When did France kick the US military out of its country?
Tex Houston
Tex Houston
Albert H. Dobyns wrote in message <35FF49...@worldnet.att.net>...
. I remember hearing people say that DeGaulle(sp?)
>wanted us out of his country. Did he or later Presidents
>kick us out? If we got kicked out, did we ever get let
>back in?
>--
>Al
Albert H. Dobyns
1962-1963. I remember hearing people say that DeGaulle(sp?)
Jeff Joyce
radically alter France's participation in NATO and in March 1966, the French
government indicated France would withdraw from NATO's integrated military
command structure. NATO and other allied military headquarters and
installations had to leave French territory by I April 1967. This included
all US Army and Air Force personnel. Since then France has allowed use of
their territory for certain NATO activities (such as allowing USAF U-2s to
fly from Istres Air Base to cover the Balkans). There are still no
permanently based NATO units/personnel in France.
Jeff J.
Albert H. Dobyns wrote in message <35FF49...@worldnet.att.net>...
>... I remember hearing people say that DeGaulle(sp?) wanted us out of his
dmb...@my-dejanews.com
"Jeff Joyce" <jeffre...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
> In February 1966, President de Gaulle publicly stated he intended to
> radically alter France's participation in NATO and in March 1966, the French
> government indicated France would withdraw from NATO's integrated military
> command structure. NATO and other allied military headquarters and
> installations had to leave French territory by I April 1967. This included
> all US Army and Air Force personnel. Since then France has allowed use of
> their territory for certain NATO activities (such as allowing USAF U-2s to
> fly from Istres Air Base to cover the Balkans). There are still no
> permanently based NATO units/personnel in France.
Yes, and as a result, the relevant organisations moved about 300 km North,
with NATO being just a little to the East of Brussels and SHAPE being
somewhat further South, nearer Charleroi, I believe.
It's worth re-emphasising that deGaulle didn't just kick the US out, it
was NATO lock, stock and barrel.
David
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
MJ
anal-retentive pricks.
Next time someone tries to invade them, they might as well bend over and
accept their coming humiliation...
Jeff Joyce <jeffre...@sprintmail.com> wrote in message
6toc92$b0l$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>In February 1966, President de Gaulle publicly stated he intended to
>radically alter France's participation in NATO and in March 1966, the
French
>government indicated France would withdraw from NATO's integrated military
>command structure. NATO and other allied military headquarters and
>installations had to leave French territory by I April 1967. This included
>all US Army and Air Force personnel. Since then France has allowed use of
>their territory for certain NATO activities (such as allowing USAF U-2s to
>fly from Istres Air Base to cover the Balkans). There are still no
>permanently based NATO units/personnel in France.
>
David P Benjamin
: Excuse me for saying this, but the French are a bunch of snot nosed,
: anal-retentive pricks.
You are not excused. The French have the right to their own
sovereignty. What do you think this is, the Warsaw Pact?
The French are still part of NATO, btw.
: Next time someone tries to invade them, they might as well bend over and
: accept their coming humiliation...
: >
: >
--
David
Jim Erickson
and
: accept their coming humiliation...
Give us a break. No one is going to invade France. Those kinds of
Western European wars are over.
Jim Erickson
Thierry Van Pevenaeyge
Thierry
dmb...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message <6tom1u$3v4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <6toc92$b0l$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "Jeff Joyce" <jeffre...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
>> In February 1966, President de Gaulle publicly stated he intended to
>> radically alter France's participation in NATO and in March 1966, the
French
>> government indicated France would withdraw from NATO's integrated
military
>> command structure. NATO and other allied military headquarters and
>> installations had to leave French territory by I April 1967. This
included
>> all US Army and Air Force personnel. Since then France has allowed use
of
>> their territory for certain NATO activities (such as allowing USAF U-2s
to
>> fly from Istres Air Base to cover the Balkans). There are still no
>> permanently based NATO units/personnel in France.
>
MJ
Jim Erickson <jw...@columbia.edu> wrote in message
35FFF5...@columbia.edu...
Dweezil Dwarftosser
>
> The French are still part of NATO, btw.
If you say so - but the French definitely were *NOT* part of
NATO during the ten years I spent in that command, 1975-'85.
During that time, they had small numbers of forces in Germany
( close to the French border, by individual agreement between
France and Germany ). If they felt like it, they would "observe"
NATO naval and air operations. They neither took part in,
supported, nor were part of NATO in '75-'85.
--
- John T., former MSgt, USAF - and member of the 1st, 4th, 15th
36th, 50th, 56th, 86th, and 388th ( Korat Dive Toss )
Tactical Fighter Wings.
http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/3227
Mike Tighe
wrote:
>David P Benjamin wrote:
>>
>> The French are still part of NATO, btw.
>
>If you say so - but the French definitely were *NOT* part of
>NATO during the ten years I spent in that command, 1975-'85.
>
>During that time, they had small numbers of forces in Germany
>( close to the French border, by individual agreement between
>France and Germany ). If they felt like it, they would "observe"
>NATO naval and air operations. They neither took part in,
>supported, nor were part of NATO in '75-'85.
My understanding is that the French only withdrew from the military
command structure, like the multinational TAFs, for example. The
'political' and 'economic' parts of the Treaty are still there.
Unfortunately, bureaucrats don't go on manoeuvers, or you might have
seen some firmer evidence that France is still (kind of) in the
club...
Mike Tighe
Speaking from the bottom left
hand corner of the big picture.
Skeet38
>Subject: Re: When did France kick the US military out of its country?
>Path:
>Give us a break. No one is going to invade France. Those kinds of
>Western European wars are over.
Before Art says it I might as well say it "Who would want to"
skeet38
Will Chabun
Gros Tenquin and Marville. The RAF also had to move a small number of
units, IIRC.
wjc
Albert H. Dobyns <ahdo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
<35FF49...@worldnet.att.net>...
> I was stationed at a small Army airfield in France back in
> 1962-1963. I remember hearing people say that DeGaulle(sp?)
> wanted us out of his country. Did he or later Presidents
> kick us out? If we got kicked out, did we ever get let
> back in?
> --
> Al
>
dmb...@my-dejanews.com
"Thierry Van Pevenaeyge" <Thierry.VanPev...@Skynet.be> wrote:
> Nato HQ is at Evere and SHAPE is at Mons
>
Ok, I knew for sure it was at Evere - I live there and work on
the other side of the road. The Charleroi comment came from a
tour guide describing a route including both Charleroi and Mons,
so forgive me for missing that it was nearer one than the other.
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: Excuse me for saying this, but the French are a bunch of snot nosed,
: anal-retentive pricks.
: Next time someone tries to invade them, they might as well bend over and
: accept their coming humiliation...
I doubt anyone would be dumb enough to invade France, given that the
French would likely nuke them at the first oppourtunity.
tim gueguen 101867
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: >>: Next time someone tries to invade them, they might as well bend over
: >>: and accept their coming humiliation...
: >>Give us a break. No one is going to invade France. Those kinds of
: >>Western European wars are over.
: >Yeah. That's what they said after WW1....
: I didn't think of that! Screw Europe, we better make sure our Northern
: border is secure against another invasion from Canada
BWAHAHA!!! Its too late to stop the Canadian seizure of the US. We
already dominate your comedy industry, have made major inroads into the
rest of Hollywood, and our agents are rapidly taking over the news
business. Now if our sleeper agent manages to get the presidency in 2000....
tim gueguen Canadian Takeover Agency operative XA@2
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
dissuade folks quite well from trying to invade you.
tim gueguen 101867
: Jim Erickson <jw...@columbia.edu> wrote in message
: 35FFF5...@columbia.edu...
: >: Next time someone tries to invade them, they might as well bend over
: >and
: >: accept their coming humiliation...
: >
: >Give us a break. No one is going to invade France. Those kinds of
: >Western European wars are over.
: >
: >Jim Erickson
Lee Waun
>
> >>: Next time someone tries to invade them, they might as well bend over
> >>: and accept their coming humiliation...
> >
> >>Give us a break. No one is going to invade France. Those kinds of
> >>Western European wars are over.
>
>
> Southern one is fortified to prevent an invasion by Mexico! Heck, maybe
> Virginia should reinforce it's border in case the damn Yankees decide to
> invade again.
>
> Jim Erickson
It is too late for you americans. With the sucessful testing of Canada's
intercontinental weather ballons we shall soon be turning Virginia into
a child's bad birthday party. Surrender now or face party favours.
ArtKramr
>From: dmb...@my-dejanews.com
>Date: 9/17/98 9:40 AM EST
>Ok, I knew for sure it was at Evere - I live there and work on
>the other side of the road. The Charleroi comment came from a
>tour guide describing a route including both Charleroi and Mons,
>so forgive me for missing that it was nearer one than the other.
>
>David
Is the Chat Noir still there?
Arthur
344th Bomb Group 494th Bomb Squadron
9th Tactical Air Force
England, France, Belgium, Holland
dmb...@my-dejanews.com
artk...@aol.com (ArtKramr) wrote:
>
> Is the Chat Noir still there?
>
Tell me where it was, and I'll see if I can find it.
Pierre Henri Baras
>anal-retentive pricks.
Thanks MJ, I needed that to remind me to read the Starr report and
have a good laugh next time I see Clinton beg for your pardon. We might eat
frogs and snails, but we aren't facing total humiliation. Peolple like you
tend to make the rest of the world forget all the great things America has
done.
You're just a huge pain in the ass.
>
>Next time someone tries to invade them, they might as well bend over and
>accept their coming humiliation...
I thought Clinton was straight? Why would he come over and try to nail
Chirac (French president)?Is he THAT sick? Or perhaps were you talking about
something else? Excuse me for not understanding, but hey... I'm just French
:-)
Pierre-Henri
Ogden Johnson III
: Southern one is fortified to prevent an invasion by Mexico! Heck, maybe
: Virginia should reinforce it's border in case the damn Yankees decide to
: invade again.
Not a chance, Virginia has solidified its defenses. The damyankees [it's
one word, BTW] would have to come through either Washington, DC, or West
Virginia. Everybody knows that *nothing* can get through the Washington
bureaucracy. And West Virginia is full of Sen Robert Byrd sponsored
highway projects that go nowhere. We're quite safe, thank you.
OJ III
ArtKramr
> artk...@aol.com (ArtKramr) wrote:
>
>>
>> Is the Chat Noir still there?
>>
>
>Tell me where it was, and I'll see if I can find it.
>
>David
>
the area, especially us guys up at Florennes. Really scroungy place, but we
spent many an evening there washing away a mission or two. But that was a long
time ago. (sigh)
ArtKramr
>From: "Pierre Henri Baras" <lba...@infonie.fr>
>I thought Clinton was straight? Why would he come over and try to nail
>Chirac (French president)?Is he THAT sick? Or perhaps were you talking about
>something else? Excuse me for not understanding, but hey... I'm just French
>:-)
>Pierre-Henri
>
I don't know what Clinton has to do with the french collaborating and fighting
on the side of the Germans in WW II. But all I care about is that another drop
of American blood never falls on French soil.
Wingman
anything out. Twice now they've capitulated to the Germans because Paris
must not be damaged, WHAT ABOUT LONDON, COVENTRY, WARSAW. They were happy to
come running here for protection and then we had to let LONG NOSE lead the
parade into Paris so the French would believe they had liberated themselves.
And oh what good friends they are after the event. And oh what short
memories they have.
I could go on but they are more to be pitied than ridiculed.
Definitely not a Francophile, stick to your frog and snails.
Regards
Roast Beef and proud of it.
polo
>
> >From: "Pierre Henri Baras" <lba...@infonie.fr>
>
> >I thought Clinton was straight? Why would he come over and try to nail
> >Chirac (French president)?Is he THAT sick? Or perhaps were you talking about
> >something else? Excuse me for not understanding, but hey... I'm just French
> >:-)
> >Pierre-Henri
> >
> I don't know what Clinton has to do with the french collaborating and fighting
> on the side of the Germans in WW II. But all I care about is that another drop
> of American blood never falls on French soil.
>
> Arthur
>
You keep ignoring the fact that you were in France fighting
against Germany which had declared war against the US,
about Pearl Harbor time.
You should be grateful that the British didn't
accept any peace offers from Germany. Had they done
so you would have been in a very tight spot, fighting
a war on 2 fronts. You should be grateful that
you along with the British and the French
were able to fight the Germans on French soil.
Of course to you gratitude is a foreign concept.
Hey Art! I just found another ignorant historian who mistakenly
believes that the Germans raided allied airfields with 500++
aircraft on Jan. 1, 1945. You really should set him straight.
ArtKramr
>From: "Wingman"
>Oh I'm so sorry I missed the part where France had the bottle to kick
>anything out. Twice now they've capitulated to the Germans because Paris
>must not be damaged, WHAT ABOUT LONDON, COVENTRY, WARSAW. They were happy to
>come running here for protection and then we had to let LONG NOSE lead the
>parade into Paris so the French would believe they had liberated themselves.
>
>And oh what good friends they are after the event. And oh what short
>memories they have.
>
Well said. Let's never forget that the cowardly French surrendered and
actually helped the Germans fight the Allies, killing Americans and Brits,
sinking American and British ships and firing on American and British troops.
Then licking our boots when it was clear that we were going to kick the hell
out of the Germans. Disgusting. And let's never forget it. Never. De Gaulle
pulled out of NATO because he was afraid he might have to fight. And he really
didn't know much about that fighting stuff.
Arthur
344th Bomb Group 494th Bomb Squadron
9th Tactical Air Force
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
dmb...@my-dejanews.com
artk...@aol.com (ArtKramr) wrote:
>
> It was a nightclub in Charleroi and a hangout for fliers from the airfields
in
> the area, especially us guys up at Florennes. Really scroungy place, but we
> spent many an evening there washing away a mission or two. But that was a
long
> time ago. (sigh)
>
Hmm. Might have some trouble - if it had been Brussels, it would
have been easy. There *is* a Chat Noir in Brussels, but one might
find that the name is a bit like "The White Hart" in the UK.
If I'm in Charleroi, I'll try to look it up - but don't hold
your breath.
ArtKramr
>From: dmb...@my-dejanews.com
>Hmm. Might have some trouble - if it had been Brussels, it would
>have been easy. There *is* a Chat Noir in Brussels, but one might
>find that the name is a bit like "The White Hart" in the UK.
>
>If I'm in Charleroi, I'll try to look it up - but don't hold
>your breath.
>
>David
>
Don't bother. It isn't all that important. Just curious. Thanks anyway. (s)
ArtKramr
>I'm still trying to figure out what we are supposed to be grateful to
>the French for.
>A. Schieffer
>schi...@computer.org
we are grateful to the French for fighting on the German side and not on our
side. If they ever fought on our side, we would have lost the war for sure.
(grin)
Pierre Henri Baras
>West and with the Japanese in the East. There is a big difference
>between accepting defeat and helping the occupation.
Some of us collaborated because Nazis occupied half of our country. Some of
us collaborated because they had rifles pointed on their head. Most French
collaborators were HANGED at the end the war, and believe me, very few
evidence was needed for you to be accused of collaborating.
Calling all French people traitors just shows how narrow minded you are.
Of course we had traitors, I'll even admit to you that even the Gestapo
was disgusted by what some French did to the Jews.
What you said comes around what, once every 2 weeks. Your speech is as
useless and futile as Art's. What is your point? You hate French people? So?
I don't think you realize how easy is for you to say such nonsense.
PHB
MJ
mistakes. They have the same anal attitude they've always had, and given a
similar situation to that in WW2, I think the French would surrender and
collaborate again. It's just a reflection of the lack of integrity of the
French people.
Pierre Henri Baras <lba...@infonie.fr> wrote in message
906482092.646643@si1-paris...
Wingman
produce good wine and perfume, WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?.
Oh and they claim Chopin (Polish) and Marie Curie (Polish) so don't be
surprised if they claim to be war heroes.
Mind you we are as daft as they are, we had to put Napoleon in his place
after he had tried to invade us by building a tunnel, so what do we do?, WE
BUILD THE BLOODY THING FOR THEM. All this time we've had the English Channel
to protect us from invasion and we give it up to the French.
We as English may by European but the only friends we could rely upon have
been on the other side of the pond.
So next time you sip on you wine or sniff your wife that's two things they
CAN do.
Cheers (hic)
Mike
DManton300
>French do
>produce good wine and perfume, WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?.
>
>So next time you sip on you wine or sniff your wife that's two things they
>CAN do.
Having said that there are some pretty respectable Californian vino's about
now!<G>
oh yeah-and some fantastic new world reds!
regards
Drewe
Finally got my web page going! Find me at
http://members.aol.com/dmanton300/index.html
"Better the pride that decides
In a citizen of the world
Than the pride that divides
When a colourful rag is unfurled"
Dugaru
just occasional) "bash the French" thread.
But I'll say it: they did a nice job at Yorktown.
-Dugaru
In article <19980921221620...@ng-fd2.aol.com>,
polo
>
> However, the French collaborated with the Germans in the
> >West and with the Japanese in the East. There is a big difference
> >between accepting defeat and helping the occupation.
>
> Some of us collaborated because Nazis occupied half of our country. Some of
> us collaborated because they had rifles pointed on their head. Most French
> collaborators were HANGED at the end the war, and believe me, very few
> evidence was needed for you to be accused of collaborating.
> Calling all French people traitors just shows how narrow minded you are.
> Of course we had traitors, I'll even admit to you that even the Gestapo
> was disgusted by what some French did to the Jews.
> What you said comes around what, once every 2 weeks. Your speech is as
> useless and futile as Art's. What is your point? You hate French people? So?
> I don't think you realize how easy is for you to say such nonsense.
> PHB
There were collaborators in Holland, Norway, Belgium, Denmark
Greece, Jugoslavia, etc.
Some people are under the illusion that all Frenchmen,
should have spent the years of occupation killing Germans.
Because they didn't does not make them collaborators.
Had they killed Germans you can bet that there would have been
horrible reprisals. There were several villages that were
destroyed, and the villagers killed. How long would it
have been before all villages and villagers destroyed.
When Britain developed the SOE all French citizens were
discouraged from doing any overt resistence until they
were needed to battle the Germans after the invasion of Europe.
Most, if not all Frenchmen continued to do their jobs so
that they could feed themselves. Police still did their
jobs, engine drivers drove the trains, farmers farmed, etc etc.
What possible benefit would they have gained by not
doing what they had to do to survive.
On the eve of D-DAY messages were radioed to France to
tell them that the time to act was "NOW". A panzer division
on its way from Toulouse to Normandy were were delayed by
the maquis. Reprisals were taken for that one,
and at least one other time after D-Day in Northern France.
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: The sad part is, that it doesn't seem like the French learned from their
: mistakes. They have the same anal attitude they've always had, and given a
: similar situation to that in WW2, I think the French would surrender and
: collaborate again. It's just a reflection of the lack of integrity of the
: French people.
America haven't faced any sort of outside invasion since the mid 1800s,
much to our fortune. It didn't help that many folks in the West tended
to see Hitler as standing up to the supposed threat of Communism. I
suspect that if the Nazis had by some miracle come to control parts of
North America they would have found a significant number of willing
collaborators without much effort.
tim gueguen 101867
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: Pierre Henri Baras wrote:
: >
: > Thanks MJ, I needed that to remind me to read the Starr report and
: > have a good laugh next time I see Clinton beg for your pardon. We might eat
: > frogs and snails, but we aren't facing total humiliation.
: Give me a break. Clinton is probably more popular in France now than
: ever before. Isn't womanizing a national pastime in France?
The French seem to be more honest about it than Americans. Just look at
Mitterand's funeral, where his mistress and their daughter present just
like any other mourners. Of course French culture doesn't possess the
same puritan streak as US culture does.
tim gueguen 101867
Wingman
prefer to spend my hard earned pounds with a friendly country rather than
the back stabbing French.
There are really two reasons for the problem with the French:
1 They could not get their trousers on fast enough when the Germans
moved
against them. Following the national pastime they were torn
between,
mistress, wife, family and duty, just too much to think about
after eating all
those snails. After all what civilised nation would eat BUGS.
2 They have never forgiven us for twice pulling them out of the s__t
Another reason for them not joining NATO, they'd have to ask not only their
wives but also their mistresses and getting the two to agree !!!!!!!!!!! :-(
Best we just forgive them for being French they can't help it after-all.
Roast Beef Again
Bye Frogs
dmb...@my-dejanews.com
"MJ" <mjoh...@home.com> wrote:
> The sad part is, that it doesn't seem like the French learned from their
> mistakes. They have the same anal attitude they've always had, and given a
> similar situation to that in WW2, I think the French would surrender and
> collaborate again. It's just a reflection of the lack of integrity of the
> French people.
>
For all their faults, I think there are far too many people here willing
to slam the French at every opportunity. There is an enormous difference
between collaboration and surrender - there was a lot of both in wartime
Europe. Vichy has a deservedly bad reputation, Lavalle (sp?) equally so,
but the word "quisling" doesn't come from France. It was the name of a
Norwegian politician.
Gaullism and other French nationalistic tendencies make co-operating
with them a pain, but they are rarely more of a pain than the
800 pound gorilla represented by the US.
To be honest, I wish people would lighten up on the French. It's bloody
unfair to blame the occasional poster here for the presumed sins of his
grandfather, or his politicians, and it's only natural for people to
get aggressive and irrational when they are irrationally attacked and
painted with the broad brush laid about here by Art, amongst others.
It seems that rather than be abused, they go away again and as a result
we miss out on potentially valuable opinions and information that may
otherwise come out of the French defence industry. After all, it is one
of the few nations capable of producing modern combat aircraft and
equipment. So, how about a little "entente cordiale"?
Yama
Anthony Schieffer wrote:
> I'm still trying to figure out what we are supposed to be grateful to
> the French for.
Your independence, to begin with?
> Maybe for getting us into Vietnam?
*laugh*
Boyce G. Williams, Jr.
>
>It is too late for you americans. With the sucessful testing of Canada's
>intercontinental weather ballons we shall soon be turning Virginia into
>a child's bad birthday party. Surrender now or face party favours.
>
>
got the forts in place around Richmond.
Boyce G. Williams, Jr.
.--------------------------------------------------------------------.
| "People should have two virtues: purpose- the courage to envisage |
| and pursue valued goals uninhibited by the defeat of infantile |
| fantasies, by guilt and the failing fear punishment; and wisdom- a|
| detached concern with life itself, in the face of death itself." |
| Norman F. Dixon|
'--------------------------------------------------------------------'
Boyce G. Williams, Jr.
>Give me a break. Clinton is probably more popular in France now than
>ever before. Isn't womanizing a national pastime in France? Right up
>there with surrender, collaboration, and issuing unsolicited comments on
>whatever the U.S. happens to be doing at the moment? Must be hard living
>vicariously through another entire country.
That's only after they found out Slick Willie is doing what would have
gotten any other American Exec fired.
Scott MacEachern
>Well said. Let's never forget that the cowardly French surrendered and
>actually helped the Germans ...
While, of course, the United States was still sitting a long way back,
staying well out of the war and -- in the case of a whole bunch of
American companies -- making nice profits on collaboration with the
Nazis. I alwys love it when Americans take credit for prosecuting a
war that they only joined half-way through...
Scott
_______________________________________
Scott MacEachern
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bowdoin College
Brunswick, ME 04011 smac...@polar.bowdoin.edu
L'obstination et ardeur d'opinion est la plus sure preuve de betise. Est-il rien certain, resolu,
dedaigneux, contemplatif, grave, serieux, comme l'ane? Montaigne
Patrick PETIT
Hel...@Hangar13.co.uk says...
What is the dream of English girls ?
Find a French lover.
"le roast beef n'est plus ce qu'il etait"
PP
Knightmare
the way his illness for near 15 years ! He knew he was ill even before
his first election...
Yannick
If replying by email, please remove NO_SPAM_ from address
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN wrote in message <6u9q2r$707$1...@missing.its.to>...
:The French seem to be more honest about it than Americans. Just look
Knightmare
What do you at the CERN ? You only read and lurk RAM, RAMN, etc. ? I'm
on the other end of Cointrin's runway... :)
Yannick
Geneva, Switzerland
If replying by email, please remove NO_SPAM_ from address
Patrick PETIT wrote in message <6ub3or$q0p$1...@sunnews.cern.ch>...
:What is the dream of English girls ?
:
Concord DO Office
when the United States entered the war (on TWO hemispheres mind you) &
shortly there after, well, basically brought all the bad guys to there
knees. Be interesting what the other nations of the world would be like
today w/o the 1-800-help-USA line on their global speed dials.
Scott MacEachern <smac...@polar.bowdoin.edu> wrote in article
<36090701...@news.bowdoin.edu>...
Jerry Abbatello
>
> I was stationed at a small Army airfield in France back in
> 1962-1963. I remember hearing people say that DeGaulle(sp?)
> wanted us out of his country. Did he or later Presidents
> kick us out? If we got kicked out, did we ever get let
> back in?
> --
> Al
I don't think we ever "got back in" in the same way that that we were
officially in before. However, France still participated in a number of
NATO support programs. By that time it had been decided that we really
didn't need to have troops in France anyway since troops in Germany were
closer to a front anyway. DeGaulle could afford to "throw out the
Americans" since he knew we wouldn't let anything happen to Europe
anyway. He insulted us in order to give the French people a feeling of
greater independence. But he treated Canada worse. While as a guest in
Canada he called for a free Quebec which fueled the Separatist flames
for years. His ego was always much larger than whatever brains he may
have had. He did however unite a large part of the French military
during World War II (the part that chose to not remain under Vichy
authority) .
Jerry A.
Scott MacEachern
>MMMmmm, halfway through? You mean when Germany was @ it's peak of power
>when the United States entered the war (on TWO hemispheres mind you) &
>shortly there after, well, basically brought all the bad guys to there
>knees.
More or less... the States enters the war at the very end of 1941 and
gets hammered until mid-1942. At which time, the Soviets (remember
them?) had been at the Nazis through that whole, long winter before
and Stalingrad was coming up... as was the 'Alam al Halfa Ridge.
>Be interesting what the other nations of the world would be like
>today w/o the 1-800-help-USA line on their global speed dials.
Probably much like the situation if the Commonwealth and the Soviets
hadn't been involved. Actually, I don't remember the States entering
the war out of a selfless desire to aid democracies in Europe... or at
least your country successfully resisted the temptation until the end
of 1941. It was my impression that Pearl Harbor had something to do
with it. And you -- and Art Kramer -- should be bloody glad that the
USA escaped the choice between collaboration and guerilla warfare that
France and other countries in Europe faced in WW2. You might find that
-- had you and yours been placed in the same situation -- you'd have
less to preach about at this point.
Scott
____________________________________________
Scott MacEachern
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bowdoin College
Brunswick, ME 04011 smac...@polar.bowdoin.edu
And return from Clachan/from Suisnish and the land of the living;
Each one young and light-stepping/without the heartbreak of the tale.
Sorley MacLean, 'Hallaig'
dmb...@my-dejanews.com
pe...@mail.cern.ch (Patrick PETIT) wrote:
>
> What is the dream of English girls ?
>
> Find a French lover.
>
Ever wonder why they have to dream? The real thing's so rare
there aren't any to be found.
>
> "le roast beef n'est plus ce qu'il etait"
>
Malheureusement, c'est vrai. La vache folle, ce n'est pas
un blague.
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: MMMmmm, halfway through? You mean when Germany was @ it's peak of power
: when the United States entered the war (on TWO hemispheres mind you)
The British and Australians also found themselves fighting in both Europe
and Asia.
&
: shortly there after, well, basically brought all the bad guys to there
: knees.
I wouldn't call three years later "shortly thereafter." You also seem to
be ignoring the nice little mess the Germans created for themselves by
invading Momma Russia.
tim gueguen 101867
polo
>
> MMMmmm, halfway through? You mean when Germany was @ it's peak of power
> shortly there after, well, basically brought all the bad guys to there
> today w/o the 1-800-help-USA line on their global speed dials.
Yes there was a help line to the US in both wars. Britain was almost
broke in 1917
from the pay phone charges to buy war materials from uncle sam at
extotionist prices.
During WWII good old uncle sam sucked Britain and Russia dry before
Germany
declared war on the US.
And good old uncle sam came into the war when the hard slogging was
done.
Can't say that the US can't pick a winning side.
polo
> Probably much like the situation if the Commonwealth and the Soviets
> hadn't been involved. Actually, I don't remember the States entering
> the war out of a selfless desire to aid democracies in Europe... or at
> least your country successfully resisted the temptation until the end
> of 1941. It was my impression that Pearl Harbor had something to do
> with it. And you -- and Art Kramer -- should be bloody glad that the
> USA escaped the choice between collaboration and guerilla warfare that
> France and other countries in Europe faced in WW2. You might find that
> -- had you and yours been placed in the same situation -- you'd have
> less to preach about at this point.
>
> Scott
> ____________________________________________
>
> Scott MacEachern
And when did uncle sam enter WWI?? Very very late. Just in time to
be able to say we were over over there.
polo
>
>
> I don't think we ever "got back in" in the same way that that we were
> officially in before. However, France still participated in a number of
> NATO support programs. By that time it had been decided that we really
> didn't need to have troops in France anyway since troops in Germany were
> closer to a front anyway. DeGaulle could afford to "throw out the
> Americans" since he knew we wouldn't let anything happen to Europe
> anyway. He insulted us in order to give the French people a feeling of
> greater independence. But he treated Canada worse. While as a guest in
> Canada he called for a free Quebec which fueled the Separatist flames
> for years. His ego was always much larger than whatever brains he may
> have had. He did however unite a large part of the French military
> during World War II (the part that chose to not remain under Vichy
> authority) .
>
> Jerry A.
Interesting history by Walt Disney and Art Kramer neither
of whom let facts spoil their stories.
polo
> That's about like saying that the U.S. won W.W.I. I realize that we
> received support from France, but saying that France is responsible for
> our independence is silly. The Atlantic Ocean contributed much more than
> France. And, that was back when the French were worth something in a
> fight.
Every body conveniently forgets that the US allied itself to France
during the war of 1812/14. The US must have believed that France
would defeat Britain and wanted to be on the winning side.
Well in case you have forgotten France and her allies were defeated
in that war.
>
> A. Schieffer
> schi...@computer.org
Matthew Hamer
Canada is planning to invade the US:
1) A mass launch of our T33 fleet, carrying maple syrup, will be used to
cripple your electrical system and raise your cholestrol levels.
2) We will import our ever lingering constituional crisis to paralyze your
government.
3) Fleets of DeHavilland Beavers will perform max manifold pressure takeoffs
to deafen your population.
Basically, you are already doomed .....
Regards, Matt
In article <360125...@columbia.edu>,
Jim Erickson <jw...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>>>: Next time someone tries to invade them, they might as well bend over
>>>: and accept their coming humiliation...
>>
>>>Give us a break. No one is going to invade France. Those kinds of
>>>Western European wars are over.
>
>>Yeah. That's what they said after WW1....
>
>I didn't think of that! Screw Europe, we better make sure our Northern
>border is secure against another invasion from Canada and our that our
>Southern one is fortified to prevent an invasion by Mexico! Heck, maybe
>Virginia should reinforce it's border in case the damn Yankees decide to
>invade again.
>
>Jim Erickson
polo
>
> Anthony Schieffer (n8...@sgi.com) wrote:
> : Pierre Henri Baras wrote:
>
> : >
> : > Thanks MJ, I needed that to remind me to read the Starr report and
> : > have a good laugh next time I see Clinton beg for your pardon. We might eat
> : > frogs and snails, but we aren't facing total humiliation.
>
> : ever before. Isn't womanizing a national pastime in France?
Not in the Bill Clinton sense.
> The French seem to be more honest about it than Americans. Just look at
> Mitterand's funeral, where his mistress and their daughter present just
> like any other mourners. Of course French culture doesn't possess the
> same puritan streak as US culture does.
And French craftsmen have not built any office desks that can accomodate
one peson under them.
>
> tim gueguen 101867
polo
>
> Its easy for North Americans to make such statements when Canada and
> America haven't faced any sort of outside invasion since the mid 1800s,
> much to our fortune. It didn't help that many folks in the West tended
> to see Hitler as standing up to the supposed threat of Communism. I
> suspect that if the Nazis had by some miracle come to control parts of
> North America they would have found a significant number of willing
> collaborators without much effort.
>
> tim gueguen 101867
There was that very patriotic American Nazi Bund.
Jason Castello
There is actually a dramatic difference of opinion on this subject.
Many argue that the US entered the war just in time to save France and
Britian. Remember in 1917 Russia had just withdrawn, therefore Germany
was transferring is troops from the Eastern front to the Western
front. So the fresh influx of troops into the Western front is seen by
many as very important, if not pivotal to the defeat of Germany,
rather than a stalement.
-jason
Jason Castello
>Anthony Schieffer wrote:
>
>
>> That's about like saying that the U.S. won W.W.I. I realize that we
>> received support from France, but saying that France is responsible for
>> our independence is silly. The Atlantic Ocean contributed much more than
>> France. And, that was back when the French were worth something in a
>> fight.
>
>Every body conveniently forgets that the US allied itself to France
>during the war of 1812/14. The US must have believed that France
>would defeat Britain and wanted to be on the winning side.
>
Umm... not really, the US pursued a path of neutrality throughout the
Napoleonic Wars. In fact, the US was more dependant on Britain than
anyone else (i.e. they were the US only real trading partner).
-Jason
ArtKramr
>From: mha...@mail.island.net
>Jim is onto our secret --
>
>Canada is planning to invade the US:
>
>1) A mass launch of our T33 fleet, carrying maple syrup, will be used to
>cripple your electrical system and raise your cholestrol levels.
>2) We will import our ever lingering constituional crisis to paralyze your
>government.
>3) Fleets of DeHavilland Beavers will perform max manifold pressure takeoffs
>to deafen your population.
>
>Basically, you are already doomed .....
>
>Regards, Matt
>
I warn you. If you attack the U.S. I will immediately surrender and
collaborate. It's something I learned when I was in France. (s)
Arthur
344th Bomb Group 494th Bomb Squadron
9th Tactical Air Force
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Cecil Turner
> Every body conveniently forgets that the US allied itself to France
> during the war of 1812/14. The US must have believed that France
> would defeat Britain and wanted to be on the winning side.
I believe there was a little matter of British ships impressing American
sailors to help fight the war against France--seemed a bit excessive to folks
hereabouts. (There was also a group of US hawks wanting to conquer Canada,
but we like to pretend that didn't happen.) "Allied itself to France" is
pretty strong.
> Well in case you have forgotten France and her allies were defeated
> in that war.
That statement works only if you don't count the US among the allies.
Otherwise you have to explain some fairly serious British setbacks in the
winter of 1814-1815.rgds,
KTFrog
Yevgeniy Chizhikov
Jason Castello wrote:
> There is actually a dramatic difference of opinion on this subject.
> Many argue that the US entered the war just in time to save France and
> Britian. Remember in 1917 Russia had just withdrawn, therefore Germany
> was transferring is troops from the Eastern front to the Western
> front. So the fresh influx of troops into the Western front is seen by
> many as very important, if not pivotal to the defeat of Germany,
> rather than a stalement.
> -jason
Questionable statement. Things went against Germany quiet bad in 1916 WITHOUT
the US participation. For example Russia had very successful offense in 1916.
It is certainly was huge blow to Germans and Austro-Hungarians. However,
Russia benefited very little from it, while France and Britain certainly did.
Germans had to transfer troops to Russian front. Austro-Hangrary was ready to
collapse and stop all offensive actions toward Italy. It was certainly great
achievement. Germans and Austro-Hungarians lost more than 400,000 men as POWs
a lone. Things moved in the West also. Introduction of tanks and British and
French attacks had been also successful. Germany was FINISHED. Even through
Germans was removing troops and sending them West, Germany was done. French
and British could not go all the way to Germany, and war is simply would have
been stalled. With American help, French, British, and Italians could
certainly go all the way to Berlin, but they DID NOT. All that makes American
contribution very limited. In fact I believe it is mostly have to do with
punishment Germany economically after the war, than with military
achievements.
Russian contribution to W.W.I is even more overlooked that contribution to
W.W.II. Certainly, Russia withdrew from the war because of the external
problems, but for 4 years Russians faced 50% of the Axis troops, while French
and British faced another 50%. About 40% troops face by Russians were German.
In defeat of Austro-Hungary, Russians played the overwhelming role. From 1.6
million people lost by Ausro-Hungary, almost all were lost against Russia.
Successful offense in 1916 was certainly big relieve to the French and
Britain. It was also Russia who saved French and British in 1914, when
Russia, while still unprepared, attack Germany's back and made it to withdrew
troops from Western Front. In 1914 and 1916 Russia more than for fill it's
Allied duties. As usual, Russian participation is no more than a mentioning
in the Western history.
Yevgeniy Chizhikov.
Stephen Harding
> Every body conveniently forgets that the US allied itself to France
> during the war of 1812/14. The US must have believed that France
> would defeat Britain and wanted to be on the winning side.
Where do you get your American history from?
The US was *not* allied with France during the War of 1812! The US
was neutral during most of the Napoleonic Wars, suffering transgressions
against our shipping by both sides.
The 1812-1814 war was not in any way an alliance with France against
England, although the war is sometimes catagorized as a side show of
the larger Napoleonic wars (such as our French and Indian War of the
1750's was a minor side show of a larger English-French struggle in
Europe).
> Well in case you have forgotten France and her allies were defeated
> in that war.
France was defeated in that war. The US-England contest was a draw,
but had the feeling of victory due to the stunning American victory at
New Orleans [after the war was actually over].
SMH
Scott MacEachern
> But, we live in
>country were the citizens don't have to back everything that the
>government decides on.
Quite true... but the ways in which a country comports itself when
faced by war are the result of the interactions of government and
citizenry. If many of the citizens of America were comfortable in not
going to war against the Nazis, then that reflects upon them and their
view of the world, just as the actions of French collaborators would
reflect upon those people. I am not arguing that a disinclination to
go to war and active collaboration are the same thing -- they're not
-- but that individuals must bear some responsibilities for public
policies that they support.
>Don't be so sure. We have quite an independent and violent nature.
And the French don't? Remember, this was the country that was
composing odes to the bayonet at the beginning of WW1. There is a
difference between bravery en masse in warfare and the solitary
bravery that is necessary for those who want to fight occupying
powers. A few people will resist, some will collaborate and most will
try to keep well out of it and live their lives; you might look at the
history of your own Civil Rights Movement, for examples. America has
not recently been invaded, of course, which allows Americans to keep a
variety of illusions alive.
Scott
_______________________________________
Scott MacEachern
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bowdoin College
Brunswick, ME 04011 smac...@polar.bowdoin.edu
L'obstination et ardeur d'opinion est la plus sure preuve de betise. Est-il rien certain, resolu,
clipper
don't remember that about the french people and army in WWII :
* in may and june 1940, french fighters shot down about 900 germans
airplanes : these planes were not at the battle of britain
* many french soldiers gave their life for helping british soldiers to
reembark to England at Dunkerque in june 40 : these soldiers were later in
el-alamein and normandy; no the french soldiers,
* about 100 000 french soldiers died in may and july 40 : that number is
greater that the one of killed during the battle of Verdun between february
an october 1916 !!!
* landing of normandy was made possible by the courage of thousand of french
patriots, most of them were killed by the germans
Wingman a écrit dans le message
<6uafhi$g25$1...@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net>...
Tim Lynch
(Scott MacEachern) wrote:
> Quite true... but the ways in which a country comports itself when
> faced by war are the result of the interactions of government and
> citizenry. If many of the citizens of America were comfortable in not
> going to war against the Nazis, then that reflects upon them and their
> view of the world, just as the actions of French collaborators would
> reflect upon those people. I am not arguing that a disinclination to
> go to war and active collaboration are the same thing -- they're not
> -- but that individuals must bear some responsibilities for public
> policies that they support.
What many Americans saw was a tyrant which Europe had coddled and let
strengthen without preparing for what he could do to them. He was also
fighting another tyrant in Stalin, no popular figure either. Having just
fought over there earlier in the century left Americans divided over what
to do about the perpetually warring continent.
Your statement seems to read as if every American in 1941 had just been
shown the film "Shindler's List" and was still apathetic about the
situation in Europe. The knowledge of the Nazis nearly sixty years ago
was no where near the stomach turning volumes we all learn today. It
wasn't as if Walter Cronkite and the Internet were providing up to the
minute audio and video of the carnage in Europe while Americans were
sitting at their desktops going, "Cool, dude...check out the gnarly
'splosions!" Besides, I have my doubts about the self righteous Europeans
(notice I said not all, just the pompous ones...you know who you are) EVER
coming over to this hemisphere in similar ratios to assist us, however
wildly hypothetical that scenario is.
--
Tim
Pierre Henri Baras
>I warn you. If you attack the U.S. I will immediately surrender and
>collaborate. It's something I learned when I was in France. (s)
>
>Arthur
I'm disappointed, Arthur. I was expecting something better than this. This
one really was too easy. It's not with these remarks that you're going to
keep your Francophobia up. The prophetical wisdom you just let go is just
what I expected from a senile Yankee, perhaps even racist.
Come on, show us what a great American heroe is capable of proclaiming.
PHB
Pierre Henri Baras
>>There are really two reasons for the problem with the French:
>>
>> 1 They could not get their trousers on fast enough when the
Germans
>>moved
>> against them. Following the national pastime they were torn
>>between,
>> mistress, wife, family and duty, just too much to think about
>>after eating all
>> those snails
Hey, Clipper, have you ever left your country? Listening to you makes me
think you're just a stupid teenager repeating what he heard his even dumber
parents say to make himself interesting. Man, you make British people look
like fools.Seems your natural evolution stopped after the Battle of Britain.
What Art says is funny, almost interestingly funny. What you say is
pitifully absurde. Childish would be too weak.
. After all what civilised nation would eat BUGS.
Snails belong to the gastropoda family. They're not bugs.Did you go to
school?Or were you eating Spam instead? Meat in cans... that's what they
raise Yankees with.
>>
>> 2 They have never forgiven us for twice pulling them out of the
>s__t
>>
>>Another reason for them not joining NATO,
We joined Nato, dumbass. We didn't need Uncle Sam to protect us.
ArtKramr
>From: "Pierre Henri Baras" <lba...@infonie.fr>
>Date: 9/26/98 7:05 AM EST
>Message-id: <906812520.513859@si2-paris>
The subject at hand is the French collaboration. Do you have any comments on
that subject? (g)
ArtKramr
>From: "Pierre Henri Baras"
>4) No sane Frenchman is proud of our country's attitude during the "Drôle de
>Guerre" 1939-40.
Well, that is nice to hear.
Tamela R. Germano
<lba...@infonie.fr> wrote:
> Honesty, subjectivity and common sense are the key to this discussion.
>
> Art, I don't know what your feelings are concerning WWII, but if you're
> gonna stay provocative, just keep out please.
I'ts too late for him to keep out, he already has been in WWII. And
lived through it, unlike my uncle who died in a B-17 over Europe. That
gives him the right to be as provocative as he wants to be.
Art will indeed pull your leg to see what you say, but that is most
often after some twit has has told him that he does not know what realy
happened when he lived through it.
Dino in Reno
HAROLD RENNINGER
gutless ashole
HAVE A GREAT DAY>>>>HAROLD
Pierre Henri Baras
>The subject at hand is the French collaboration. Do you have any comments
on
>that subject? (g)
>
b. Those who did did it well, I'll have to admit.
2) Many French were forced ( mentally, physically) to help the Nazis and
deeply regretted it. They often had no other choice. Help the SS or die.
That is not collaborating, it is saving your ass.
3) Those who did collaborate paid for it at the end of the war. Very few
evidence was needed for one to be convinced of collaboration. Men were
hanged and women who slept with Germans to take advantage had their head
shaved and some were branded like cattle.
4) No sane Frenchman is proud of our country's attitude during the "Drôle de
men during the war. Those who refused to surrender fled occupied France and
fought with the US and G. Britain. Those who stayed with Vichy interfered
with the Allied landings. Nobody is proud of them.
Nobody can honestly deny this. Please be welcomed if you have any such
subjective thoughts to submit to this NG.
PHB
LesB
>Hey, Clipper, . . . .
Think you mean "Wingman" here Pierre. Like you, "Clipper" seems to be
posting from France.
LesB
{take out one to mail}
EE Canberra Tribute Site
http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~lesb/canberra.html
ArtKramr
>>
>> Art, I don't know what your feelings are concerning WWII, but if you're
>> gonna stay provocative, just keep out please.
>
>lived through it, unlike my uncle who died in a B-17 over Europe. That
>gives him the right to be as provocative as he wants to be.
> Art will indeed pull your leg to see what you say, but that is most
>often after some twit has has told him that he does not know what realy
>happened when he lived through it.
>
>Dino in Reno
>
>
>
ROFL !!!!
Arthur in Las Vegas
Pierre Henri Baras
who sacrificed themselves for us.
PHB
ArtKramr a écrit dans le message
<19980926222446...@ng101.aol.com>...
Pierre Henri Baras
>
>Think you mean "Wingman" here Pierre. Like you, "Clipper" seems to be
>posting from France.
>
Thats possible, and good news; we're 2 to resist Art, Lorne and all that
bunch. I think people know which side I'm on. I probably got mixed up.Sorry.
PHB
Pierre Henri Baras
don't think you are proud of your withdrawal of Saigon in 75'.
PHB
ArtKramr a écrit dans le message
<19980926194832...@ng10.aol.com>...
>
>>From: "Pierre Henri Baras"
>
>>4) No sane Frenchman is proud of our country's attitude during the "Drôle
de
>>Guerre" 1939-40.
>
>Well, that is nice to hear.
>
>Arthur
smac...@polar.bowdoin.edu
> Your statement seems to read as if every American in 1941 had just been
> shown the film "Shindler's List" and was still apathetic about the
> situation in Europe.
Not at all. At that point, no one (not even those 'coddling' [whatever that
means] Europeans) had the same knowledge of the Holocaust as we have now,
although it was pretty obvious that terrible things were happening to people
in occupied Europe. (A number of American diplomats in Berlin were saying
that, for example.) But people who knew what they knew, and still opposed
doing anything, bear some responsibility, I think. They are not in the same
category as the American industrialists who profited from collaboration with
the Nazi regime and then demanded payment from the victorious Allies for
damage to their German plants after the war, but there is still some
culpability involved.
> Besides, I have my doubts about the self righteous Europeans
> (notice I said not all, just the pompous ones...you know who you are) EVER
> coming over to this hemisphere in similar ratios to assist us, however
> wildly hypothetical that scenario is.
Lafayette et al spring to mind, although that was a while ago. And the
situation is, as you say, hypothetical. But for every pompous European (or
Canadian, in my case), we have three or four equally pompous Americans giving
lectures on how Murricuh won the war all on its own.
Scott
_______________________________________
Scott MacEachern
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bowdoin College
Brunswick, ME 04011 smac...@polar.bowdoin.edu
L'obstination et ardeur d'opinion est la plus sure preuve de betise. Est-il
rien certain, resolu, dedaigneux, contemplatif, grave, serieux, comme l'ane?
Montaigne
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Wingman
Art has every right, though I did not live through the war (having been born
at the end of it) I would say that these bleeding hearts should take their
French arses around the cemeteries close to wartime airfield. I have many
times visited them, in my way to say thanks for my freedom. The most
sobering part is when you read the ages, THEY WERE BOYS, who gave their
lives to help liberate Europe. Had we not won we would not be having this
conversation now as only one point of view would be allowed.
To all W.W.II airmen, sailors and soldiers I say a heartfelt thanks for not
one nation won the war we all won it. My thanks also go to Art and his
comrades whom I forgave a long time ago for wasting our tea at Boston. (Only
joking Art)
Mike
Wingman
Ogden Johnson III
: Thats possible, and good news; we're 2 to resist Art, Lorne and all that
: bunch. I think people know which side I'm on. I probably got mixed up.Sorry.
: PHB
Well, you can count me in 'that bunch', although not from anything that
happened in WWII [I was 2 when it ended]. No, my distaste for France and
the French arose from two port visits, the first in 1964, the second in
1980, both well after WWII. In the first, my parents [who met the ship on
leave from my father's base in Germany] and I, even though accompanied my
father's long lost friend, a Le Havre restauranteur/bar owner *from* WWII,
were treated like s**t. On the second, the only time we were *not*
treated like s**t, was in and around Belleau Woods, during a visit to the
USMC memorial there.
In visits to a score of countries, the only place I received a worse
reception was VN. Even the Japanese, who are reknown for disliking all
foreigners, are courteous and polite while they do so. They may *think*
you're s**t, but they don't treat you like it.
OJ III
[And no, it wasn't a 'drunken Marine on liberty' thing - I bought into and
practiced the 'ambassador in uniform' thing. It worked; everywhere but in
France, that is.]
ArtKramr
>From: "Wingman" <Hel...@Hangar13.co.uk>
>To all W.W.II airmen, sailors and soldiers I say a heartfelt thanks for not
>one nation won the war we all won it. My thanks also go to Art and his
>comrades whom I forgave a long time ago for wasting our tea at Boston. (Only
>joking Art)
>
>Mike
>
>
>
Nothing personal Mike ol' pal, but that tea wasn't all that good. (grin)
Wingman
Art has every right, though I did not live through the war (having been born
at the end of it) I would say that these bleeding hearts should take their
French arses around the cemeteries close to wartime airfield. I have many
times visited them, in my way to say thanks for my freedom. The most
sobering part is when you read the ages, THEY WERE BOYS, who gave their
lives to help liberate Europe. Had we not won we would not be having this
conversation now as only one point of view would be allowed.
To all W.W.II airmen, sailors and soldiers I say a heartfelt thanks for not
HAROLD RENNINGER
Wingman
Never mind I only drink coffee anyway, but I'd always have a drink with a
vet. Just lost an old friend last year, he flew Hurricanes in the Battle of
Britain he had what the French lack "BALLS".
Harrold,
I'd love to go fishing if the coffee's good but the "Pond" is a bit wide!!
:(
Pierre or PHB (sounds like a type of plastic)
Either you,re too sensitive or as I suspect like all French you've no sense
of humour I therefore suspect that it is you who is the teenager sunny boy.
Regards and Respect to all VETS
Mike
LesB
>>comrades whom I forgave a long time ago for wasting our tea at Boston. (Only
>>joking Art)
>
>Nothing personal Mike ol' pal, but that tea wasn't all that good. (grin)
You used way too much water making it - and cold water at that! ;-)
Anyway, you're supposed to put the milk in first.
RMiG15
Well, kids; when all the bickering is done, the fact remains that no one gets
into a war except in self-interest. They'd be a damned fool to do otherwise.
RMiG15
Pierre Henri Baras
Isn't that why you like us so much? :-)
Pierre Henri Baras
>Never mind I only drink coffee anyway, but I'd always have a drink with a
>vet. Just lost an old friend last year, he flew Hurricanes in the Battle of
>Britain he had what the French lack "BALLS".
I know war is man's stuff, but couldn't we orient this discussion in
an other direction. You know very well what you're saying is false and that
you just want to be interesting. You wouldn't have said that if the war had
ended differently, if you were on the different side.
I thought you knew that a lot of French , as well as Polish, Tcheck and
Belgian aviators flew and died for the RAF. Too bad because its an important
part of RAF history you are forgetting.
>
>
>Pierre or PHB (sounds like a type of plastic)
>Either you,re too sensitive or as I suspect like all French you've no sense
>of humour I therefore suspect that it is you who is the teenager sunny boy.
>
How would you react if someone was always reminding you of Vietnam or the
50's witch hunt. We are 2 or 3 guys here trying to defend the honor of our
country against really dishonnest people. Its not about sensitivity or even
pride, it is just that I hate lyiers or people that won't understand that
what they say, even if it's sometimes true, is useless to remind. I like
America, California more precisely, but I just don't understand why you
always remind everyone that you're the best. Not only is it useless( perhaps
not in Iran) but people outside your borders are fed up with it.
Pierre-Henri Baras
Wingman
I've been around the world and sadly wasted time in your so called capital I
don't think the residents ever went to school. Gastropod or not it's still a
disgusting habit you're trying to cover up by trying to define a bug or not.
Ref: We didn't need Uncle Sam to protect us.
Since when has France ever been able to protect itself?, you conveniently
forget that in the recent past we have twice pulled you out of a hole. We
even gave long nose a place of safety which he immediately forgot when we
liberated your country from the Nazi and collaborators.
Wingman
Mary Shafer
> I'm still trying to figure out what we are supposed to be grateful to
> the French for.
They helped us win the Revolutionary War. "Lafayette, we are here", the
first official words spoken by the AEF when it landed in France in WW I,
were a tribute to the aid provided to the rebellious colonists fighting
the British. So was the name of the unit of American pilots, the
Lafayette Escadrille, who went to France before the US entered the war.
Additionally, the French helped preserve the Union during the (US) Civil
War, partly by putting pressure on the British to stop helping the
Confederates (which they were doing because they needed the cotton for
their "dark, satanic mills" making fabric). As the supply of raw
materials from the Confederate States diminished, many British factories
found themselves in desperate straits. Their owners put pressure on
their government to support the Confederacy, by trying to use the Royal
Navy against the Union ships blockading the Southern ports, for example.
The Union had set the blockade up to close down exportation of cotton and
other goods in an attempt to cut off the flow of funding into the
Confederacy, just as the US has imposed the economic sanctions (a less
direct blockade) on Iraq and Cuba.
The French also paid the US the ultimate compliment of imitation; they
modeled their Revolution (ca 1790) on our Revolution, co-opting many of
the elements in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Had Napoleon not succeeded so well, the similarity between the two would
be fairly obvious.
I should mention that the British were divided on supporting the Southern
states, as there was a strong Abolitionist element in the UK; they had
outlawed slavery and prohibited participation in slave-trading by all
subjects, both at home and in their colonies, some time before the US got
around to it. Consumer boycotts, such as refusing to buy fabrics made
from American cotton, was part of this, although more common in the UK
than in the colonies, which were the bigger part of the textile market.
--
Wingman
Get real, where would France have been if we had capitulated or accepted
Hitler's proposals. We didn't and took a real plastering, our capital was
not saved neither was Coventry or my home town Sheffield. We resisted and
with help (some would say belatedly) from our friends overcame Hitlerism.
Only last year I stood in Victory Square, Warsaw and the War Memorial and
translated for my daughter the inscription remembering the pilots (Polish)
lost in the Battle of Britain.
No I don't have my head stuck up my arse, I'm European (not a supremacist)
and speak four languages and I would proffer older and wiser than you.
Wingman
dmb...@my-dejanews.com
"Wingman" <Hel...@Hangar13.co.uk> wrote:
>
> No I don't have my head stuck up my arse, I'm European (not a supremacist)
> and speak four languages and I would proffer older and wiser than you.
>
You appear to be living proof, then, that knowledge does not equate to
wisdom, and that your education was sadly lacking in any of the finer
qualities..
Your persistent trollish attempts to antagonise a specific group of
people reading this group reveal you for what you are - a narrow-minded
xenophobic bigot who stoops to arse-licking in a pathetic attempt to
shore-up what must be a very low sense of self-esteem.
Crawl back into your nasty little hole "Wingman", you deserve
nothing but my contempt, which I give freely.
David
Pierre Henri Baras
We care about our language. You don't . It is not a problem, just a fact.
You have cities like Miami were road signs are in 2 languages. Why not? We
chose to preserve our language. But I agree that some laws are really
stupid.
We stopped nuc tests in 96, you did in 92. Your point isn't a point . It is
a bit too hypocritical.
Another thing, you still produce land mines and sign the Anti-mines treaty.
We did. :-)
>I don't think that the French have recovered yet. That may be why they
>are so defensive. They still think that the survival of the French
>people is in jeopardy. That would explain the strange laws in France
>about using the French language on web pages and such. It may also
>explain why the French are the last first-world country to conduct
>nuclear tests. Most countries don't see the necessity of such tests
>anymore. Seems a lot like France was just trying to make sure that
>everyone knows that they have the bomb.
>
>just my take on it.
>A. Schieffer
>schi...@computer.org
Dweezil Dwarftosser
>
> Your theory isn't too out of line, but I have a few things to say.
> We care about our language. You don't . It is not a problem, just a fact.
The Romans probably cared about their own language in the same way
- and probably others, such as the Sumerians.
All of which contributed to the death of these spoken languages, as
French is quickly becoming.
--
- John T., former MSgt, USAF - and member of the 1st, 4th, 15th
36th, 50th, 56th, 86th, and 388th ( Korat Dive Toss )
Tactical Fighter Wings.
http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/3227
BUFDRVR
They also gave us a pretty nice "statue" in 1876
BUFDRVR
"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"
Bejewelled
>
>They also gave us a pretty nice "statue" in 1876
>
>
This history stuff is all very fine. The fact is today (since WW2?) French
attitudes betray a, what, dislike?, resentment? envy? suspicion? of the USA and
the english-speaking world in general. This seems strongest in the 'enarch'
ruling class. It's partly responsible for the urge to european union, which is
an attempt to create a "europe that can say no" to paraphrase Morita-san, a
new super-power equal in strength to the USA. Two super-powers will only
collide, it seems to me, leading to a world of US/EC rivalry which will be not
to anyone's advantage. Better if the free nations could work together.
Adrian Camp