Fair is fair

[Ed]

The French are taking a lead in the Congo. Problem is they are faced with kid soldiers

http://canada.com/national/story.asp?id=0A4F7F07-69AC-4F8D-B21A-91A53348CDA9

BUNIA, Congo - With his baggy jeans and oversized military fatigues, Eric Mabele patrolled this town with a rifle at his side and a few grenades looped around his belt.

Enemy forces are all around Bunia, eager to fight their way in. Fierce-looking French troops have been storming into town this week to take up peacekeeping duties. But Eric, slouching and taking a sip of beer, said he wasn't scared. At 12 years old, he is an experienced soldier.


Now, I am wondering how the various lefties on this board are going to react to this. Whill they watch closely for any French show of force against kids? Will they dissect every shooting incident? Will they question the French role, in the first place?

We'll see, but probably not. If the situation were reversed (ie. US in, French out) I would not suspect a similar reaction.

This kind of (potential) inconsistancy is what some of us find really irritating.

Edit to add: The very fact that these watchdogs of American behavior did not post this in the first place suggests which way it will go.

[Tmy]

Nobody is going to care because its an African country. Black people dying is not a big news draw. Isnt there a famine going on in east africa?I sort of heard about that.

The media would rather focus on less dire news. Like the mideast conflict, or Prince William's latest thought.

[Ed]

Originally posted by Tmy
Nobody is going to care because its an African country. Black people dying is not a big news draw. Isnt there a famine going on in east africa?I sort of heard about that.

The media would rather focus on less dire news. Like the mideast conflict, or Prince William's latest thought.

AND the US is not involved. What would the rest of the world do without us to complain about, I wonder.

[Mr Manifesto]

The difference, which a lot of Americans don't seem to understand, is that France is not trying to impose Pax Franca upon the world, whereas the US clearly is trying to impose Pax Americana. Many people who identify themselves as the right use the phrase 'Peace Through Strength'. This translates to people like me as, 'if you don't do what we want, we'll kill you and there's nothing you can do about it'.

France is taking police action in a war-torn country. IIRC three million have died so far in a four year period. This action has the sanction of the US- France did not decide to ride in like a bunch of cowboys. That would be why there is less criticism of this action than the illegal war in Iraq.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Ed


We'll see, but probably not. If the situation were reversed (ie. US in, French out) I would not suspect a similar reaction.

This kind of (potential) inconsistancy is what some of us find really irritating.
[B]

Well, have any kiddy-widdys been killed by the froggies-woggies yet Eddy-Weddy?

No? then what are you on about? Basically you are saying "I bet the left will do x when y occurs, which already just shows how stupid the left is!" meanwhile y hasnt occured yet and the left hasnt even had a chance to say x.

Originally posted by Ed
[B]Edit to add: The very fact that these watchdogs of American behavior did not post this in the first place suggests which way it will go.

Didnt post what? that nothing has happened yet?

Should we all start posting threads about things that havent happened?

[Flo]

Originally posted by Ed


AND the US is not involved. What would the rest of the world do without us to complain about, I wonder.

And what makes you think that the French themselves are unable to monitor the behavior of their army and to criticize it if need arises ?

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Flo


And what makes you think that the French themselves are unable to monitor the behavior of their army and to criticize it if need arises ?

I wonder how the French would react if the Americans criticized their military involvement?

[Supercharts]

Originally posted by Flo


And what makes you think that the French themselves are unable to monitor the behavior of their army and to criticize it if need arises ?

Here's a clue: WWII

[Ed]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
The difference, which a lot of Americans don't seem to understand, is that France is not trying to impose Pax Franca upon the world, whereas the US clearly is trying to impose Pax Americana. Many people who identify themselves as the right use the phrase 'Peace Through Strength'. This translates to people like me as, 'if you don't do what we want, we'll kill you and there's nothing you can do about it'.

How do you know this? About this not being a French power grab? You don't and cannot, can you? Suppose I turned this around and said that "what you don't understand is that the US is not ...etc." I submit there there is as much evidence for one as the other.

France is taking police action in a war-torn country. IIRC three million have died so far in a four year period. This action has the sanction of the US- France did not decide to ride in like a bunch of cowboys. That would be why there is less criticism of this action than the illegal war in Iraq.

France has a long and sad colonial history in Africa. If the US had that history would you be saying the same thing? No, I suspect not. Given the graves and other evidence that has been uncovered in Iraq, you won't cut the US a bit of a break? Iraq was war torn too, except there was only one side. As far as the cowboy allusion, if I recall correctly twenty some odd countries supported the Iraq war. What makes the UN the gold standard for intervention?

[/B]

[Flo]

Originally posted by Tmy


I wonder how the French would react if the Americans criticized their military involvement?


Given what I've read on this forum and in the American press during the last few months, expect a big shrug, followed by French equivalents of remarks about pots and kettles ("c'est l'hôpital qui se fout de la charité"). ;)

What is really funny in Ed's post is that should something nasty happen in Congo, it will be mostly the European left that will be up in arms against the French conduct of operations, accusations of French imperialism/neo-colonialism are rife, etc...

[Ed]

Originally posted by Flo


And what makes you think that the French themselves are unable to monitor the behavior of their army and to criticize it if need arises ?

Personally, I agree. Will you now make the same statement about US forces?

edit: Have the French ever acknowledged their atrocities in Algeria?

[Ed]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Well, have any kiddy-widdys been killed by the froggies-woggies yet Eddy-Weddy?

I would guess so but I don't know for a fact. Do you find the prospect amusing?

No? then what are you on about? Basically you are saying "I bet the left will do x when y occurs, which already just shows how stupid the left is!" meanwhile y hasnt occured yet and the left hasnt even had a chance to say x.

Consider it a prediction. I did not say stupid, I said inconsistant



Didnt post what? that nothing has happened yet?

The prospect is there. That was enough for a bunch of speculation prior to Iraq

Should we all start posting threads about things that havent happened?

It would be refreshing if the subject was not about the US

[Flo]

Originally posted by Ed


Personally, I agree. Will you now make the same statement about US forces?

edit: Have the French ever acknowledged their atrocities in Algeria?


There are obviously Americans who are able to aknowledge that their country and their military can/has behaved in a shameful manner, and that it has to answer for it, to its citizen and to the World at large. I wish they were more prominent in the media and in your government, which would help other countries have a better opinion of the USA.


The French government has officially recognised that there's been a war in Algeria, not just some police operation that turned bad, that the military used unacceptable means, that atrocities were committed, and that at some point those responsible will have to answer about it despite the agreements at independance time, although there is a fierce opposition from the kind of "patriots" who cannot admid that their country could do wrong or should sometimes apologise (I suppose you know the kind ;) )

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Ed
France has a long and sad colonial history in Africa. If the US had that history would you be saying the same thing? No, I suspect not.

I'm not arguing that France has not done wrong in the past. I am arguing that they aren't doing anything wrong with this action and that the US are currently imposing Pax Americana- in Africa as well as other parts of the world.

Given the graves and other evidence that has been uncovered in Iraq, you won't cut the US a bit of a break? Iraq was war torn too, except there was only one side. As far as the cowboy allusion, if I recall correctly twenty some odd countries supported the Iraq war. What makes the UN the gold standard for intervention?


The graves are there because the US promised the Shia and the Kurds that she would support them in their revolt of Saddam, and failed them. Most of the graves are from the 1991 uprising. I haven't seen a news report yet of mass graves from a different year. So, no, I won't cut the US a break- next time she should support her allies and keep her promises.

Iraq wasn't war torn, it was a surpressed country. There was potential for Saddam to be overthrown, but this wasn't possible thanks to the failed 1991 uprising, and the trade sanctions which allowed Saddam to blackmail any dissidents. Part of the reason why you probably won't find any post-1991 mass graves- there wasn't the need for them. The image of Iraq in a constant state of war was one created by the US propaganda machine. It was certainly a broken country, but it wasn't broken by war- it was broken by US-led trade sanctions.

As for the 'had the support of 20 countrys', I notice only three of those actually sent troops- Poland sending a handsome 200, and my country sending a thumping 2000. For the remaining seventeen countries, their support was because they were afraid of incurring the economic wrath of America if they didn't give her support. France was not let off lightly by America for daring to stand up to her on the economic stage.

And finally, just because the French haven't paid for their atrocities in Algeria doesn't make America any more noble a country. You are using the typical American excuse "Other people are as bad if not worse, so we can do what we like". Well, other people don't have the American arsenal and the American complete lack of respect for international relations.

[Flo]

Originally posted by Ed
Jon: Well, have any kiddy-widdys been killed by the froggies-woggies yet Eddy-Weddy?

Ed: I would guess so but I don't know for a fact. Do you find the prospect amusing?

As far as the news I get from the French press and African correspondents, no casualties due to the French so far.


Jon: No? then what are you on about? Basically you are saying "I bet the left will do x when y occurs, which already just shows how stupid the left is!" meanwhile y hasnt occured yet and the left hasnt even had a chance to say x.

Ed: Consider it a prediction. I did not say stupid, I said inconsistant

Maybe in the US. In Europe, the left will be delighted to bash France for the slightest mishap, and point any inconsistancy between its criticism of US actions and its handling of the Congolese situation.



Jon: Didnt post what? that nothing has happened yet?

The prospect is there. That was enough for a bunch of speculation prior to Iraq

Small difference: France has sent a contingent of (relatively) lightly armed foot soldiers. It is not bombing the country flat and demanding that Kabila leave or be killed (although the latter would not be a bad idea ...)

[Ed]

Originally posted by Flo


As far as the news I get from the French press and African correspondents, no casualties due to the French so far.


Good. Can you trust them, though?

Maybe in the US. In Europe, the left will be delighted to bash France for the slightest mishap, and point any inconsistancy between its criticism of US actions and its handling of the Congolese situation.



we'll see

Small difference: France has sent a contingent of (relatively) lightly armed foot soldiers. It is not bombing the country flat and demanding that Kabila leave or be killed (although the latter would not be a bad idea ...)

Bombing flat? Our military went to great pains to explain how they were trying to avoid just that. You say "bombing flat". Lightly armed? Why does that make a difference?

[Ed]

Originally posted by Flo



There are obviously Americans who are able to aknowledge that their country and their military can/has behaved in a shameful manner, and that it has to answer for it, to its citizen and to the World at large. I wish they were more prominent in the media and in your government, which would help other countries have a better opinion of the USA.


)

This is not an answer. Will you make the precise same statement about the US military? If you hesitate, it shows your bias.

[Flo]

Originally posted by Ed


This is not an answer. Will you make the precise same statement about the US military? If you hesitate, it shows your bias.


And what bias would that be ? I'm sorry I don't exactly understand what you expect me to say, or what you've understood I was trying to say in my answer (English is not my first language).



As far as the news I get from the French press and African correspondents, no casualties due to the French so far.


Good. Can you trust them, though?

Usually yes. I'm talking press that is, if not hostile, at least wary of the government, and family and friends in Africa.

[Flo]

Originally posted by Ed
Bombing flat? Our military went to great pains to explain how they were trying to avoid just that. You say "bombing flat". Lightly armed? Why does that make a difference?

Honestly, between what the military (US or other) goes to great pains to explain, and what they actually achieve, "bombing flat" is only a small exageration ;)

I agree however that, to somebody whose relative is dead and property is destroyed, there is no difference whether it's been achieved via bombs or light armament, and that the French army will (I hope) have to answer for each unjustified death or destruction.

[c0rbin]

This is not an answer. Will you make the precise same statement about the US military? If you hesitate, it shows your bias.

Quit being a bully.

What do you care what other countries think of America if you think what we do is right--even righteous?

[Ed]

Originally posted by c0rbin


Quit being a bully.

What do you care what other countries think of America if you think what we do is right--even righteous?

Can you make this post somewhat coherent for me? Try referring to what I posted in this thread.

Sorry, I just re-read your post and I think I get it now.

The answer (in the general case that is if you are using "you" rather than "one") might be curiosity.

If you mean "me" specifically, IF I thought it was right, the answer might be the same. If I did not, the answer would probably be to gather support for my view because I have no self confidence. If I were not sure, it would be to help me inform my opinion.

What's the difference, anyway?

As far as being a bully is concerned, I'll ask what I like, thank you.

[Tmy]

These Euros have some nerve. For centries they've collectively f-uped the entire planet. Now they give the US crap for trying to clean up the messes they started years ago.

[Flo]

Originally posted by c0rbin


Quit being a bully.

What do you care what other countries think of America if you think what we do is right--even righteous?

I don't consider Ed has been a bully, nor does he come through as the righteous type (so far :D )

[Ed]

Originally posted by Flo


I don't consider Ed has been a bully, nor does he come through as the righteous type (so far :D )

Thank you. Actually, the question could have been posed for any country other than the US but I was watching the Congo thingie closely since I believe it is more of a morass than the Balkins. And I give the French high marks for trying to do something, I just hope it doeeeess not turn out to be the mess that I dread.

Where is Massongy anyway? My search did not find much. Any nice castles? If you are nice I will tell you the story of my pillage of Notre Dame de Paris. Very European on my part:D or. I should say:cool:

[c0rbin]

Fair enough, I will step out. I reacted emotionally and am not ashamed, however this was not my discussion to begin with.

[Flo]

Originally posted by Ed


Thank you. Actually, the question could have been posed for any country other than the US but I was watching the Congo thingie closely since I believe it is more of a morass than the Balkins. And I give the French high marks for trying to do something, I just hope it doeeeess not turn out to be the mess that I dread.

I don't give my country many marks at all for finally trying to do something, when they could have done much more years ago, starting by not supporting Mobuto, then Kabila and indulging almost all and every African tinpot dictator who could write verses in French :rolleyes:

I also agree Congo is another Ghastlistan, but will be much worse to sort out, what with the sheer size of the country, and the different populations, languages, and customs involved. The difference, however, is that on the World stage, to paraphrase Pratchett, Congo has all the strategical importance of a banana.

Where is Massongy anyway? My search did not find much. Any nice castles?

On the road between Geneva and Evian. We just had a very funny :mad: week because of the G8, and had to endure 5 helicopters above our heads everytime GWB had to go to the bathroom (tiny bladder, that man :D). Sorry, no interesting castle (if you except the false ruin that ruins the sight on the hill nearby), but a couple very good restaurants (and my wine cellar, of course).

If you are nice I will tell you the story of my pillage of Notre Dame de Paris. Very European on my part:D or. I should say:cool:

To my knowledge, pillaging Notre Dame is not a very European thing to do, at least not since the last Viking invasion ... ;)

[KelvinG]

I will be happy to keep an eye on the situation in Congo, and make sure the French are good.
However, it's not going to be easy since the mainstream media seems to have little interest in this story. So, it guess it's not the just the so called "lefties" on this board that aren't interested in making this a story.

And, if the French do a great job in the Congo, can we expect accolades for them? The French have been getting pummelled lately on this board, even now that some of their pre-war concerns are being validated. Can we hope for some apologies in the near future or are the French going to be forever besmirched.

[Ed]

Originally posted by Flo


I don't give my country many marks at all for finally trying to do something, when they could have done much more years ago, starting by not supporting Mobuto, then Kabila and indulging almost all and every African tinpot dictator who could write verses in French :rolleyes:

Yes, but you see that is precisely what happens to the US. Shoulda coulda. Fact is France didn't for whatever reasons. The fact that they did not (as the US did not help insurgents in Iraq in '91) has absolutely no bearing on what they are doing now, today.

I think that this is quite good, can I get French backing to take over Cuba? I could do wonders with that place.

Fête
A André Rouveyre

Feu d'artifice en acier
Qu'il est charmant cet éclairage

Artifice d'artificier
Mêler quelque grâce au courage

Deux fusants
Rose éclatement
Comme deux seins que l'on dégrafe
Tendent leurs bouts insolemment


I also agree Congo is another Ghastlistan, but will be much worse to sort out, what with the sheer size of the country, and the different populations, languages, and customs involved. The difference, however, is that on the World stage, to paraphrase Pratchett, Congo has all the strategical importance of a banana.

À la différence de avec les hommes, la taille ne devrait pas être importante.

On the road between Geneva and Evian. We just had a very funny :mad: week because of the G8, and had to endure 5 helicopters above our heads everytime GWB had to go to the bathroom (tiny bladder, that man :D). Sorry, no interesting castle (if you except the false ruin that ruins the sight on the hill nearby), but a couple very good restaurants (and my wine cellar, of course).

Just sold mine.

To my knowledge, pillaging Notre Dame is not a very European thing to do, at least not since the last Viking invasion ... ;)

Yes, but, we owe many modern collections of Armor to the British who pillaged it from France who pillaged it from the rest of Europe. Other art too, I imagine. Pillage seems to be a european pastime. Some ended up here because we pillage with $

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by Flo

I also agree Congo is another Ghastlistan,

Good word! I like it. Are you sure you're completely French? I was a bit French, but I got better.

[Flo]

Originally posted by Hypocolius


Good word! I like it. Are you sure you're completely French? I was a bit French, but I got better.

Born in Paris, mother French, father cameroonian, stepfather Swiss, educated in Switzerland, never recovered ...

I picked "Ghastlistan" from a book called "Bluff your way about the Balkans" or something like this.

[Flo]

Originally posted by KelvinG
And, if the French do a great job in the Congo, can we expect accolades for them? The French have been getting pummelled lately on this board, even now that some of their pre-war concerns are being validated. Can we hope for some apologies in the near future or are the French going to be forever besmirched.

Wishful thinking, about the French doing a great job (as if anybody could in the present state of dereliction of the place), and about the French suddenly stopping to be the target of bashing (unless there suddenly emerges some competition, but who ?) ;)

[Ed]

danes

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by Mr. Manifesto
The difference, which a lot of Americans don't seem to understand, is that France is not trying to impose Pax Franca upon the world, whereas the US clearly is trying to impose Pax Americana.

So when Chirac said that those European countries that took a different line to France on the question of Iraq "missed an opportunity to shut up" and were "badly brought up" he wasn't trying to impose the French view of things on them?

[Mike B.]

On the ABC news last night they were interviewing a French officer.

Man I would not like to have his job.

They have to try to keep the peace with warlords with as Ed stated young pre-teens with AK-47s in loose militias.

Apparently, it is a war crime to have someone under 15 in your army.

Kudos to the French for trying to do something.:)

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Shane Costello


So when Chirac said that those European countries that took a different line to France on the question of Iraq "missed an opportunity to shut up" and were "badly brought up" he wasn't trying to impose the French view of things on them?

They weren't using economic and military means to do so- that is correct.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by Mr. Manifesto:
They weren't using economic and military means to do so- that is correct.

Prospective members of the EU were threatened that their membership mightn't materialise.

[OBgac]

Originally posted by Shane Costello


Prospective members of the EU were threatened that their membership mightn't materialise.


I don't remember that those countries were threatened (and I think it just might have made the newspapers over here). As the spat was after the Copenhagen summit the chances of that actually happening were zero.

[DanishDynamite]

EdGod:Now, I am wondering how the various lefties on this board are going to react to this. Whill they watch closely for any French show of force against kids? Will they dissect every shooting incident? Will they question the French role, in the first place? Why would only lefties watch for attrocities? It seems the righties are quick to point out attrocities if it means there is a possibility for rightously blowing something up. ;)

I'd like to reiterate my own little biased theory of why there is a lingering animosity between the US and France. (It is because they are so much alike. Both have an inflated opinion of themselves and their importance, both deign to learn a foreign language as their language is clearly the lingua franca.) I'd like to reiterate this theory, but I won't.

danes.
:D

[Ed]

:D

[ZeeGerman]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite

It is because they are so much alike. Both have an inflated opinion of themselves and their importance, both deign to learn a foreign language as their language is clearly the lingua franca. I'd like to reiterate this theory, but I won't.


Then I'll do it for you. You just hit the nail on the head, my man :D

Zee

[Ed]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
EdGod: Why would only lefties watch for attrocities? It seems the righties are quick to point out attrocities if it means there is a possibility for rightously blowing something up. ;)

I'd like to reiterate my own little biased theory of why there is a lingering animosity between the US and France. (It is because they are so much alike. Both have an inflated opinion of themselve
and their importance,

One rooted in the past, one in the present


both (do not) deign to learn a foreign language as their language is clearly the lingua franca.

One was, the other is the closest that the world has come

) I'd like to reiterate this theory, but I won't.

OK


:D

:D backatcha