Freedom Fries

[Old Tiger]

remember this whole debacle

[Macarthur]

silliness

[piratebg]

Damn Frenchies

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

What made everyone so upset with France when this happened?

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
What made everyone so upset with France when this happened?

Good point....Especially since.....:( ......Psst, they were right.

[JR2004]

They're not FREEDOM FRIES still? Since when?

[BwdLions]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
What made everyone so upset with France when this happened?

France has no backbone. They never have and never will. They can't take of themselves. They never back the USA and it's allies when there's consequences or repucussions. We saved their butts in WWI and WWII and they seem to have forgotten that. They are slowly but surely letting outsiders take over their country because they can't protect themselves. They will eventually need the US to rescue them again, but it will be too late. I don't care much for France.

[ronwx5x]

Originally posted by BwdLions
France has no backbone. They never have and never will. They can't take of themselves. They never back the USA and it's allies when there's consequences or repucussions. We saved their butts in WWI and WWII and they seem to have forgotten that. They are slowly but surely letting outsiders take over their country because they can't protect themselves. They will eventually need the US to rescue them again, but it will be too late. I don't care much for France.

Really? I never would have guessed you don't care much for France!

...............................:inlove:

[LHexPlayer]

We surrender-

Yours truly
France

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by BwdLions
France has no backbone. They never have and never will. They can't take of themselves. They never back the USA and it's allies when there's consequences or repucussions. We saved their butts in WWI and WWII and they seem to have forgotten that. They are slowly but surely letting outsiders take over their country because they can't protect themselves. They will eventually need the US to rescue them again, but it will be too late. I don't care much for France. Plus they were dealing illegally with Saddam. It was not in their interest financially to take him out of power. Everyone seems to forget this little known fact.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
Plus they were dealing illegally with Saddam. It was not in their interest financially to take him out of power. Everyone seems to forget this little known fact.

and that was 99% reason why France would not support the US not because they dont have a backbone, they just did not want to get caught.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
Plus they were dealing illegally with Saddam. It was not in their interest financially to take him out of power. Everyone seems to forget this little known fact.

But who gave Saddam all of those weapons that they have been using in the war against us?

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
But who gave Saddam all of those weapons that they have been using in the war against us? We did. No doubt about that. We were trying to help the lesser of two evils and it came back to bite us in the butt. He should have been taken out of power long before he was. And he would have been if the UN wasn't a worthless piece of garbage.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
But who gave Saddam all of those weapons that they have been using in the war against us? most of their weaponry is Russian, however alot of their biological and chemical is compliments of the US! oh and american companies were bargaining with Saddam as well. In fact I can remember a guy getting charged with it a few years back. Russians had contracts with that regime as well. Nobody is innocent in the meddling of middle east affairs. we simply used our ability to snatch away what they were doing and they don't like us for it.

[Ranger Mom]

I'm watching you!!!:p :p

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
We did. No doubt about that. We were trying to help the lesser of two evils and it came back to bite us in the butt. He should have been taken out of power long before he was. And he would have been if the UN wasn't a worthless piece of garbage. it wasn't just the UN partner, in the 1st war in order to maintain a coalition, which was amazing considering we had other middle eastern countries on board, we couldn't be seen as INVADERS, just liberators. Removing the politics, it made sound military sense, but Bush used the good image to get the results he wanted, a liberated Kuwait, safe Saudia Arabia and the oil flowing safely.

[firstdown]

Originally posted by BwdLions
France has no backbone. They never have and never will. They can't take of themselves. They never back the USA and it's allies when there's consequences or repucussions. We saved their butts in WWI and WWII and they seem to have forgotten that. They are slowly but surely letting outsiders take over their country because they can't protect themselves. They will eventually need the US to rescue them again, but it will be too late. I don't care much for France.


I finally agree with a Brownwood poster. :D Maybe there is hope after all.:thinking:

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by DDBooger
it wasn't just the UN partner, in the 1st war in order to maintain a coalition, which was amazing considering we had other middle eastern countries on board, we couldn't be seen as INVADERS, just liberators. Removing the politics, it made sound military sense, but Bush used the good image to get the results he wanted, a liberated Kuwait, safe Saudia Arabia and the oil flowing safely. I'm referring to the numerous sanctions against Iraq after the first Gulf War. He broke the same resolutions over and over and the UN did nothing about it other than to say, "If you do it again, you're going to be in big trouble." He did it again and again and again and the UN did squat.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BwdLions
France has no backbone. They never have and never will. They can't take of themselves. They never back the USA and it's allies when there's consequences or repucussions. We saved their butts in WWI and WWII and they seem to have forgotten that. They are slowly but surely letting outsiders take over their country because they can't protect themselves. They will eventually need the US to rescue them again, but it will be too late. I don't care much for France. well as long as we're talking history, this country owes a lot of its existence to France, without their naval assistance, supplies and auxillary troops this nation would likely had sought a peace with England. Not to mention France was occupying alot of English reserves in other parts of the world. You can't just point out history that best suits our case ;) WWI, French hardly were cowards, in fact they died in staggering numbers and couragiously at Verdun among other places, antiquated EUROPEAN leadership made that war a stalemate. WWII was another example of stupidity, the Maginot line was WWI thinking. needless to say, once the enemy is behind you, what exactly would you have them do? lol French resistance was very active prior to D-day!

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
I'm referring to the numerous sanctions against Iraq after the first Gulf War. He broke the same resolutions over and over and the UN did nothing about it other than to say, "If you do it again, you're going to be in big trouble." He did it again and again and again and the UN did squat. yeah, but then again we preach freedom all the time, democracy and yet our best friend in the middle east aside from israel is who? where did most terrorist on 9/11 come from? hypocrasy is a staple in geopolitics sir! lol Acting outside the UN has weakened our ability to threaten those with VERIFIABLE nuke tech. (korea and Iran). I can see what you mean with the UN but its no more different than our stubbornness about israel and saudia arabia

[ronwx5x]

I think deep down the French feel they are superior intellectuals who are embarassed to have been placed in the position of having to be liberated by the any lesser group. They also dislike the British, who reciprocate the feeling!

The US did not liberate France by itself. Other countries had troops fighting in large numbers and perhaps even greater percentages. England held off Germany by itself for quite a while, 1940 - 1942.

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by DDBooger
yeah, but then again we preach freedom all the time, democracy and yet our best friend in the middle east aside from israel is who? where did most terrorist on 9/11 come from? hypocrasy is a staple in geopolitics sir! lol Acting outside the UN has weakened our ability to threaten those with VERIFIABLE nuke tech. (korea and Iran). I can see what you mean with the UN but its no more different than our stubbornness about israel and saudia arabia There is no doubt that Saudi Arabia has it's problems just as we do, but the Iraq war had nothing to do with 9-11. It was all about WMDs. Regardless of what the national media would have you believe, we HAVE found WMDs in Iraq. They have not been the quantity that we thought, but there was evidence that they had them....heck, we know they had them because we gave em to them.

Saudi Arabia on the other hand is not trying to enrich uranium into biological weapons.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by ronwx5x
I think deep down the French feel they are superior intellectuals who are embarassed to have been placed in the position of having to be liberated by the any lesser group. They also dislike the British, who reciprocate the feeling!

The US did not liberate France by itself. Other countries had troops fighting in large numbers and perhaps even greater percentages. England held off Germany by itself for quite a while, 1940 - 1942. Thats correct sir! English had the benefit of having a barrier between them and the tanks. the strait! had they not, while speculative, I doubt they had the material to stop the blitzkrieg. The US would have had to work overtime and the Brits hold for about half a year before we could get supplies in. Thank god for the Battle of Brittain and cancellation of Operation Sea Lion

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
There is no doubt that Saudi Arabia has it's problems just as we do, but the Iraq war had nothing to do with 9-11. It was all about WMDs. Regardless of what the national media would have you believe, we HAVE found WMDs in Iraq. They have not been the quantity that we thought, but there was evidence that they had them....heck, we know they had them because we gave em to them.

Saudi Arabia on the other hand is not trying to enrich uranium into biological weapons. i don't watch network news, in fact haven't since the Iraq war. and sorry but the threat we showed the public in comparison to what we found is much different. Bush has even came out and said we didn't find anything..Yes they did have them, but apparently the prior work in disposing of them was pretty darn effective. Saddam had to create a facade in order to maintain, sort of MOB mentality, if you look weak you die. He had a HUGE shia population and with Iran next door enjoying a post religious fundamentalism renaissance, he had other worries besides the US and UN. And the war was fought on borrow sympathy of 9/11 don't kid yourself about that. BUT we must clean up our messes and we seem to be doing an alright job! I don't have to like the premise to desire a positive outcome...yes i know politics could enter here at this point, but lets just leave that out.

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by DDBooger
i don't watch network news, in fact haven't since the Iraq war. and sorry but the threat we showed the public in comparison to what we found is much different. Bush has even came out and said we didn't find anything..Yes they did have them, but apparently the prior work in disposing of them was pretty darn effective. Saddam had to create a facade in order to maintain, sort of MOB mentality, if you look weak you die. He had a HUGE shia population and with Iran next door enjoying a post religious fundamentalism renaissance, he had other worries besides the US and UN. And the war was fought on borrow sympathy of 9/11 don't kid yourself about that. BUT we must clean up our messes and we seem to be doing an alright job! I don't have to like the premise to desire a positive outcome...yes i know politics could enter here at this point, but lets just leave that out. Agreed. The only thing I would add is that we gave them so much time, it would have been easy for them to smuggle the WMDs out of Iraq before we got there.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
Agreed. The only thing I would add is that we gave them so much time, it would have been easy for them to smuggle the WMDs out of Iraq before we got there. understood, the collapse of Soviet Russia set in motion alot of dangers, coupled with pakistani technology proliferating the know how, its a scary world, Next prez and the following must choose our causes carefully and be calculated. Our military is a sharp tool but it is not built for nation building, as we see our servicemen increasingly carrying the burden. Policing, intel and mossad ruthlessness coupled with favorable foreign policy will defeat al queda, while it doesn't necessarily churn out the money for the military industrial complex, its the most effective method as think tanks that advise the pentagon are starting to espouse!

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by BwdLions
France has no backbone. They never have and never will. They can't take of themselves. They never back the USA and it's allies when there's consequences or repucussions. We saved their butts in WWI and WWII and they seem to have forgotten that. They are slowly but surely letting outsiders take over their country because they can't protect themselves. They will eventually need the US to rescue them again, but it will be too late. I don't care much for France.

DDBooger is right.

Before you go off the deep end here, you need to look back over history.

The French suffered huge losses in WWI which has gone a long way to them being very reluctant later in the 20th century. Also, it's easy for us in the US to judge because until 9/11, we have never had any sort of war on our solid outside of a civil war. Europe has a very different perspective on this due to geography.

And as someone said, we basically owe our independence to the French. We would not have done it without them.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by Macarthur
DDBooger is right.

Before you go off the deep end here, you need to look back over history.

The French suffered huge losses in WWI which has gone a long way to them being very reluctant later in the 20th century. Also, it's easy for us in the US to judge because until 9/11, we have never had any sort of war on our solid outside of a civil war. Europe has a very different perspective on this due to geography.

And as someone said, we basically owe our independence to the French. We would not have done it without them. French people are great, but they had an elitist legacy in the upper echelons that alienated their own people as well as others. that same borgeouis was the failed leadership of WWI and WWII. They've progressed, parisians are not very HOSPITABLE people, but who are we kidding, we have New Yawkers! where gettin an screw U is free! lmao

[Silverback 04]

Originally posted by DDBooger
French people are great, but they had an elitist legacy in the upper echelons that alienated their own people as well as others. that same borgeouis was the failed leadership of WWI and WWII. They've progressed, parisians are not very HOSPITABLE people, but who are we kidding, we have New Yawkers! where gettin an screw U is free! lmao

Dude, I'd appreciate it if you would keep your posts a little cleaner... I've never seen so many 5$ words in one paragraph in my life.

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by Macarthur
And as someone said, we basically owe our independence to the French. We would not have done it without them. And we've returned the favor more than once.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
And we've returned the favor more than once. yeah but it would be very arrogant for us to believe we did it out of the kindness of our hearts! lol it benefited us as well as them. Dealing with De Gaulle (as difficult as it was) was much more appetizing than dealing with Hitler had we not intervened. To tell you the truth it can be argued that we did it more for the security of England than to liberate the French. But thats just a bit of revisionist history.

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by DDBooger
yeah but it would be very arrogant for us to believe we did it out of the kindness of our hearts! lol it benefited us as well as them. Dealing with De Gaulle (as difficult as it was) was much more appetizing than dealing with Hitler had we not intervened. To tell you the truth it can be argued that we did it more for the security of England than to liberate the French. But thats just a bit of revisionist history. Does it really matter why we did it? The United States has done more to help underdeveloped countries than any nation in modern history. Do we get something out of it? Sometimes. Maybe even most of the time. But don't think for a second that every other country doesn't act on what they think will be in their own best interests.

The French helped us in our independence because it was in their own best interest.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
Does it really matter why we did it? The United States has done more to help underdeveloped countries than any nation in modern history. Do we get something out of it? Sometimes. Maybe even most of the time. But don't think for a second that every other country doesn't act on what they think will be in their own best interests.

The French helped us in our independence because it was in their own best interest. I agree completely, i do some work with a foreign relations committee, its the one thing I always point out when i'm ridiculed for our administration, had they the power and capability they'd be doing the same thing. much of the lasting problems today in the middle east and africa are due to colonialism and culturally ignorant or indifferent Euro powers carving up nations they exploited in a fashion that didn't seperate ethnic or racial boundaries. and yes, developing countries are aided by the United States, but overwhelmingly it is the few in power who benefit from it in those countries. Globalization has destroyed alot of these countries long standing ways of life. right or wrong, we are hardly the only benefactors of these policies. WTO and IMF are multi-national organizations.

[JR2004]

Originally posted by DDBooger
well as long as we're talking history, this country owes a lot of its existence to France, without their naval assistance, supplies and auxillary troops this nation would likely had sought a peace with England. Not to mention France was occupying alot of English reserves in other parts of the world. You can't just point out history that best suits our case ;) WWI, French hardly were cowards, in fact they died in staggering numbers and couragiously at Verdun among other places, antiquated EUROPEAN leadership made that war a stalemate. WWII was another example of stupidity, the Maginot line was WWI thinking. needless to say, once the enemy is behind you, what exactly would you have them do? lol French resistance was very active prior to D-day!

We do owe France a debt of gratitude for their help during the Revolutionary War. Their naval blockade helped secure victory at Yorktown. General Lafayette became one of just a handful of people to have been granted honorary US citizenship. They've done a lot for us. It's still ironic though that a European monarchy is what helped a fledgling democracy gain its independence. Even though their main reason for helping was just to help beat Britain, it's still one of those odd things in history.

In the what have you done for us in the last 100 years category though it hasn't been a whole lot. Twice we entered World Wars to help aid France and other European countries. It's true that the French resistance was going on before we entered WWII, but how much can you really do with little to no supplies? They fought a guerrilla war against the Germans, but they had to have us enter the fight in order to regain their country from the Nazis. Without the influx of American weapons I don't believe that France, Britain and Russia would've overcome the Nazis and their Italian allies. The American war machine as well as millions of our own troops is what pushed victory in Europe over the top.

[DDBooger]

don't think anyone denies that partner, again the point I was making is both have benifitted as allies, 100 years is just an arbitrary number, and the French needing saving was more do to outdated thinking rather than fighting elan. English would have likely been in the same situation if not for geography

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by JR2004
The American war machine as well as millions of our own troops is what pushed victory in Europe over the top.

You can flip that and say if Hitler would not have been so quick to open an Eastern Front agianst Russia the American war machine would have seen the full force of the Nazi army..It was Russia that slowed them down and force their supply lines to get to far stretched out and Germany had to split their army which allowed it to be more even, both them and us fighting two front wars

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
You can flip that and say if Hitler would not have been so quick to open an Eastern Front agianst Russia the American war machine would have seen the full force of the Nazi army..It was Russia that slowed them down and force their supply lines to get to far stretched out and Germany had to split their army which allowed it to be more even, both them and us fighting two front wars yessir, and if not for our intervention there was always the possibility that the iron curtain would have draped over all of Europe, Russian tanks were amazing and their production was protected from bombing, Russia certainly deserves a lot of credit.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by DDBooger
yessir, and if not for our intervention there was always the possibility that the iron curtain would have draped over all of Europe, Russian tanks were amazing and their production was protected from bombing, Russia certainly deserves a lot of credit.

And you can honestly say all we did was trade one dictator for another in most of Europe..We should have listened to PAtton..attack Russia right then

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
And you can honestly say all we did was trade one dictator for another in most of Europe..We should have listened to PAtton..attack Russia right then we certainly should have at least escorted them home, screw going into Russia, Napoleon and Hitler learned the hard way.

[JR2004]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
It was Russia that slowed them

It was the Russian winter that slowed them down far more than the Russian army. Tests have shown that the German troops did not have adequate clothing to survive a Russian winter. The Germans learned almost nothing from Napolean in this regard.

Russian troops were ready to fold like a deck of cards until a) that horrible winter and b) their psychotic dictator issued a decree that any Russian soldier who was found retreating from the Germans was to be shot on sight. The Germans tried to use one of his sons as a bargaining chip in order to trade him for a key Field Marshal. Stalin disavowed knowledge of having a son named Yakov.

[JR2004]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
And you can honestly say all we did was trade one dictator for another in most of Europe..We should have listened to PAtton..attack Russia right then

Yes, Patton should've been listened to because the man was 1000 percent correct. Churchill shared the same sentiment, but Roosevelt thought he could bargain with Stalin. Bargaining with the devil never turns out well.