French Military Publication

[Richard G]

http://momentoffame.com/snapshots/MomentOfFame/l30352.jpg

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Richard G
http://momentoffame.com/snapshots/MomentOfFame/l30352.jpg

haha

JK

[Girl 6]

I'm moving this to the Flame Wars section. Flame me, but is there some reason people have to keep putting the French down? Or, are we getting a bit too nationalisitc in the U.S.?

G6

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally posted by Girl 6
I'm moving this to the Flame Wars section. Flame me, but is there some reason people have to keep putting the French down? Or, are we getting a bit too nationalisitc in the U.S.?

G6

Or are we becoming a bit too sensitive??? I think it's very funny. :)

[Doctor X]

The French merely reap the response to their behavior.

--J.D.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by Girl 6
...is there some reason people have to keep putting the French down?

My ancestry is English, German, Irish, and Polish. Who else but the French do I get to put down? :)

[bangdazap]

Originally posted by Doctor X
The French merely reap the response to their behavior.

--J.D.
Yeah, they're receiving a stream of childish insults! That oughta teach 'em! :D

[Ed]

Originally posted by Girl 6
I'm moving this to the Flame Wars section. Flame me, but is there some reason people have to keep putting the French down? Or, are we getting a bit too nationalisitc in the U.S.?

G6

There was catagorically no reason to move this thread except that you didn't like it. This is a very bad precident.

[Drooper]

Originally posted by Ed


There was catagorically no reason to move this thread except that you didn't like it. This is a very bad precident.

I would have to agree.

Plus it gave me a smile at the start of my week.

:)

[Richard G]

Hmm...

[hal bidlack]

I have decided, based on a variety of input, to return this thread to Banter. I happen to agree with Girl6 that this thread has turned into little more than French bashing. But I also feel this is different than person-bashing. There is, I think, a political content to this effort. I also feel it would have been a bit more appropriate in the politics section, but the person starting the thread put it here, so here it stays.

Know also that I retain full faith in Girl 6 as a moderator, and reasonable people can differ from time to time on issues of policy and politics.

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by Girl 6
I'm moving this to the Flame Wars section. Flame me, but is there some reason people have to keep putting the French down? Or, are we getting a bit too nationalisitc in the U.S.?

G6

There's a war on, G6...it's our patriotic duty to belittle any country that doesn't agree with us. Nationalism is the right word...

[Drooper]

Excellent decision (I don't mean to demean the original decisio by G6 in any way when I say that).

But I thought it was just a bit of fun and it hardly insited any flame war. In fact if you read the responses it drew more barbs directed at French knockers (errr), than the French.

[Luciana]

Has any French person expressed negative feelings toward this link? If so, I'd agree that the matter should be handled carefully, which could include a full apology.

But if not, let it be. I dislike the idea of taking action against something because it might offend someone out there. That is, in my opinion, a dangerous precedent: political correctness to the extreme. What if the "possible offended" just find it funny, and are willing to participate in the joke? We can't, shouldn't, build a taboo where there's none.

Originally posted by Luciana Nery
Has any French person expressed negative feelings toward this link? If so, I'd agree that the matter should be handled carefully, which could include a full apology.



Why would someone apologize for political satire? Every day, all over the world, various political groups satire each other. The Dems, the Reps. Political cartoons run every day in my local paper.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by hal bidlack
I have decided, based on a variety of input, to return this thread to Banter.
Didn't this thread originally start in Politics and Current Events?

Another question: I always wondered what the point of moving threads was.... Well, I understand the concept, but when you move a thread, it keeps a link to it in the original location (which still links to the complete thread), so now it appears as if it exists in 2 locations. Wouldn't it make more sense (when a thread is moved), to just have a single message in the original forum saying "The following thread is moved... go to the other forum to see it...."

By the way, if you like the orginal picture, visit: www.axisofweasels.com. Lots of funny pictures and quotes on the site, including my favorite:

Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. All you do is leave behind a lot of noisy baggage.
-Jed Babbin, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense

(Edited to fix URL)

[Walter Wayne]

Does anybody else think this is a hoax.

I mean its in English?

:D (just in case)

Walt

I don't like to say I told you so but.............:rolleyes:

[Girl 6]

Hey, I'm fine with it wherever it ends up.

G6

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Girl 6
Hey, I'm fine with it wherever it ends up.
Maybe we can see how many forums we can put it in....

Hey, its a 'publication', right? We can move it to Literature next.

We could email Randi about it during his show, then we could put it in the Radio Section!

We could put it in the R&P forum if we could just find a way to link it with Franko......

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Denise
We could put it in the R&P forum if we could just find a way to link it with Franko......
Well, 'Franko' is fairly 'french' sounding. (Franko-Prussian war, etc.), so we can link it to him that way.

[Foodbunny]

Some jokes get repeated so much that they only become funnier through obsurdity. In my opinion the French surrendering gag is not one those jokes.

Originally posted by Segnosaur

Well, 'Franko' is fairly 'french' sounding. (Franko-Prussian war, etc.), so we can link it to him that way.

I think you're on to something there!

[Dub]

Originally posted by Segnosaur

Well, 'Franko' is fairly 'french' sounding. (Franko-Prussian war, etc.), so we can link it to him that way.

That would be 'Franco-Prussian' War. ;)

[Torlack]

Originally posted by Foodbunny
Some jokes get repeated so much that they only become funnier through obsurdity. In my opinion the French surrendering gag is not one those jokes.

I agree. I take France's propensity for surrender very seriously.

:mad:

:rolleyes:

:D

In all seriousness, the presentation makes it different than just posting a message that just says "Screw the French, they just surrender!".

[Yahzi]

Putting the French down is a time-honored international tradition.

Why? Well, at one time the France was the crown of Europe - just like virtually every other nation over there (heck, even Portugal once ran half the planet). Pretty much everybody has accepted the vissitudes of fortune, except the French. They still insist on acting as if they were the crown of Europe. So they still attract the barbs and arrows.

All of those faded empires demand respect for their past glories. But France demands respect for its current glory. This is what makes them a figure of fun.

The whole surrender thing is a way to remember that the Fourth Republic fell to the Third Reich in two weeks primarly because the French couldn't see what was wrong with being fascist. It's not really that their troops surrendered (that was the Italians), it's that they chose fascism. That's what we are still pissed about.

[Yahzi]

I want to expand on the surrender joke issue. I noticed a lot of these jokes were aimed the French solider. This is unfair - at no point in WWII (or any war) did the French earn a reputation for cowardice or lack of zeal to fight. The Italians did - both German and the Allied officers noted that Italian troops were so poorly trained and led that they were almost worthless in combat.

The French government surrendered to the fascist movement, almost without firing a shot. This has nothing to do with their soldiers. There was a panic during the initial invasion where French soliders ran in fear because they heard a rumor that the Germans were coming. But this was really a reflection of the understanding the French solider had that his high commanders really didn't want to fight the Germans, and thus weren't going to support him. Everybody gets scared and runs when they think the guy behind them is bailing. For the Italians, it was a permanent state of affairs during the war - they never did really cotton to fascism and Ill Duke. For the French, this period of cowardice ended once they became fascist. The remaining French forces (in particular the Navy) acted with such pride as to compromise their military and political role - which is the traditional reason for making fun of the French military.

I find it sad that the failure of the French political process is leaking over to the French military. The historically correct reason to make fun of the French military is that they are brave to the point of stupidity - The Song of Roland, the pre-fab houses taken on Crusade, the WWI faith in "espirit de corps" defeating machine guns, etc. This taint of surrender belongs to the French people and government.

So, in retrospect, I don't find the magazine cover funny. Even though I laughed at it the first time.

I think if you go to the AxisOfWeasels site and look carefully at the jokes, most of them agree with the distinction I made.

[Torlack]

France fell because they totally misjudged the threat. They thought that the Maginot Line would protect them. However that belief depended on the Ardennes being impassible.

They weren't.

Germany did an end run around France's primary defenses.

[Brian]

Happy to see that good sense won out over good manners.

[Ian Osborne]

Perhaps France has remembered what America did for her in WWII, and wants to repay the debt in the Gulf by turning up two years late and then claiming they won it on their own? Just a thought...

[hammegk]

Let's go to science & debate if the French -- especially their politicians -- are at dna level a different race from the rest of the caucasoids.

Damn 'surrender' alleles. :(

[shuize]

France fell because they totally misjudged the threat. They thought the Maginot Line would protect them.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Germans take the exact same course in their drive through Belgium into France as in WWI?

[Shaun from Scotland]

Originally posted by shuize

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Germans take the exact same course in their drive through Belgium into France as in WWI?

Not exactly. The Schlieffen plan of WW1 was designed to culminate in taking Paris. In WW11, the plan was to reach the Channel coast and split the allies in half, attacking from the Ardennes which was thought impassable. This was a subtle, yet strategically brilliant difference.

French military thinking was never to simply rely on the Maginot line. They fully expected to be attacked again through Belgium. They were simply out thought by brilliant German strategy.

[bangdazap]

Originally posted by shuize

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Germans take the exact same course in their drive through Belgium into France as in WWI?
Initially, Belgium was allied with France, so the Maginot Line wasn't extended to cover the border between the two countries. The French plan was to move into Belgium and fight the Germans there when the invasion started. However, Belgium decided that it just wasn't worth being turned into a battlefield (again) so they withdrew from the alliance, weakning the French military strategy.
When the Germans entered Belgium anyway (neutrality nonwithstanding) the French and Brittish forces entered Belgium to meet them there, according to the plan that was made with the First World War experience in mind.
But then the Germans invaded through the gap in the Maginot Line on the French-German border that was supposedly impassable: the Ardenner forest. That meant that the Allied forces in Belgium became surrounded: hence the evacuation through Dunquerke (sp?).
The remaining French forces could probably have stopped the German advance if there was will to do so: in part, the experience from the First World War made the French unwilling to suffer a million dead over a small East European country (again).
At the time, what was to become the Second World War wasn't seen as a conflict of Democracy vs. Dictatorship but a struggle between competing grand powers. Fascism and dictorship didn't have the bad name it has today, but was seen as just another method of governing a country.

[patnray]

A little reality for the France bashers:

1.1 million French died in WW1. 100,000 died in WW2.

The US retained cordial relations with Germany for 18 months after Germany invaded France.

Algerian terrorists conducted an extensive bombing campaign within France prior to France's eventual withdrawal from Algeria. They experienced the pain and horror of terrorism long before the US did....

[kookbreaker]

Originally posted by Torlack
France fell because they totally misjudged the threat. They thought that the Maginot Line would protect them. However that belief depended on the Ardennes being impassible.

They weren't.

Germany did an end run around France's primary defenses.

I also like to point out that the French fought a lot better once the Brits gone on their boats and left. :D

Is there a military equivelant of "Pee-shy"?

[hal bidlack]

Opps, I should have moved this back to politics, not banter. I"m fixing my fix :)

[bignickel]

Ugh. I had a brilliantly sarcastic post thought out in response to the original posts, but now I've run into a military history jumble at the end of the thread here.

Not directed at anyone in particular, but please folks: read a book on the fall of France during WW2 before you make blanket statements that are patently false. Not only did the French fire their weapons, but they fought very well against the Wehrmacht in Belguim.

I recommend William Shirer's "The Collapse of the Third Republic" to anyone who wants to discuss 'cheese-eating surrender monkeys.'

I wouldn't call the German plan to invade through the Ardennes 'brilliant'. Rather, the Germans had a 'brilliant' reading of the French High Command's mind, enough to know that such a plan could be pulled off. For the strongest of the French forces were in Belgium, awaiting the German attack (they even had the original german plans for the invasion, salvaged from a german recon plane crash). Unfortunately, the weakest French army ('boys and old men') was deployed to guard the Ardennes sector. (and of course, no one would attack through there, would they?)

The French and English High Commands certainly could have stopped the breakthough, or at least cut it in half, if they had their act together. Which, of course, they didn't. And if they had a sense of how fast mechanized warfare had become. Which they didn't. Or of the importance of mass armor. Which... well, you get the idea.

But the French soldier fought valiantly, though doomed, until the French government signed the Armistice. It wasn't the French soldier who lost the war, or the Wehrmacht who won it; it was the French High Command who lost it.

I should also point out that it was the French who declared war on the Germans for the invasion of Poland. Not us. We only got involved when Hitler declared war on us. The French lost 90,000 men because they stood up to Germany. Doesn't sound too cowardly to me.

Ugh. Me defending the French. Strange.

Well, here's the twist at the end of my post: when all's said and done, when it comes to the French's current position on what we should or shouldn't do, they can shut the hell up. Other countries positions on current events vis a vis Iraq I can listen to and respect, but not France.

Why, you say?

One word:

Algeria.

[DanishDynamite]

I find this constant bashing of France by Americans very unbecoming. Have they no shame, no sense of gratitude?

This prejudice is striking when you recall that France is America's oldest ally. The capital city was designed by a Frenchman, L'Enfant, and the square across from the White House is named after LaFayette. In the War of Independence, France was America's key ally against the British.

And yet Europeans who don't agree with American policy (especially the French) are castigated for not remembering the past.

Good grief.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by patnray
A little reality for the France bashers:

1.1 million French died in WW1. 100,000 died in WW2.

The US retained cordial relations with Germany for 18 months after Germany invaded France.

A couple more points (from a Canadian):

- Of course a lot of french people died... it was France that was invaded. A lot of Canadians died too (perhaps even a higher number per capita... I'll have to do some checking on that) and we weren't even defending our own territory!
- The U.S. did remain 'neutral' and may even have traded with germany; however, they also sent a lot of aid to britian (so while they were neutral militarily, they were supporting the allies behind the scenes)

Of course, if you say that maintaining relations with Germany was bad in 1940 and that America should have entered the war right away against 'evil' germany, then countries like France should enter the war against 'evil' Iraq. (France is doing the same 'bad' things the U.S. did half a century ago.)

[Soapy Sam]

And in a country flooded with Algerian ex-Mujahadeen, pretending to be seeking political asylum, a nation with the highest count of civilian nuclear reactors in Europe and a country INSIDE WHICH two of the bloodiest wars in our history have been fought, is it any wonder they are treading cautiously? France has no Atlantic or English Channel to protect its borders from terrorists. I think we should make the attempt to comprehend the political situation in France before we go accusing them of anything.

And justifying racist comment as a joke either is or is not acceptable. Sure, it might be funny, but maybe it needs to be REALLY funny to be tolerable. That's a personal choice. But once you make it, stick to it. No half measures. Say what you think. Try substituting the words "Black"or "Israeli" or "American" in the next racist joke you hear. See if it sounds as funny. (It might, to other ears).

Or find a French soldier and tell him what you think. To his face. Not on the Net from behind a pseudonym. I know a few in the Legion.
Give you their addresses if you like.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Soapy Sam
And in a country flooded with Algerian ex-Mujahadeen, pretending to be seeking political asylum, a nation with the highest count of civilian nuclear reactors in Europe and a country INSIDE WHICH two of the bloodiest wars in our history have been fought, is it any wonder they are treading cautiously?
Actually, at the Amazing meeting, one of the presenters talked about lives lost in war. The world wars have been remarkably bloodless compared to wars of past centuries (in terms of per capita lives lost).

It should also be noted that other countries (like Poland) have ALSO been the source of battle in the wars (in fact, they were attacked before France was, and ended up getting absorbed into the Soviet block). Yet, Poland actually supports invasion of Iraq.

France also 'exported' violence (i.e. was a colonial power) in other parts of the world. (Vietnam anyone?)

Also, the main reason why people are bashing the french right now is because of their stance on Iraq. But France is not saying "Don't attack Iraq because we were attacked in the past and know how bad war is". They are using arguments like "No War for Oil" and "Sanctions are working", when the real reason should be "Hey, we don't want to loose our foothold with Saddam."

[Girl 6]

You know, I think I need to explain myself a little more. I still stand by my assessment of this. However, I can recognize how this is all interpretation on my part. You guys know how I feel about racism. I don't care if it is directed against a white person, a japanese person, or a black person.

I still find the picture disparaging and disrespectful. And, yes, maybe I'm overreacting. But, at least you know where I'm coming from.

I have agreed NOT to move any more threads. I accept that I may have used bad judgement. But, I also want you to know that I was up front about it.

G6

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Girl 6
You know, I think I need to explain myself a little more. I still stand by my assessment of this. However, I can recognize how this is all interpretation on my part. You guys know how I feel about racism. I don't care if it is directed against a white person, a japanese person, or a black person.

Canadians however, are fair game.

(Just kidding...)
Originally posted by Girl 6
I have agreed NOT to move any more threads. I accept that I may have used bad judgement. But, I also want you to know that I was up front about it.
Well, I for one don't think you should have moved the thread. However, that said, I hope you don't go totally gun-shy (well, excuse the wording.) In general, I trust your opinion and ability to moderate this forum (even if I disagree with some of your ideas.)

[KillerBob]

Ummmm, question.

Since when is "French" a race?

[DanishDynamite]

Girl6:You know, I think I need to explain myself a little more. I still stand by my assessment of this. However, I can recognize how this is all interpretation on my part. You guys know how I feel about racism. I don't care if it is directed against a white person, a japanese person, or a black person.

I still find the picture disparaging and disrespectful. And, yes, maybe I'm overreacting. But, at least you know where I'm coming from.

I have agreed NOT to move any more threads. I accept that I may have used bad judgement. But, I also want you to know that I was up front about it. All is forgiven. With an avatar like yours, I don't care what you say, as long as you keep posting. :)

BTW, where did this thread originate? It seems to have been moved around a lot.

[hal bidlack]

I moved it to banter by mistake, thinking that's where it started. But it was first in the politics forum, so that's where I moved it to. Should be fairly stable now. :)

[Girl 6]

Originally posted by KillerBob
Ummmm, question.

Since when is "French" a race?

LOL!! :D

G6

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Segnosaur

A couple more points (from a Canadian):

- Of course a lot of french people died... it was France that was invaded. A lot of Canadians died too (perhaps even a higher number per capita... I'll have to do some checking on that) and we weren't even defending our own territory!
- The U.S. did remain 'neutral' and may even have traded with germany; however, they also sent a lot of aid to britian (so while they were neutral militarily, they were supporting the allies behind the scenes)

Of course, if you say that maintaining relations with Germany was bad in 1940 and that America should have entered the war right away against 'evil' germany, then countries like France should enter the war against 'evil' Iraq. (France is doing the same 'bad' things the U.S. did half a century ago.)

A lot of that 'aid' was actually paid for, including such aid as run down destroyers.

And why is Canada not being mentioned by the US? I don't see them lining up for this coming war.

[Ed]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


A lot of that 'aid' was actually paid for, including such aid as run down destroyers.

And why is Canada not being mentioned by the US? I don't see them lining up for this coming war.

*sigh*

Because the Canadians are not as funny as the French when they get indignant. They don't puff up and stand on their tip toes.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Ed


*sigh*

Because the Canadians are not as funny as the French when they get indignant. They don't puff up and stand on their tip toes.

I'm serious. Why aren't they. Canada would be as important to the US, except that it is not a veto holder in the UN. Yet they are being let off the hook.

[Richard G]

The Canadian military is very, very small. I think they have only twenty F-16 fighters in the whole country. They don't need a large military with the U.S. sitting right next door.

Which begs the question, why would the Canadians be considered so important to the U.S. in this war? Their contribution would be token at best.

[hammegk]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I'm serious. Why aren't they.

We could discuss the antagonistic history of Anglo-French relations, and also note that Anglophiles do seem to stick together, even you lot are actually ok.

As they say in the GWN, 12 beavers pissing on a frog: same internal problem for Canadians.

aside
Re the French race: determination contingent on finding the "surrender" allele in French politicians.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Richard G
The Canadian military is very, very small. I think they have only twenty F-16 fighters in the whole country. They don't need a large military with the U.S. sitting right next door.

Which begs the question, why would the Canadians be considered so important to the U.S. in this war? Their contribution would be token at best.

why are the australians so important? They have armed forces about the same size as canada's. but dubya has been treating John Howard like a long lost friend, with plenty of 'face time' as well.

[Walter Wayne]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


A lot of that 'aid' was actually paid for, including such aid as run down destroyers.

And why is Canada not being mentioned by the US? I don't see them lining up for this coming war. Hey, I don't even know what Canada's exact stance on the war is. First all, no one can understand a word our prime-minister says, and second he is evasive, even when asked what colour the sky is.

How is anyone supposed to attack our position.

Walt

[Richard G]

why are the australians so important?

They aren't. Militarily speaking.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Richard G


They aren't. Militarily speaking.
ooooooooooooh yessssssss they are!!!!! Its not size that matters, its just being there that counts.
Bush is desperate to call this a multinational effort. If the king of Tonga agreed to send a guy with a sharp stick Bush would be entertaining the king of Tonga on TV every second day..... Bush does not want this to look like US + UK pounding on some small country, he must have more nations involved at any cost.

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by The Fool

ooooooooooooh yessssssss they are!!!!! Its not size that matters, its just being there that counts.
Bush is desperate to call this a multinational effort. If the king of Tonga agreed to send a guy with a sharp stick Bush would be entertaining the king of Tonga on TV every second day..... Bush does not want this to look like US + UK pounding on some small country, he must have more nations involved at any cost. I think you got this totally right.

The US of A, IMHO, has all the power needed to win the not-so-hypothetical war, but the number of countries actually supporting the war is very important politically.

[Junior Bidlack]

As said by Grounds Keeper Willie "damn cheese eating surrender monkies'

[Baggle]

Just because I think that so many people getting offended over silly nationalistic jokes is utterly stupid, I think I'll post a couple.

Q: What's the difference between an American and an American bomb?

A: The bomb is smart enough to know where to find Iraq




Q. Why don't they have fireworks at Euro Disney?

A. Because every time they shoot them off, the French try to surrender.



You might be from Canada if....
You dismiss all beers under 6% as "for children and the elderly."
You hum David Foster's '88 Calgary Olympics theme in the shower.
You know that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) don't always look like that.
You make up patriotic lyrics to go along with David Foster's '88 Calgary Olympics theme.
You cried when Gus "drowned" on Road To Avonlea.
You remember when Alanis Morrissette was "Too Hot To Hold".


Q: What were the 2 Mexican FireFighting Brother's names?
A: Hose A and Hose B


I could go on, but I won't. Some people here really, REALLY need to lighten up. My god. By the way, Girl 6, nothing personal against you, but whoever asked you about "French" being a race was NOT joking. "French" is NOT a freaking race. Nor is "American" or "Canadian." Getting all steamed about somebody making fun of a particular nation makes about as much sense as getting steamed about somebody making fun of some of those war protestors(both pro and anti). Or making fun of Enron.

The people being made fun of are NOT being made fun of because of how they look, how they dress(except in the case of those beret wearing fruity Frenchies), or how they smell(another bad example, come to think of it...). The jokes made are about how a certain group of people ACT. From their history and attitude, what can we take from it and bend to our will to make a joke? THAT is what is going on here. It is called satire. I suppose we should ban "A Modesto Proposal" as well, since it makes the British and/or Irish look bad, depending on how you view it, and therefore must be racist. Let's also ban quotes from Austin Powers movies, since, after all, he is making fun of the British, and that is racist....:rolleyes:

I must say, though, even if the jokes being made WERE about smell or WERE about dress or culture or ANYTHING else, if it is being done in a light hearted way, and hatred is not dripping from the post, have a chuckle and get over it. I cannot imagine all of the folks who posted here and were so upset about the Frenchie jokes being able to interact meaningfully in a friendship for any amount of time and being able to carry around this attitude. Eventually a joke about you would be made, and you'd be forced to either throw a fit, like many did here, or realize there is probably a grain of truth in the joke and have a good laugh about it.

My family history is that of poor "Oakies" coming to California from Oaklahoma and trust me, I never stop with the jokes to my grandmother, and she loves them all, and even provides some of her own. They may not sound funny to anybody else, but when you have a history with the issues being joked about, it's hilarious. My girlfriend of two years is a first generation American, whose parents are both from Mexico. I love the jokes about Mexicans on that side of the family spectrum as well, and never worry about telling them about Mexicans or Americans and neither do they. The jokes are light hearted and funny, with a grain of truth about ourselves in them. I'm proud of my both my family's history and my adopted family's(that of my girlfriend) history and I love the cultures of both, although I must admit the culture of my girlfriend has MUCH better food. This being said, I will NEVER give in to the politically correct to the point of being evangelical maniacs everywhere in the world(including on this board) who insist I must shed a tear whenever somebody is forced to have a sense of humor. Get over it. Sheesh. I can't believe I wasted so much of my time on this topic.

-Baggle

[Doubt]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I'm serious. Why aren't they. Canada would be as important to the US, except that it is not a veto holder in the UN. Yet they are being let off the hook.

Why let the Canadians off on this one? I am less than an hours drive from Canada, I can provide one point of view on this:

1.) They don’t have a conflict of interest in this one. The French have investments in the Iraqi oil industry.

2.) They appear to show up for just almost every peace keeping mission the UN can dream up. It does not appear to matter where or why.

3.) Doing more than their fair share in Afghanistan compared to the size of their force.

4.) Friendly fire in Afghanistan. It is kind of hard for us to gripe at them considering what happened.

5.) They generally treat individual Americans well, even when they don’t like what we do. Now go to Paris and see what happens if you don’t speak French.

6.) The Canadians don’t go out of their way to remind us about past conflicts and vise versa. (The US attacks in the revolution, Canadian troops used to sack Washington in the war of 1812, Finnean Brotherhood invading Canada after our civil war.)

7.) Putting up with 19 year old US students crossing the boarder and getting drunk.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
As said by Grounds Keeper Willie "damn cheese eating surrender monkies'

ok.....fess up hal, Is this your sockpuppet?


Apologies to Junior Bidlack if I'm just being a cynical conspiracy theorist.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Doubt


Why let the Canadians off on this one? I am less than an hours drive from Canada, I can provide one point of view on this:

2.) They appear to show up for just almost every peace keeping mission the UN can dream up. It does not appear to matter where or why.



Does this tell you something?

[Drooper]

Originally posted by Richard G


They aren't. Militarily speaking.

Not in terms of numbers, but there are some very handy forces availble, namely the SAS.

[Ian Osborne]

To be honest I agreed with Girl6's moving the thread, as the original post was a flame, not a political comment. But anyway, in the spirit of the thread, here's a quick joke:

Q: What's the difference between a slice of toast and the French?

A: You can turn a slice of toast into soldiers!

[hal bidlack]

Originally posted by The Fool


ok.....fess up hal, Is this your sockpuppet?


Apologies to Junior Bidlack if I'm just being a cynical conspiracy theorist.

Actually, he's my son, home from college on spring break. I showed him the forum and went to bed. perhaps that was a mistake. ;)

[Drooper]

Originally posted by hal bidlack


Actually, he's my son, home from college on spring break. I showed him the forum and went to bed. perhaps that was a mistake. ;)

you're not wrong.

He certainly seemed surprised at some of the anecdotes about you we told him.

Especially the one involving the gerbil, the gaffer tape and the fish net stockings. ;)

[arcticpenguin]

Originally posted by Baggle

My family history is that of poor "Oakies" coming to California from Oaklahoma and trust me, I never stop with the jokes to my grandmother, and she loves them all, and even provides some of her own.
The proof is in the pudding. Here's an Okie who can't spell Okie.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I'm serious. Why aren't they. Canada would be as important to the US, except that it is not a veto holder in the UN. Yet they are being let off the hook.
Ok, here's the situation:

Canada is doing its best to sit on the fence. Different officials are giving different stories about whether they will support military action. What Canada has done lately:

- We sent in troops into Afghanistan last year, and we plan to send in peacekeepers this summer. This should free up American troops for deployment elsewhere. (Our way of helping without appearing to help.)
- We have been working on a U.N. resolution setting deadlines for Iraq compliance. (Same sort of thing the Americans just announced, but our deadlines were probably much later than what the Americans would have wanted.)
- Even though we haven't committed fully to the American efforts in Iraq effort, we recently sent additional navy forces to the gulf, which could be involved in a conflict (We have a small navy; the last ship we sent I believe will be used to coordinate communications between allied ships)
- We haven't 'signed on' to help the U.S. against Iraq, but we haven't actively hindered them in the U.N. (like France and Germany has done). And, we supported the NATO resolution to assist Turkey, whereas France, Germany and Belgium did not

Basically, our armed forces are severely underfunded. Someone mentioned that we have about 20 F-18s. Well, we have a few more than that (I think in total we have over 100, but many of those are not flying.) The helicopters our navy flys are 40 years old, and we've probably lost more soldiers from helicopters crashing than from enemy soldiers. When we were in Afghanistan last time, we actually had to get airlifted by the Americans.

[Baggle]

Originally posted by arcticpenguin

The proof is in the pudding. Here's an Okie who can't spell Okie.

LOL. Hey! It's no fair; my "a" key sticks because of the excessive amount of chewing tobacco that has leaked into it through the years. In any case, don't make me get my shotgun, boy! I'll blow a hole clear through this trailor's wall trying to get ya if I have to. I'd flame you some more, but I must be off to work...there is a long day of welding and dry wall installation ahead of me. :D

-Baggle

[Richard G]

http://www.binarystorage.net/clients/flashbunny/pics/frenchclock.jpg

[DanishDynamite]

Baggle:The jokes made are about how a certain group of people ACT. From their history and attitude, what can we take from it and bend to our will to make a joke? THAT is what is going on here. It is called satire. I don't have a problem with people making jokes about other countries. Hell, in this country making fun of the Swedes is a national pasttime. The jokes are, however, goodnatured.

There is also something called "context". There must have been at least ten threads within the last couple of weeks, dedicated to bashing the French. They've been called everything from cowards to f*ckwits. This thread is just another one with the same purpose. There is nothing goodnatured about it.

On the other hand, perhaps "cheese eating surrender monkies" is funny. I think I'll start calling the Americans "Jello-eating child-executing dogs". Just goodnatured fun, afterall.

[hammegk]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
...Just goodnatured fun, afterall.

Kool. Give me a ring next time your visiting -- any state will do -- and we'll find a nice friendly neighborhood tavern where you can have some "fun" joshing with the locals.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by Danish Dynamite:
There is also something called "context". There must have been at least ten threads within the last couple of weeks, dedicated to bashing the French. They've been called everything from cowards to f*ckwits. This thread is just another one with the same purpose. There is nothing goodnatured about it.

I would have agreed up until Chirac threw that hissy fit after most of the rest of Europe had the temerity to differ from French policy. After that and his defense minister's attempt to bully the Eastern Europeans I for one think open season should be declared on the French.

[DanishDynamite]

Shane Costello:I would have agreed up until Chirac threw that hissy fit after most of the rest of Europe had the temerity to differ from French policy. After that and his defense minister's attempt to bully the Eastern Europeans I for one think open season should be declared on the French. You prove my point.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by Danish Dynamite:
You prove my point.

Well I never claimed to be "well-bred". ;)

Seriously though, we had to hold a referendum on the Nice Treaty in Ireland a second time after rejecting it the first time around. Why? We were told that it was "selfish" of us to deny the Eastern European candidates membership. And now the French are threatening and abusing the same candidate countries? Apologies for my failure to arouse even a half-iota of sympathy for them.

[Baggle]

Danish, this is the thread that was moved. Find one instance in this thread where the French are referred to as fsckwits or cowards. If you have a problem with another thread, take it up there. I don't seem to recall anybody throwing a hissy fit over the "Gulf Wars" satire poster, that was a takeoff of Star Wars, to the point of it being moved for "American bashing." The two are EXACTLY the same; political satire, and I laughed at both.

I also made clear the point that joking is light hearted, or it is not joking at all. If you think that this thread started as a cold hearted attempt to make the French hated among the populace of this board, then I think that you are not only wrong, but I think you may be stupid, as well. However, from your other posts, I know that you are not stupid, and that leads me to believe that either you take yourself much too seriously, you simply did not think your words through, or you are not as seriously upset about THIS THREAD as you claim to be, and rather you are just using it as a punching bag for your frustration over whatever other threads may have upset you.

Now there is another matter that seems to be cropping up. I guess the consensus is growing here that maybe political satire should not be censored after all. Well, while it is grand that a group of people who are supposed to be above average in their ability to reason realize this, this is not the only item that should be protected from censorship. Political opinions need protection, too. If somebody honestly thinks that the French are a bunch of cowards and idiots, that is their right, and I believe it makes them look very stupid indeed. However, as I said, it is their right to look stupid. If you disagree, you have the option of ignoring the stupid person or posting a reply that blows him/her out of the water with facts. I've seen this done a few times here. Censorship is for the weak minded. Why delete something so that nobody may see it when we may much more easily post an amendment to it that makes other people see the truth about it, and therefore realize how stupid the initial poster was? Or, in the case that the initial poster had all of his facts right and still has the opinion he has, you have one option; GET OVER IT! Not everybody thinks like you, and if somebody hates France and has all of their facts right, then so be it. I don't want all of (insert poster here)'s remarks deleted because they hate America, and there are a few of them. Most of these guys have the facts strait and they STILL hate America. I have the same facts and I do not hate America. Solution? I'll give you a hint; it's NOT CENSORSHIP. Sheesh.

As far as your French/American joke contrasts, thank you very much for illustrating for us the difference between good natured teasing and hateful prodding. Let me give you a bit of an example on the differences between these two, in my mind...

Funny: Germans are blonde haired, blue eyed sausage eating hosen wearing thugs.
Hateful: Germans are ugly Jew killing Nazi warmongers.

Funny: The French are cheese eating surrender monkies.
Hateful: The French are cowardly fsckwits.

Funny: Americans are uneducated McDonald's addicted fatties.
Hateful: Americans are Jello-eating child-executing dogs.


I hope I've illustrated the difference here. I am not advocating the censorship of hateful "jokes." Even if I think they are stupid and speak volumes about the speaker, I think(hope...?) that the people who inhabit this board do not have to resort to censorship to make their points clear, and for the truth to be heard. This board is for the "logically superior" of the internet, and I think we all need to start illustrating that a bit more.

-Baggle

[DanishDynamite]

Originally posted by Baggle
Danish, this is the thread that was moved. Find one instance in this thread where the French are referred to as fsckwits or cowards. If you have a problem with another thread, take it up there. I don't seem to recall anybody throwing a hissy fit over the "Gulf Wars" satire poster, that was a takeoff of Star Wars, to the point of it being moved for "American bashing." The two are EXACTLY the same; political satire, and I laughed at both. Your point?
I also made clear the point that joking is light hearted, or it is not joking at all. We are in agreement then.
If you think that this thread started as a cold hearted attempt to make the French hated among the populace of this board, then I think that you are not only wrong, but I think you may be stupid, as well. I'd be floored by your insight, if only you had any.
However, from your other posts, I know that you are not stupid, and that leads me to believe that either you take yourself much too seriously, you simply did not think your words through, or you are not as seriously upset about THIS THREAD as you claim to be, and rather you are just using it as a punching bag for your frustration over whatever other threads may have upset you. Your attempt to psychoanalize me is entertaining, but irrelevant.
Now there is another matter that seems to be cropping up. I guess the consensus is growing here that maybe political satire should not be censored after all. Well, while it is grand that a group of people who are supposed to be above average in their ability to reason realize this, this is not the only item that should be protected from censorship. Political opinions need protection, too. If somebody honestly thinks that the French are a bunch of cowards and idiots, that is their right, and I believe it makes them look very stupid indeed. However, as I said, it is their right to look stupid. Certainly it is their right. It is also my right to point out their stupidity.
If you disagree, you have the option of ignoring the stupid person or posting a reply that blows him/her out of the water with facts. I've seen this done a few times here. If you stick around, you'll see it a lot more.
Censorship is for the weak minded. Why delete something so that nobody may see it when we may much more easily post an amendment to it that makes other people see the truth about it, and therefore realize how stupid the initial poster was? I detest censorship. I have never advocated it. I like to point out stupidities among ignorant idiots just as much as the next guy.
Or, in the case that the initial poster had all of his facts right and still has the opinion he has, you have one option; GET OVER IT! Not everybody thinks like you, and if somebody hates France and has all of their facts right, then so be it. Never happened.
I don't want all of (insert poster here)'s remarks deleted because they hate America, and there are a few of them. Most of these guys have the facts strait and they STILL hate America. I have the same facts and I do not hate America. Solution? I'll give you a hint; it's NOT CENSORSHIP. Sheesh. Sheesh, indeed.
As far as your French/American joke contrasts, thank you very much for illustrating for us the difference between good natured teasing and hateful prodding. I'm always willing to help the less endowed.
Let me give you a bit of an example on the differences between these two, in my mind...

Funny: Germans are blonde haired, blue eyed sausage eating hosen wearing thugs.
Hateful: Germans are ugly Jew killing Nazi warmongers.

Funny: The French are cheese eating surrender monkies.
Hateful: The French are cowardly fsckwits.

Funny: Americans are uneducated McDonald's addicted fatties.
Hateful: Americans are Jello-eating child-executing dogs.


I hope I've illustrated the difference here. I am not advocating the censorship of hateful "jokes." Even if I think they are stupid and speak volumes about the speaker, I think(hope...?) that the people who inhabit this board do not have to resort to censorship to make their points clear, and for the truth to be heard. This board is for the "logically superior" of the internet, and I think we all need to start illustrating that a bit more.As I've said, I am by no means against censorship. However, given idiotic attempts at justifying blather, I will respond.

[Frank Newgent]

What is a Texan?

A Mexican on his way to Oklahoma.

[Baggle]

Danish, I really don't think that this thread deserves any more attention, so I'll try to make this my last post on the subject. I'll try to address point by point the things you mentioned in your reply to my post.

There is also something called "context". There must have been at least ten threads within the last couple of weeks, dedicated to bashing the French. They've been called everything from cowards to f*ckwits. This thread is just another one with the same purpose. There is nothing goodnatured about it.
These were your words. I interpereted them to mean that you were fed up with the posts about the French in general, from this thread or elsewhere, and you were simply airing your frustrations on this thread. It seemed to me that your implication was clear, and that you were posting on this thread as a response to those other threads that you disliked. I may have been wrong, but I think that if you meant something different, there may have been better words to use. Or maybe I was right? At this point, I've got no clue. Also, despite what you think, I thought that the original post was good natured. It was a mock magazine cover with no additional comments around it. It is true that it was intended to satire the French, but what is cold hearted about that? Even JK, the biggest French hater of all, only gave a simple laugh as a response to it. You asked me what my point was in addressing the fact that this is simply political satire. This is my point.

As far as your comment about two people having the same facts and different opinions goes, I guess this an example of that. We both see the same things in that satire. I think it's a funny joke, and you seem to think that it's a bad thing. Also, I did not intend my comments to be directed directly towards you, so I apologize if I came off a bit aggressively. I have a habit of using the word "you" in place of better suited words much of the time. I'll try to work on that one.

I think that moving this thread to the Flame War section of the forum could be equated to deletion. The idea was to put the post in an area where many fewer people would see it, the same concept behind deletion. I was debating the merits of that original action from the "bad choice" perspective, and I thought you were advocating the move. If this was not the case, as I thought it was, then those points I made regarding censorship are irrelevent to you, and I apologize. I think they apply very much so to the rest of the advocates, however.

I am not sure if I am the person who makes "idiotic attempts at justifying blather" that you mentioned, but if I am, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would stay away from name calling directed towards me. I don't want to have anything to do with that on this forum, please. If you disagree with me, tell me why, and blow me out of the water if you have to. If you think I am being stupid, there are better ways to illustrate this while still making somebody look and feel very foolish than to call people names. Also, the picture may be worthless, but I think it has as much of a right to be here as anything else does, and I also feel that it is legitimately funny. What is different from that picture than making fun of Swedes in Holland? I don't think there is anything different from it. The satire was not regarded by me as being hate-filled or bad natured, and I cannot see where somebody might get that view of this picture.

One last thing....I apologize if my "psychoanalyzing" of you was taken the wrong way. I did not mean to come off sounding like I was trying to assess you as a person. I merely thought that by your aggressive response to this thread, that there had to be more antagonizing behind it than this single picture could possibly cause you. Apparently I was wrong about this, as you've implied, and you were upset about this thread alone. If this is indeed the case, I concede that I was wrong about what I thought your other motivations or aggravations might be. Luckily for me, I am rarely correct, so this really doesn't tarnish my image too much.

-Baggle

[Baggle]

By the way, I consider this image to be MUCH funnier and just as useless. I laugh every time I see this image even still. It could be viewed as "hateful American bashing" and not all of the comments in it are true, but I still don't want it moved to another thread if somebody posts it.

http://www.thescreamonline.com/images3-1/clone-of-the-attack1.jpg

-Baggle