a fairly long time, a French declaration of war was propably the thing that European monarchs feared the most...



@ Catzmeow:
defeat may have many reasons, the Japanese at Kalkin Gol and later during August Storm also thought that "There is no way the unwashed Russian hordes will beat us", only to be surrounded and destroyed by superior tactics instead of human wave assaults.
A Certain defeatist attitude also persisted for a long time amongst Imperial Holy Roman armies as is evidenced in their usually catastophic clashes with Prussian, Ottoman and French forces. Did that lead to a sentiment that Germans cant fight?
I am not saying that French armies are unbeatable military geniousses, no army is unbeatable (btw. there is a reason why military terms like Battalion, Regiment, Advance etc. are coming from the French language), but using a singular defeat to belittle a nation with a martial history of 2000 years is awfully shortsighted.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 6, 2009)

catzmeow said:


> I don't think it is Anglophilic propaganda to suggest that the French beat themselves with defeatest attitudes in May, 1940.
> 
> 
> 
> Reynaud and Gamelin essentially handed France over to the Germans.



And yet the French - let's keep generalising shall we? - had civilians fighting in the Underground against the Vichy forces and the occupying Nazis.


----------



## catzmeow (Jan 6, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> And yet the French - let's keep generalising shall we? - had civilians fighting in the Underground against the Vichy forces and the occupying Nazis.



They had a very difficult time recruiting until DeGaulle was able to recruit sufficient assistance from the Allies that they felt safe playing along.



I do love generalizing broadly, though.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 6, 2009)

Yeah, details annoy me, I enjoy sweeping generalities............beats sweeping the yard


----------



## catzmeow (Jan 6, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> Yeah, details annoy me, I enjoy sweeping generalities............beats sweeping the yard



Or raking, for that matter. We've been doing a shit ton of raking!  meh.


----------



## tigerbob (Jan 6, 2009)

mightypeon said:


> For a fairly long time, a French declaration of war was propably the thing that European monarchs feared the most...



This fairly long time....was it between lunch and tea?


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 6, 2009)

catzmeow said:


> Or raking, for that matter. We've been doing a shit ton of raking!  meh.



Good for the flowers though


----------



## mightypeon (Jan 6, 2009)

I would say that the Kingdom of france was feared between the battle of Bouvienes (around 13th century), roughly until the Franco German war which was 1871. Thats more than 600 years, which is for example longer than the US existed.

Mind you, Charlemange was quite scary too.


----------



## tigerbob (Jan 6, 2009)

mightypeon said:


> Thats more than 600 years, which is for example longer than the US existed.



Thanks for the help with the math.  

I'm assuming you are making a point about France having been a world power for much longer than the USA.  Why?


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 6, 2009)

I've always enjoyed _La Chanson de Roland.
_
Not that it adds much to the discussion, just thought I'd tell you all about it.

And let's not forget Bayard!

Okay, as you were.


----------



## mightypeon (Jan 7, 2009)

Because history is my pet peeve, I A) cannot stand sweeping generalisations and 
B) I cannot stand national prejudices.


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 7, 2009)

yeah, well one carrier fleet will fuck up your 13th century french superpower


----------



## editec (Jan 7, 2009)

Andrew2382 said:


> The Complete Military History of France


 
Amusing, Andrew.



> Gallic Wars
> - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian. [Or at ths time in history, a Roman -ed.]


 
France is still alive. Where are those pesky Roman legions, again? Oh yeah, that's right. They still control the lower east side of Manhatten only now they call themselves the Mafia.



> - Hundred Years War
> - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman." Sainted.


 
I note a distinct lack of Britian control on the continent.



> - Italian Wars
> - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.


 
Yet amazingly, people still speak French in France.



> - Wars of Religion
> - France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots


 
You mean_ Catholic_ France?



> - Thirty Years War
> - France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.


 
There was a war? The French didn't notice as they were too busy living well for three decades.



> - War of Revolution
> - Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.


 
Unlike some nations of obsequious pandering slaves I can name, the Frogs had the good sense to dispatch their royal parasites.




> - The Dutch War
> - Tied


 
Yet, amazingly France ended up with more territiory.



> - War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War
> - Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.


 
_Viva Quebec, mon cher._



> - War of the Spanish Succession
> - Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.


 
Yeah granted. Spain and France did not become the privately kingdom of the Burbons. Whatever happened to the Austo-Hapsburgs Empire, anyway? Oh yeah, that's right..._kaput!_



> - American Revolution
> - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when America does most of the fighting."


 
No French help? No United States of America. If you don't know that, Andrew? You don't know jack shit about American history.



> - French Revolution
> - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.


 
Who is the king of France now? Oh yeah, that's right...they don't bow down to kings, do they? That's more of a John Bull kinda thing, isn't it?



> - The Napoleonic Wars
> - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.


 
A delightful romp all over Europe. Note to self...cancel Russian holiday plans, and drink more wine.



> - The Franco-Prussian War
> - Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night


.

_Finally,_ they French managed to palm off the Alsace-Lorraine on the unsuspecting Kruats.





> - World War I
> - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States [Entering the war late -ed.]. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.


 
Oh? You mean when French stopped the Hun dead in their tracks and fought that war of attrition that so crushed the Germans that they pleaded for peace at_ any_ price? 




> - World War II
> - Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.


 
You mean the same British who ran away from the war until their cousins the Americans finally came to save that nation of royalty asskissing shopkeepers? Yes, the French certainly made a mistake counting on the English for anything like fidelity that's for sure. 



> - War in Indochina
> - Lost. French forces plead sickness; take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu


 
Ho Ho Ho. And then the Americans got their asses kicked by 13 year old girls wearing black pajamas. Very impressive.



> - Algerian Rebellion
> - Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; "We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.


 
First defeat of a western army by the heathens? Somebody needs to read their history a tad more closely, I think.




> - War on Terrorism
> - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.


 

Yeah, remember how those terrorists flew planes into the Eiffel tower and the Palace Royale? 

Oh wait...that was the USA getting handed its ass in Washington and New York on 9-11 wasn't it?

My bad.


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 7, 2009)

lol editc..
you're a fucking idiot.

Listen, I am going to run to the store let me know if you want me to buy you a clue


----------



## pAr (Jan 7, 2009)

Ok, I'll take a bite.

From what I can gather from this thread, it seems the fuss between Brits, Germans and French still exists, but only in America!

Because in Europe today, I would venture to say the majority of us is looking forward to building a peaceful EU.

Yeah, I know, peace in Europe is not in the interest of Lockheed Martin et al; but guess what....... 

Cheers!


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 7, 2009)

Yes also, damn the English for not being to save France's ass earlier.  I mean it only took a whopping 40 days or so for French to completely surrender.  Hell, Poland got taken over but guess what...they never surrendered unlike you're french frogs.

In fact France got taken out so quickly, England had to take out the French fleet in the north so the Germans wouldn't sieze them.

Don't worry though, it was the selfish greedy American and British pigs that lay dead on the shores that prevented the French from eating Schnitzel today.

The thread was satire you imbicile, not to be taken literally sorry it went over your head...but please stop spewing bullshit as if France is a huge military power or they have long traditions of fighting.  The peak of France's military mught is probably a 4 foot 5 guy named Napelon who evutally go this ass handed to him by Russia and a Burning Moscow, whose own generals backstabbed him and then exiled him to Elba


Also, did France help us in our war of independence?

Yes...and no...

They also came at the fucking end basically.

From the perspective of the American Revolution, however, the high point of French support is the landing of five battalions of French infantry and artillery in Rhode Island in 1780. In 1781, these French troops under the command of Count Rochambeau marched south to Virginia where they joined Continental forces under Washington and Lafayette. Cornwallis, encamped on the Yorktown peninsula, hoped to be rescued by the British navy. A French fleet under the command of Admiral DeGrasse intercepted and, after a fierce battle lasting several days, defeated the British fleet and forced it to withdraw. This left the French navy to land heavy siege cannon and other supplies and trapped Cornwallis on the Yorktown peninsula.

At that point, the defeat of Cornwallis was essentially a matter of time.  


General Patton said it best

I would rather have a german division in front of me then a French one behind me.  I know the German one will be there in the morning.







Why are there so many trees on the Champs de Lyses

So the Germans can march in the shade.


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 7, 2009)

pAr said:


> Ok, I'll take a bite.
> 
> From what I can gather from this thread, it seems the fuss between Brits, Germans and French still exists, but only in America!
> 
> ...




lol, take a trip to london or berlin and see how well percieved the Frenchies are.


----------



## editec (Jan 7, 2009)

Andrew2382 said:


> lol editc..
> you're a fucking idiot.
> 
> Listen, I am going to run to the store let me know if you want me to buy you a clue


 
That would be _*le clue*, mon cher._

How very kind of you to offer, though.

Thanks, but  I'm full up on history, so I won't be needing any of fracture fairy tales you're so fond of.

If I need any intellectual junk food, there's always the History Channel.


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 7, 2009)

I though tthe only thing French people know how to say was


J'ai remise


----------



## editec (Jan 7, 2009)

> Also, did France help us in our war of independence?
> 
> Yes...and no...
> 
> They also came at the fucking end basically.


 
You clearly don't know much about American Revolutionary history, sport.

You know a bit about some battles, I suppose, and think that's what all it took to win the war.  

Seriously, you need to do_ a lot_ of reading on this subject if you truly believe the nonsense you posted above is even close to accurate.

I tell you this out of kindness because I do think you don't want to be ignorant, and because you are making yourself look like an ignoramous in this subject.

The French Navy and the French troops were the least of the help that France gave to America, not _all_ that nation gave us, but the least that it gave us.

Like I said, and I mean it, had there been NO French help long before the closing days of the conflict?

There'd have been no United States of America.


----------



## mightypeon (Jan 7, 2009)

I cannot speak about London, but noone I know in Berlin (and you know, I live here) has a significant problem with French people. In fact, antiamericanism is much more widespread than francophobia. 
Of course you bitch a bit, but who does not? I mean, Germans also bitch a lot about not real Germans like Bavarians or Saxons.
The Brits are also fun, the fact that a slightly drunk Brit suddenly thinks he can drink as much as a Russian (and obviously can not) opens many interesting situations.

I mean, the worst prejudice thing I ever did was to create a Cocktail out of Black Tea and Whisky (dont ever try that!) for some British friends of mine.  They later responded by mixing good German Beer with Good German Wodka (pity for both) which resulted in something pretty revolting... especially after they placed a raw sausage in it.


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 7, 2009)

editec said:


> You clearly don't know much about American Revolutionary history, sport.
> 
> You know a bit about some battles, I suppose, and think that's what all it took to win the war.
> 
> ...




Ed, did you even read what I wrote.  Th eonly person who seems ignorant here is you.  I clearly said the French did help, they were the final nail in the coffin to Britian.

Spain helped too, you know that right?  Th ehistory guru that you are. For at least five years, Spain had sent more supplies and money than had been requested to help the American Rebels succeed in what must have appeared to be an impossible dream. Spanish men from the peninsula and throughout the Americas fought in the conflict. 

However, make no mistake...The colonist di dthe majority of the fighting, to say otherwise is fucking stupid and wrong.

As a result of the victory of the Continental forces at Saratoga, Benjamin Franklin, who had gone to Paris as ambassador in 1776, was able to negotiate a Treaty of Amity and Commerce and a Treaty of Alliance with France. From this point, French support became increasingly significant. The French extended considerable financial support to the Congressional forces. France also supplied vital military arms and supplies, and loaned money to pay for their purchase. 

As I said before though the high point was when the 5 battalions landed with naval forces and the French and Americans pounded Cornwallis until he evuntally surrendered.

Their support was undeniable, but don't act as if they did the majority of the fighting, and quite simply, they took part in it for their own intrest not to see us free.  British and French (and to a lesser extent, Dutch and Spanish) forces fought for colonial wealth and empire around the world. From 1778 through 1783 -- two years after the defeat of Cornwallis at Yorktown -- French forces fought the British in the West Indies, Africa and India. 


Whenever you want that clue, let me know....I think they deliver


----------



## catzmeow (Jan 7, 2009)

pAr said:


> Because in Europe today, I would venture to say the majority of us is looking forward to building a peaceful EU.



Except the Italians, who can't stand you smelly french people.


----------



## pAr (Jan 7, 2009)

Italian women can stand my French arse easy. And I've been so wonderfully received in London, if you knew you'd be jealous. Wait. I think you already are. Why would you belittle the French if not to flatter your wounded ego? How pathetic of you! Yeah, I know, many Americans have European ancestors, but it doesn't mean you ought to act as brats.


----------



## catzmeow (Jan 7, 2009)

pAr said:


> Italian women can stand my French arse easy. And I've been so wonderfully received in London, if you knew you'd be jealous. Wait. I think you already are. Why would you belittle the French if not to flatter your wounded ego? How pathetic of you! Yeah, I know, many Americans have European ancestors, but it doesn't mean you ought to act as brats.



I will say definitively that you are the ONLY Franker I like.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 7, 2009)

Didn't some of you get the memo?  The "We Hate France" propaganda routine was repealed when Sarkozy entered the Elysee Palace


----------



## pAr (Jan 7, 2009)

catzmeow said:


> I will say definitively that you are the ONLY Franker I like.


I'm gonna take that as a compliment.   XD



Diuretic said:


> Didn't some of you get the memo?  The "We Hate France" propaganda routine was repealed when Sarkozy entered the Elysee Palace


FRANCETASTIC! Isn't it?


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jan 7, 2009)

Nice to see someone trying to do something about Piracy.


----------



## catzmeow (Jan 7, 2009)

pAr said:


> I'm gonna take that as a compliment.   XD



I'd hope for nothing else.


----------



## tigerbob (Jan 7, 2009)

mightypeon said:


> I cannot speak about London, but noone I know in Berlin (and you know, I live here) has a significant problem with French people. In fact, antiamericanism is much more widespread than francophobia.



It's the same in London.



> The Brits are also fun, the fact that a slightly drunk Brit suddenly thinks he can drink as much as a Russian (and obviously can not) opens many interesting situations.



True.  We always rise to the challenge, and always fall face first.



> I mean, the worst prejudice thing I ever did was to create a Cocktail out of Black Tea and Whisky (dont ever try that!) for some British friends of mine.  They later responded by mixing good German Beer with Good German Wodka (pity for both) which resulted in something pretty revolting... especially after they placed a raw sausage in it.



Pity the sausage.


There has always been rivalry between Britain and France, and Britain and Germany, but it's pretty good natured generally these days (except sometimes at soccer matches, but even that is nothing like it used to be).

England has many, many other rivalries much further afield - Australia and Argentina being probably the two most competitive.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jan 7, 2009)

Obviously, the only sensible thing for France to do is burn Mugadishu to the ground, and have Sarkozy demand the blood of every man, woman, and child in all of Somalia.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 8, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> It's the same in London.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The difference between Australia and Argentina being that we didn't invade any British territory.....except for Lords, The Oval, Trent Bridge....but then you did launch the Barmy Army on us a few summers ago (oh and thank you for the money they pumped into our economy, it was very welcome  )


----------



## editec (Jan 8, 2009)

Andrew2382 said:


> Ed, did you even read what I wrote. Th eonly person who seems ignorant here is you. I clearly said the French did help, they were the final nail in the coffin to Britian.


 
And if you believe, as you apparently do, that that was the only assistance the French gave to the American revolution was a few troops and some Naval ops, you clearly don't know jackshit about that period.



> Spain helped too, you know that right? Th ehistory guru that you are. For at least five years, Spain had sent more supplies and money than had been requested to help the American Rebels succeed in what must have appeared to be an impossible dream. Spanish men from the peninsula and throughout the Americas fought in the conflict.


 
Yes, Spain, Netherlands, even Russia pitched in to help embarrass the Brits. Damned near everybody hated the fucking Brits, then. Much like damned near everybody hates American imperialism, now, I might add.



> However, make no mistake...The colonist di dthe majority of the fighting, to say otherwise is fucking stupid and wrong.


 
Nobody said otherwise, lightweight.



> As a result of the victory of the Continental forces at Saratoga, Benjamin Franklin, who had gone to Paris as ambassador in 1776, was able to negotiate a Treaty of Amity and Commerce and a Treaty of Alliance with France. From this point, French support became increasingly significant. The French extended considerable financial support to the Congressional forces. France also supplied vital military arms and supplies, and loaned money to pay for their purchase.
> 
> As I said before though the high point was when the 5 battalions landed with naval forces and the French and Americans pounded Cornwallis until he evuntally surrendered.


 
Somebody's read their Wikipedia. Congrats on proving something that was never a point of contention.



> Their support was undeniable, but don't act as if they did the majority of the fighting,


 
If you about done trying to put words in my mouth that I did NOT say, I'd appreciate it.

I'll say again what so obviously annoyed you: *No French help, no United States of America*. 

You see anything about fighting or troops in the above? 

Of course not. But instead of accepting the facts, you elect to rewrite my point because you clearly didn't know what I was talking about.

Nice try, but it isn't working..._No French help, no United States._ 

Americans like you who bitch and whine about France are ignorant ingrates at best, and pandering Anglophilic knownothings at worst.



> and quite simply, they took part in it for their own intrest not to see us free. British and French (and to a lesser extent, Dutch and Spanish) forces fought for colonial wealth and empire around the world. From 1778 through 1783 -- two years after the defeat of Cornwallis at Yorktown -- French forces fought the British in the West Indies, Africa and India.


 
Yes, it was still another world war.  The second that century.



> Whenever you want that clue, let me know....I think they deliver


 
Laddie, your Fracophobic nonsense got called by somebody who knows more about that subject than you do. 

No big deal.

I was trying to play off your fractured history tales swipes, playfully,  but apparently you can dish it out, but taking it hurts your feelings or something

Now, you're desperately trying teach your grandfather how to suck eggs.

Don't bother.


----------



## RoadVirus (Jan 8, 2009)

The French actually turned an enemy back _on their own_??!! Wow! The Devil must be freezing his ass off.


----------



## mightypeon (Jan 8, 2009)

Arfff, do I have to write all my posts again for Road Virus -.-

On a sidenote, to paraphrase a good Irish friend of mine on the subject of alcohol consumption:
Drink is a curse, it makes you quarrel with your neighbour, it makes you shoot at your landlord and it makes you miss him.


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 8, 2009)

editec said:


> And if you believe, as you apparently do, that that was the only assistance the French gave to the American revolution was a few troops and some Naval ops, you clearly don't know jackshit about that period.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, Spain, Netherlands, even Russia pitched in to help embarrass the Brits. Damned near everybody hated the fucking Brits, then. Much like damned near everybody hates American imperialism, now, I might add.



No, they gave the colonist training and up to 8 battalions as well as supplies and money.  You clearly don't know jack shit if you try to summaraize that as a few troops and a few naval ops.

Everyone hates the most powerful countries...It's been a common theme throughout time.





> Somebody's read their Wikipedia. Congrats on proving something that was never a point of contention.



Actually it was a point of contention because you keep on saying how there would have been no United States with out French help....This may be true, this may not be true..quite frankly you don't fucking know.  Perhaps Spain would have gotten more involved...Perhaps aid would have come from somewhere else. As you said before many other countries wanted to bring down England.  




> If you about done trying to put words in my mouth that I did NOT say, I'd appreciate it.
> 
> I'll say again what so obviously annoyed you: *No French help, no United States of America*.
> 
> You see anything about fighting or troops in the above?



Did I say that France did nothing to contribute to the victory of the colonist gaining independence from England?  NO!  However, it was the colonist blood that fell in battle. 



> Of course not. But instead of accepting the facts, you elect to rewrite my point because you clearly didn't know what I was talking about.
> 
> Nice try, but it isn't working..._No French help, no United States._



This is what you fail to understand.  I am not disputing that France did not help out, my point is that their help came towards the latter end.  The most important thing France did (on the battlefield) was the battle of the Chesapeake where the French Navy squaked out a victory against the Royal Navy which in turn made Cornwallis trapped in Yorktown where American and French forces held the land an dthe French navy blocked his sea escape an dkept reinforcments from coming...which in turn ended the war...technically England didn't declare the war over till 2 years later until 1793...Cornwallis  surrendered in 1781.  France tried to capitlize on this with Spain by takin gover some territories in Europe however they were defeated by England at Gibralter.




> Americans like you who bitch and whine about France are ignorant ingrates at best, and pandering Anglophilic knownothings at worst.



It's French Fags like you who bitch and whine how France was once a great super power and Americans owe everything to them, while over 40,000 dead American solders lay dead on French land because the country couldn't defend themselves for more then a month. 




> Laddie, your Fracophobic nonsense got called by somebody who knows more about that subject than you do.
> 
> No big deal.
> 
> I was trying to play off your fractured history tales swipes, playfully,  but apparently you can dish it out, but taking it hurts your feelings or something




You apparently know jack shit, because I am the only one in this convo actually listing out facts about the war and you are doing jack shit except for making pointless comments.  When you can dispute me on facts and actual battles that went down then you can open your mouth.


----------



## Munin (Jan 8, 2009)

If you look at what the French military achieved in General, then I think they are still at least a couple of victories ahead of the Americans. The French were already fighting when America wasn't born yet and let s not forget that America only was "born" because of the French. Let s not forget that in parts around the world like Africa and Canada people still speak french because of the military accomplishments of the French. 

When you look at the History of any nation that existed for a long period, then you will see a lot of Nations got their but kicked in the past but only a few of them who actually managed to have influenced the world very much through their victories. And let s also not forget that the US doesn't exist more then a fraction of the time then the Nation of France does.


"*Whether the American Colonies would have had the necessary strength to implement the Declaration of Independence without the aid of France is problematical.* Certainly the leaders of the rebelling colonists realized the importance of French assistance and began to seek, and to obtain, such help soon after the outbreak of the American Revolution. In the autumn of 1775, the Continental Congress appointed a Secret Committee of Foreign Correspondence. Early the next year the committee decided to send an agent to France to seek the aid of that Nation in the struggle against Great Britain. Silas Deane was selected for the task. Within a few months after his arrival in France, Deane, covertly aided by the French Government, obtained and sent to America clothing and arms in large quantities. At Deane's suggestion also, the Compte de Vergennes, French Minister of Foreign Affairs, obtained the King's permission to lend America money. Until 1778, France continued to give America all aid short of actual military support.

*In addition, many French soldiers, as individuals, offered their assistance to the American cause. One of the most. conspicuous of these was the Marquis de Lafayette*, who left wife, fortune, and, high social position to serve the cause of liberty. Popular with the American officers and a great favorite of General Washington, *the young Marquis was an able general and played an important part in the defeat of the British General Cornwallis in the final campaign of the Revolution*.

Congress, in September 1776, had appointed Benjamin Franklin and Arthur Lee as commissioners to France to collaborate with Deane in the transaction of diplomatic affairs and to work for a treaty of alliance. For slightly over a year the commission labored at its task. Then came the news of the American triumph at Saratoga. When word of this important victory reached the French King, he promptly sent word to the commissioners that he would sign a treaty such as had been proposed and that France would openly aid America with a fleet, troops, and money.

*The Americans were greatly encouraged by the French alliance. Until then, the English had had the enormous advantage of supremacy at sea. Thenceforth, the French Fleet, wherever it might be, compelled England, in resisting French attacks, to use many ships which could otherwise have been used in transporting troops and supplies to America. The French Army greatly augmented American land forces, and the final victory over the British at Yorktown was made possible by the French Fleet and Army. Thus, throughout the long struggle of the Revolution, the sympathy and assistance of the French people were of incalculable value to the American cause.*"

Liberty State Park - Statue of Liberty - French Aid in American Revolution Basis of Long International Friendship


Lets not forget our history, right?


----------



## tigerbob (Jan 8, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> The difference between Australia and Argentina being that we didn't invade any British territory.....except for Lords, The Oval, Trent Bridge....but then you did launch the Barmy Army on us a few summers ago (oh and thank you for the money they pumped into our economy, it was very welcome  )



Ah yes, the B.A.  Never knowingly outdrunk.

I was in Cape Town a few months ago and watched the ODI between the Proteas and the Kiwis.  A local told me that 2 summers previously England had been touring and on the first day of a Test, the B.A. had drunk dry the bar behind the mid wicket boundary before lunch.  The South Africans apparently were hugely impressed.

Jeez, I miss cricket.


----------



## pAr (Jan 8, 2009)

catzmeow said:


> I'd hope for nothing else.



You still have hope? You bad, bad woman! Lemme know if you need something guud.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 9, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> Ah yes, the B.A.  Never knowingly outdrunk.
> 
> I was in Cape Town a few months ago and watched the ODI between the Proteas and the Kiwis.  A local told me that 2 summers previously England had been touring and on the first day of a Test, the B.A. had drunk dry the bar behind the mid wicket boundary before lunch.  The South Africans apparently were hugely impressed.
> 
> Jeez, I miss cricket.



The Sefricans smacked us (am I doing a thread drift?  I am?  Too bad) and good for them, they deserved to win and Smith is a bloody legend here now.

We would like the Barmey Army to return.  Our brewers are getting a bit anxious and besides we could use the foreign currency.  And given the weakened state of the Australian test team, England just might be on another Ashes winner.....

But seriously, the Barmey Army are huge favourites when they come here, it makes the summer even more enjoyable.


----------



## elvis (Jan 9, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> And yet the French - let's keep generalising shall we? - had civilians fighting in the Underground against the Vichy forces and the occupying Nazis.



People forget that the British were also defeated when the Nazis conquered France.  They retreated across the English Channel after for some unknown miracle, Hitler didn't massacre them all at Dunquerque.  Likewise, it's a miracle the Japanese didn't conduct their "Third Wave" at Pearl Harbor.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 9, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> People forget that the British were also defeated when the Nazis conquered France.  They retreated across the English Channel after for some unknown miracle, Hitler didn't massacre them all at Dunquerque.  Likewise, it's a miracle the Japanese didn't conduct their "Third Wave" at Pearl Harbor.



I won't forget the BEF being defeated nor the efforts which went to getting the BEF back to Britain.

The Evacuation of Dunkirk, 1940

Nor will I forget the fact that Britain stood virtually alone against Germany during 1940 and then endured the Blitz yet still kept fighting against Germany.


----------



## Anguille (Jan 9, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> I've always enjoyed _La Chanson de Roland.
> _
> Not that it adds much to the discussion, just thought I'd tell you all about it.
> 
> ...


Are you blowing your olifant?


----------



## tigerbob (Jan 9, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> I won't forget the BEF being defeated nor the efforts which went to getting the BEF back to Britain.
> 
> The Evacuation of Dunkirk, 1940
> 
> Nor will I forget the fact that Britain stood virtually alone against Germany during 1940 and then endured the Blitz yet still kept fighting against Germany.



The evacuation of Dunkirk was a huge shot in the arm for British pride at a time when it was badly needed.  Literally snatching a sort of victory from the jaws of defeat.

The Battle of Britain was basically the first real tipping point of the war, but for Londoners it was not nearly as bad as The Blitz which Edward Murrow reported on so vividly for CBS.

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6KLQxtDOkZA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6KLQxtDOkZA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

My mother used to tell a funny story about one evening when she was going in to work (she was an opera singer) with a colleague called Pauline.  Walking down the street, they heard the familiar drone of a 'doodlebug' (a V1 rocket).  Hearing the drone was a several times a day occurrence - what you didn't want to hear was the sound stop, because that meant it was coming down right on top of you.  On this occasion that is what happened.

Apparently, they looked round in panic, saw a flight of steps leading down into a basement and ran down them and through the door at the bottom, where a very gay man looked up with a smile and said "I can do you right now if you like".

The doodlebug dropped 2 streets away killing 8 people, and 20 minutes later, Mum and Pauline reemerged from the basement with their ears pierced.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 10, 2009)

Anguille said:


> Are you blowing your olifant?



No, just pulling a leg or two 

When I was a kid I had a book about Bayard, I remember being highly impressed - _sans peur et sans reproche_ - my French is really crappy but I always remembered that phrase.

And I first knew about Roland of Roncesvalles from reading a comic book of all things.  I was intrigued and tried to find out a bit more.  And I get a big kick out of the streetcar in Toronto that announces on the front that it's heading to Roncesvalles - yeah I know, small things amuse small minds


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 10, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> ............
> My mother used to tell a funny story about one evening when she was going in to work (she was an opera singer) with a colleague called Pauline.  Walking down the street, they heard the familiar drone of a 'doodlebug' (a V1 rocket).  Hearing the drone was a several times a day occurrence - what you didn't want to hear was the sound stop, because that meant it was coming down right on top of you.  On this occasion that is what happened.
> 
> Apparently, they looked round in panic, saw a flight of steps leading down into a basement and ran down them and through the door at the bottom, where a very gay man looked up with a smile and said "I can do you right now if you like".
> ...



My father was an ARP Warden before he joined the RAF during WWII, he told me a story of him being out on the streets (Lambeth, South London) working when he heard the sound of explosions and he was pretty certain that bombs were about to rain down on the buildings right near him.  By the light of some burning buildings he saw a big object on the footpath that he could take cover behind to try and avoid shrapnel so he dived behind it in a flat panic.  When the wave had passed he stood up and saw that he'd been sheltering behind a housebrick, a single housebrick.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 10, 2009)

That Ed Murrow clip is a classic, I first heard it on a radio doco, it's brilliant.


----------



## Bootneck (Jan 10, 2009)

I went to the doctor today to talk about contraception.
She said "You could try French letters".
I said "What's that?"
She said "Condoms"
I said "I don't like them".
So she said "You should try the French Army method then".
I said "What's that?"
She said "You pull out before you get into trouble!".


----------



## morpheus (Jan 19, 2009)

If French "losses" include being booted out after having effectively invaded and occupied (for several years) Britain, Canada, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, the Low Countries, West Africa, and North Africa, then shouldn't we also say that Britain's, Germany's, and America's histories are _also_ littered with military losses?  Or do we prefer that France was still running a global empire today, and are bitter that the empire declined? 

Editec puts it perfectly:



editec said:


> Yes, some Americans are told a load of francophobic nonsense and of course since it suits their preconceived prejudices after years of Anglophilic propaganda, naturally they buy it whole clothe.



_My_ question is, why are some Americans hell-bent on constantly ripping France, and hijacking an otherwise intelligent discussion on the piracy problems off the coast of Somalia?  I'm curious where this francophobia and hatred is rooted.  Can someone provide some insight?  And isn't this hypocrisy, given how much we complain about anti-Americanism abroad (which is _far_ more widespread around the world than anti-Frenchism)?  Maybe we need to rip on past superpowers in order to cope with our own declining empire?  Why do Americans have such a fixation with WWII, but a complete loss of memory for everything that's occurred since then?  Last I checked, Vietnam wasn't a success (of course, this is the "fault of liberals"), but even the initially popular 2003 Iraq invasion was an ill-conceived disaster until [arguably] the 2007 military surge after which _Afghanistan_ took a severely sour turn.  And even the effectiveness of the surge is not considered sustainable by Middle East experts.  Fuck, even the _Korean War_ -which has been spun into a victory by the military-industrial propaganda complex- in reality ended in a truce.  But again, let's wave WWII in everyone's face, demanding that the world owes us big, and completely disregard the help of the Brits, Canadians, and Russians without whom it's uncertain if we'd win (let alone underground resistance movements in Europe and Asia).  And our righteous actions in WWII then somehow justify our meddling in domestic affairs of foreign nations _since_ then, removing heads of state and installing dictators wherever we saw fit, while lecturing the world on democracy.  And then -somehow- American foreign policy's biggest cheerleaders -the mass media- have a "liberal and anti-American bias". 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Are we bitter that our own empire has shown its first signs of decline?  Are we bitter that France opposed our invasion of Iraq, even though most of us now admit that was a mistake?  So, we want the world to blindly follow us even when we're wrong, rather than point it out to us when we're making a grave mistake?  Isn't that what allies are for, anyways?  Even after we refused to share our intelligence (on Islamic terrorism) with the France after the bombing of the Paris Metro and hijacking of an Air France flight in the 1990s, they _still_ backed us 100% on Afghanistan and now back us 100% on Iran. But  they had the dignity to _diplomatically_ oppose what they thought was a mistake on our part, and we didn't like that.  We preach democracy, but we don't like it when the majority of UN and Security Council members don't vote along the same lines as us.  That's when we start to rip on the world, and discredit the UN, _even though, since the late 1980s, the United States has been using its Security Council veto more often than any other Security Council member_.  And then we dug deep and found some vague economic ties between France and Iraq -completely ignoring our own role with arming Saddam Hussein in the 1980s, turning a blind eye to his genocide against the Kurds, and _encouraging_ his intentions to annex Kuwait- only to quietly hush down when light was shed on underground economic dealings between _prominent Americans and American companies_ and post-Gulf War Iraq. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Ironically, French public opinion -while certainly in opposition to the Iraq invasion- did not oppose it as much as _other_ European countries did.  65% of French citizens opposed the war, according to Gallup (about the same amount of Britons), while levels in other countries were significantly higher (around 75% in Germany, 88% in Italy, 90% in Spain and Switzerland, to the best of my memory).  But, of course, you can always count on _Americans_ to dutifully believe and do as they're told, and give the war a 65% approval rating, with a one-sided media manipulated by the Pentagon and corporate interests, broadcasting pro-war propaganda to the American public until it was too late (2006-ish).


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 19, 2009)

As General patton said

I'd rather have a german divison in front of me then a French one behind me...At least I know the German one will be there in the morning.


----------



## Anguille (Jan 19, 2009)

morpheus said:


> _My_ question is, why are some Americans hell-bent on constantly ripping France, and hijacking an otherwise intelligent discussion on the piracy problems off the coast of Somalia?  I'm curious where this francophobia and hatred is rooted.  Can someone provide some insight?



Evidemment ces francophobes ont étés fait porter les cornes par des français.


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 19, 2009)

I thought it had something to do with France not being sucked in to invade Iraq.  Wasn't that when the Freedom Fries bullshit childishness started?

But small point Morpheus, France didn't invade Britain.  Napeoleon wanted to, with his_ grand armee_ (can't do the accent, forget how the keyboard wants to be tickled) but there he was stuck near Boulogne-sur-mer because of the weather.  Perfidious Albion indeed! 

If you mean Guillaume of Normandy, yes, but he stayed


----------



## Annie (Jan 19, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> I thought it had something to do with France not being sucked in to invade Iraq.  Wasn't that when the Freedom Fries bullshit childishness started?
> 
> But small point Morpheus, France didn't invade Britain.  Napeoleon wanted to, with his_ grand armee_ (can't do the accent, forget how the keyboard wants to be tickled) but there he was stuck near Boulogne-sur-mer because of the weather.  Perfidious Albion indeed!
> 
> If you mean Guillaume of Normandy, yes, but he stayed



Nope started at the latest with WWII, while the underground was respected the regular forces and government were derided, with good cause.


----------



## Andrew2382 (Jan 19, 2009)

> _my_ Question Is, Why Are Some Americans Hell-bent On Constantly Ripping France, And Hijacking An Otherwise Intelligent Discussion On The Piracy Problems Off The Coast Of Somalia?  I'm Curious Where This Francophobia And Hatred Is Rooted.  Can Someone Provide Some Insight?  And Isn't This Hypocrisy, Given How Much We Complain About Anti-americanism Abroad (which Is _far_ More Widespread Around The World Than Anti-frenchism)?  Maybe We Need To Rip On Past Superpowers In Order To Cope With Our Own Declining Empire?  Why Do Americans Have Such A Fixation With Wwii, But A Complete Loss Of Memory For Everything That's Occurred Since Then?  Last I Checked, Vietnam Wasn't A Success (of Course, This Is The "fault Of Liberals"), But Even The Initially Popular 2003 Iraq Invasion Was An Ill-conceived Disaster Until [arguably] The 2007 Military Surge After Which _afghanistan_ Took A Severely Sour Turn.  And Even The Effectiveness Of The Surge Is Not Considered Sustainable By Middle East Experts.  Fuck, Even The _korean War_ -which Has Been Spun Into A Victory By The Military-industrial Propaganda Complex- In Reality Ended In A Truce.  But Again, Let's Wave Wwii In Everyone's Face, Demanding That The World Owes Us Big, And Completely Disregard The Help Of The Brits, Canadians, And Russians Without Whom It's Uncertain If We'd Win (let Alone Underground Resistance Movements In Europe And Asia).  And Our Righteous Actions In Wwii Then Somehow Justify Our Meddling In Domestic Affairs Of Foreign Nations _since_ Then, Removing Heads Of State And Installing Dictators Wherever We Saw Fit, While Lecturing The World On Democracy.  And Then -somehow- American Foreign Policy's Biggest Cheerleaders -the Mass Media- Have A "liberal And Anti-american Bias".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh My Eyes


----------



## Annie (Jan 19, 2009)

Andrew, why write a post in format no one will read?


----------



## Bootneck (Jan 19, 2009)

The last time Britain and France were at war, British officers wore scarlet tunics. 

During one battle, the French captured an English colonel. They took him to their headquarters and the French general began to question him.

Finally, as an afterthought, the French general asked, 

"Why do you English officers all wear red coats? Don't you know the red material makes you easier targets for us to shoot at ?"

In his bland English way, the officer informed the general that the reason English officers wear red coats is so that if they are shot, the blood won't show, and the men they are leading won't panic.

.......And that is why, from that day to this, all French Army officers wear brown trousers.


----------



## morpheus (Jan 19, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> I
> But small point Morpheus, France didn't invade Britain.  Napeoleon wanted to, with his_ grand armee_ (can't do the accent, forget how the keyboard wants to be tickled) but there he was stuck near Boulogne-sur-mer because of the weather.  Perfidious Albion indeed!
> 
> If you mean Guillaume of Normandy, yes, but he stayed



I'm talking about the Norman invasion and ocupation of England in the Middle Ages, during which many French and Latin-rooted words were absorbed by the English language, a legacy that lasts to this day.


----------



## tigerbob (Jan 19, 2009)

morpheus said:


> I'm talking about the Norman invasion and ocupation of England in the Middle Ages, during which many French and Latin-rooted words were absorbed by the English language, a legacy that lasts to this day.



Thank God because, let's face it, old English was fucking gibberish.

Modern English to Old English Vocabulary

I'm surprised the Normans were interested in an island that made so little sense (and arguably still does).


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 19, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> Thank God because, let's face it, old English was fucking gibberish.
> 
> Modern English to Old English Vocabulary
> 
> I'm surprised the Normans were interested in an island that made so little sense (and arguably still does).



And why were all these French guys named Norman?


----------



## tigerbob (Jan 19, 2009)

toomuchtime_ said:


> And why were all these French guys named Norman?



Excellent point.

Ahhh, so many worthy questions, so little time...


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 20, 2009)

morpheus said:


> I'm talking about the Norman invasion and ocupation of England in the Middle Ages, during which many French and Latin-rooted words were absorbed by the English language, a legacy that lasts to this day.



Yes, so was I.  Just as well they did too, I wouldn't be here otherwise


----------



## Diuretic (Jan 20, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> Excellent point.
> 
> Ahhh, so many worthy questions, so little time...



That one's easy - no bloody imagination!


----------



## Munin (Feb 19, 2009)

Bootneck said:


> The last time Britain and France were at war, British officers wore scarlet tunics.
> 
> During one battle, the French captured an English colonel. They took him to their headquarters and the French general began to question him.
> 
> ...



I don't want to spoil your joke but brown doesn't show blood either, it is very hard to see the blood on brown colored clothing.


----------



## tigerbob (Feb 19, 2009)

Munin said:


> Bootneck said:
> 
> 
> > The last time Britain and France were at war, British officers wore scarlet tunics.
> ...



Bah humbug.


----------



## editec (Feb 19, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > People forget that the British were also defeated when the Nazis conquered France. They retreated across the English Channel after for some unknown miracle, Hitler didn't massacre them all at Dunquerque. Likewise, it's a miracle the Japanese didn't conduct their "Third Wave" at Pearl Harbor.
> ...


 
Nor should we.

_Truly_ England's finest hour.


----------



## Munin (Feb 25, 2009)

editec said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> > elvis3577 said:
> ...








 Poor britain, all alone


----------



## tigerbob (Feb 25, 2009)

Munin said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > Diuretic said:
> ...



Yes indeed.  Germany was completely surrounded.


----------



## editec (Feb 25, 2009)

It was STILL Englands finest hour.

They'd gotten their asses handed to them.

The NAZI subs were isolating the nation, their RAF fighters were out numbered, yet they fought (thanks to radar) the German AF off long enough for the rest of the world to mobilize.

As to the Anglophilia and francophobia, inherent in the American people?

This nation was basically taken over by Anglophiles after Andrew Jackson left office.

Since the leadership of the nation is (or at least was) mostly of Anglo origins, and particularly since the bnaking communities exists today thanks in large part to the Bank of England (at one time the largest stateholder in our own Fed) Anglophilia is just part of the American mindset.

Do bear in mind, also that the ruling class of American (especially for the first 125 years) is mostly Protestant, as was the population, while the French are mostly Roman Catholics.

But without the financial aide of the French court at the time of our revolution, the USA would probably not have formed.

We simply did not have the material to fight a stand up war against England, nor did we have the dough to buy it.

To really understand why I say NO French no USA, one must understand the diplomatic machinations of the American Revolution.

Militarily, France's contributions (while important especially in the southern battles) weren't as important as the fact that thanks to Beaumarchie (sp?) and Franklin finding the USA money and materials and EUROPEAN ALLIES to help us defeat the Brits.


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 25, 2009)

Munin said:


> Poor britain, all alone



Stop, I'm getting misty-eyed.  Ah, the Empire *sob*.


----------



## DavidS (Feb 25, 2009)

I can't believe there's actually a debate to be had about the French military. Hilarious.


----------



## tigerbob (Feb 25, 2009)

Diuretic said:


> Munin said:
> 
> 
> > Poor britain, all alone
> ...





[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3Drw4aZhdT8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3Drw4aZhdT8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]


----------

