Politically Correct? - pipTalk Forums

How to Join	Member's Area	Private Library	Search	Sanctuary		Login
Main Forums	Discussion	Tech Talk	Mature Content	Archives	A home without a wall, Our haven without ends, A circle we all call Our Family of Friends!

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

0 posted 2003-03-12 09:09 PM

quote:

ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON, March 11 — Show the flag and pass the ketchup was the order of the day in House cafeterias Tuesday. Lawmakers struck a lunchtime blow against the French and put “freedom fries” on the menu. And for breakfast they’ll now have “freedom toast.”

THE NAME changes follow similar actions by restaurants around the country protesting French opposition to the administration’s Iraq war plans.
“Update. Now Serving in All House Office Buildings, ‘Freedom Fries,”’ read a sign that Republican Reps. Bob Ney of Ohio and Walter Jones of North Carolina placed at the register in the Longworth Office Building food court.
Jones said he was inspired by Cubbie’s restaurant in Beaufort, N.C., in his district, one of the first to put “freedom fries” on the menu instead of french fries.

‘SMALL BUT SYMBOLIC EFFORT’
“This action today is a small but symbolic effort to show the strong displeasure of many on Capitol Hill with the actions of our so-called ally, France,” said Ney, chairman of the House Administration Committee.
Ney, whose panel oversees House operations, ordered the menu changes.
Advertisement

The French Embassy in Washington had no immediate comment, except to say that french fries actually come from Belgium.
Ney said he was of French descent and “once the French government comes around we can get back to talking about french fries.”
On a more serious note, Republican Jim Saxton of New Jersey has proposed a ban on Pentagon participation in this year’s Paris Air Show and restrictions on French participation in any postwar construction projects in Iraq.
But House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said at a news conference that applying legislative sanctions to France was not necessary. “I don’t think we have to retaliate against France. They’ve isolated themselves pretty well,” he said.”

Uh huh, I see no difference between the right and the left in America. You just want different code words.

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean

since 2000-02-02

Posts 27738

1 posted 2003-03-12 09:20 PM

The real question remains, however, do you want your "freedom fries" super-sized?

hush
Senior Member

since 2001-05-27

Posts 1653
Ohio, USA

2 posted 2003-03-12 09:41 PM

What do you mean, Brad?

Forgive me if I'm being dense here... I'm not sure how to feel about 'freedom fries,' our government ceasing to trade with France, and a U.S. boycott of French goods... other than that it seems silly to me to start punishing countries that aren't actually our enemies... I can understand the 'victory cabbage' propaganda from WWII... but it seems like we're now not only bullying people to stop doing what we don't want them to do in terms of military buildup/aggression, but also to get them to comply with our policies? Isn't it enough that France and Russia won't get in on the oil free-for-all when this is all over? (No, I don't think it's just about oil, but it's a factor that's unavoidable (and profitable) in our planning for post-war Iraq...)

But anyway, what code words? If 'freedom' instead of 'French' is the Right's, what's the Left's?

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

3 posted 2003-03-12 09:46 PM

Yep, I agree, deVine one...thank you

[This message has been edited by Balladeer (03-12-2003 10:30 PM).]

Poet deVine

Administrator

Member Seraphic

since 1999-05-26

Posts 22612
Hurricane Alley

4 posted 2003-03-12 09:59 PM

THANK YOU MIKE!!!! YOU ARE A DOLL!!!

And I think renaming french fries is stupid. Get over it.

[This message has been edited by Poet deVine (03-12-2003 10:54 PM).]

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

5 posted 2003-03-12 10:05 PM

More code words:

quote:

I sat in a movie theater watching "Schindler's List," asked myself, "Why didn't the Jews fight back?"

Now I know why.

I sat in a movie theater, watching "Pearl Harbor" and asked myself, "Why weren't we prepared?"

Now I know why.

Civilized people cannot fathom, much less predict, the actions of evil people.

On September 11, dozens of capable airplane passengers allowed themselves to be overpowered by a handful of poorly armed terrorists because they did not comprehend the depth of hatred that motivated their captors.

On September 11, thousands of innocent people were murdered because too many Americans naively reject the reality that some nations are dedicated to the dominance of others. Many political pundits, pacifists and media personnel want us to forget the carnage. They say we must focus on the bravery of the rescuers and ignore the cowardice of the killers. They implore us to understand the motivation of the perpetrators. Major television stations have announced they will assist the healing process by not replaying devastating footage of the planes crashing into the Twin Towers.

I will not be manipulated.

I will not pretend to understand.

I will not forget.

I will not forget the liberal media who abused freedom of the press to kick our country when it was vulnerable and hurting.

I will not forget that CBS anchor Dan Rather preceded President Bush's address to the nation with the snide remark, "No matter how you feel about him, he is still our president."

I will not forget that ABC TV anchor Peter Jennings questioned President Bush's motives for not returning immediately to Washington, DC and commented, "We're all pretty skeptical and cynical about Washington."

And I will not forget that ABC's Mark Halperin warned if reporters weren't informed of every little detail of this war, they aren't "likely -- nor should they be expected -- to show deference."

I will not isolate myself from my fellow Americans by pretending an attack on the USS Cole in Yemen was not an attack on the United States of America.

I will not forget the Clinton administration equipped Islamic terrorists and their supporters with the world's most sophisticated telecommunications equipment and encryption technology, thereby compromising America's ability to trace terrorist radio, cell phone, land lines, faxes and modem communications.

I will not be appeased with pointless, quick retaliatory strikes like those perfected by the previous administration.

I will not be comforted by "feel-good, do nothing" regulations like the silly "Have your bags been under your control?" question at the airport.

I will not be influenced by so-called, "antiwar demonstrators" who exploit the right of _expression to chant anti-American obscenities.

I will not forget the moral victory handed the North Vietnamese by American war protesters who reviled and spat upon the returning soldiers, airmen, sailors and Marines.

I will not be softened by the wishful thinking of pacifists who chose reassurance over reality.

I will embrace the wise words of Prime Minister Tony Blair who told Labor Party conference, "They have no moral inhibition on the slaughter of the innocent. If they could have murdered not 7,000 but 70,000, does anyone doubt they would have done so and rejoiced in it?"

There is no compromise possible with such people, no meeting of minds, no point of understanding with such terror. Just a choice: defeat it or be defeated by it. And defeat it we must!

I will force myself to:
                                 -hear the weeping
             -feel the helplessness
                             -imagine the terror
                                 -sense the panic
                                 -smell the burning flesh
-experience the loss
                                 -remember the hatred.

I sat in a movie theater, watching "Private Ryan" and asked myself, "Where did they find the courage?"

Now I know.

We have no choice. Living without liberty is not living.

Hush,

You ask for the left's code words? How about "Not my president, not my war."?

This is a self-performative contradiction. You don't protest, you don't feel angry unless he is your president as he is mine.

Example: I don't see anybody in America trying to extradite the former Peruvian president Fujimori from Japan. Why? Because he's not my, not your, not any American's president.

The left hasn't figured it out yet. America is not Amerika. As long as it continues to think that way, they talk themselves out of any substantive change. They argue over the name of Christmas for chrissakes.

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

6 posted 2003-03-12 10:32 PM

Okay, if it's gone, this goes too.

But I'll leave this:

I have always believed that it is an American duty to hate the French and have never met a French person I've disliked.

But somehow it's not funny anymore.

[This message has been edited by Brad (03-13-2003 06:24 AM).]

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean

since 2000-02-02

Posts 27738

7 posted 2003-03-12 10:40 PM

and I'll pretend my vote counts.

I'll pretend Florida never happened.

I'll pretend the last presidential address wasn't scripted propaganda.

I will pretend that, yes, just as was said on the Bill Mahr's show last night, that no one said, "Of course we know Saddam has weapons of mass destruction--because we kept the receipts."

I'll pretend further I didn't applaud.

I'll pretend I wasn't even here, much like MANY already do.

I'll pretend that my comments are not discounted as "fluff" simply because they do not fit this call-and-response agenda.

I will pretend I don't recognize the format of the persuasive/argumentative essay.

I will pretend I don't also recognize the psychological motivation behind it.
What I won't pretend is that anything I say here makes a difference THERE.

Have fun good poets, and PEACE.

and now? I'm gonna go pretend that PEACE is possible, because no one has ever successfully argued the difference between "pretend" and FAITH to me.

(now pretending I didn't come back to edit because I was typing so fast...hard to type with precision when one is seeing RED.)

[This message has been edited by serenity blaze (03-12-2003 11:27 PM).]

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant

since 1999-12-21

Posts 5767
Southern Abstentia

8 posted 2003-03-13 12:58 PM

Actually -- I'm thankful the President's press conference (what press conference?) was scripted.

He's a horrible extemporaneous speaker.

Say's stupid things that get us all in trouble...

Like..

Crusade.

Remember?

But as to the notion that the right is no different from the left.... haven't I been saying that all along???

Glad you're on board.

Sudhir Iyer
Member Ascendant

since 2000-04-26

Posts 6943
Mumbai, India : now in Belgium

9 posted 2003-03-13 06:58 AM

During a coffee break: one of my colleagues raised the questions:

"Will this ultimately lead to the US govt. returning the Statue of Liberty that was gifted by the French?"

"What about Russian Vodka and German Beer etc?"

....

The result about 15 colleagues staring at the floor; possibly admiring the 3 year old carpet; until one of them sneered 'stupid Americans' and everybody laughed, forcing me to add 'maybe only some... politicians'

Nobody listened.

Regards,
Sudhir

Crazy Eddie
Member

since 2002-09-14

Posts 178

10 posted 2003-03-13 02:59 PM

French fries might only be the tip of a very ominous looking iceberg, there seems to be a growing feeling among some Americans that further action should be taken to “punish” (perhaps the wrong word) the errant decision by the French to speak out against the move to war. I have to wonder how far these suggestions have been thought through though, I may be wrong but isn’t it likely to alienate a useful and active ally in the fight against terrorism? If the American Government continues to denigrate France and distances itself too far from them is the French government more or less likely to act as the eyes and ears of American interests as far as anti-terrorism is concerned?

I also have to wonder how much pressure is being exerted on smaller countries to meet the nine vote watermark, you have to be pretty naïve to believe it isn’t happening. I mean if America is willing to consider sanctions against France what’s being threatened or offered in the corridors of the UN to get positive votes and under such circumstances how free is the vote going to be and how credible can the result be under such circumstances?

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

11 posted 2003-03-13 03:42 PM

The problem you mention, CE, is most clearly put into focus with Turkey.

What exactly has been promised there?

Nobody's talking.

Crazy Eddie
Member

since 2002-09-14

Posts 178

12 posted 2003-03-13 04:58 PM

Brad,

I agree the situation in Turkey is slightly strange, as far as I understand it the Turkish people are against American troops using the country to stage a northern incursion into Iraq. The government however seems to be cutting a deal and allowing the bases to be prepared and the hardware put into place but leaving the minor detail of about 62,000 American troops moving in until the last minute.

The shrewd Turkish government has also announced that any decision about allowing a land-based assault would definitely not include permission for an assault by air. Which sounds suspiciously like the land troop deal has already been done and the Turks are trying to wring a little extra for the use of their airspace. As to why…

quote:
If the Turkish parliament reverses course and backs the deployment of 62,000 troops, the administration would ask the Republican-led Congress to provide $6 billion in direct aid, $4 billion of which could secure loans totaling as much as $24 billion.

As a downpayment on congressional action, the United States would provide Turkey with an $8.5 billion bridge loan from Treasury's Exchange Stabilization Fund, contingent on the Turkish parliament approving a budget endorsed by the International Monetary Fund

Excerpt taken from:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030311/pl_nm/iraq_turkey_usa_dc_1

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

13 posted 2003-03-13 07:31 PM

"...there seems to be a growing feeling among some Americans that further action should be taken to “punish” (perhaps the wrong word) the errant decision by the French to speak out against the move to war."

Very interesting words, Eddie. Everything is a conspiracy, I suppose. Damned Americans and their wheeling-dealing to get their way. You may want to rethink your comments after WIlliam Saffire's article in the New York Times today....the one called the French Connection. Saffire is not a Bush mouthpiece...he is a very well-respected writer for the Times. He found in two weeks of investigation that French exporters were making it possible for Iraq to buy solid rocket fuel propellants from China, funneling it through Syria, a commodity strictly forbidden by UN mandates. There are apparently many such transactions occuring between Iraq and France. Interesting how China and France team up to get illegal shipments to Iraq and both are using their veto powers against the American proposals. There was an article years ago that the French government got a stern letter from Hussein after they did not speak out against America in the Gulf War basically threatening blackmail concerning telling the world about France's aid in helping Iraq build their nuclear program if they didn't distance themselves. No, I didn't see the letter and I can't even prove it existed but enough did for it to make the news. If you want to feel that France is opposing the US proposals due to humanitarian or moral reasons, be my guest, but there is certainly enough proof to show that their hands are very deep in Hussein's ample pockets. To me, that is their main reason for their opposition. There decisions are not "errant". They are doing their best to not bite the hand feeding them. I doubt seriously also if they want all of evidence to become visible should Hussein be forced to leave and records go into the hands of the UN. I'll repost the pic I took down yesterday, without the poor taste remark attached to it.

No, Brad, I didn't post it to refer to Naziism, but to refer to the fact that France did not fight to defend themselves against Hitler, either. They "collaborated" and handed over the keys to Paris rather than defend it. I don't see any photos of Hitler posing in front of Buckingham Palace. The Brits decided to fight for their country- against the odds, to the death if necessary rather than accept defeat. The French cheered the Allied liberating armies as they marched into Paris after ousting Hitler.....and now what? America, England and more countries than you think recognize another threat to democracy and world peace and the French government, who would be eating bratwurst instead of quiche if it weren't for them, goes against them....because it would stop the profits Iraq is providing.

Let them....

As one general said, "Fighting a war without the French would be like - well, World War II."

JP
Senior Member

since 1999-05-25

Posts 1343
Loomis, CA

14 posted 2003-03-13 07:40 PM

this whole thread is bizzare.  Renaming FRENCH fries is a silly symbolic gesture to get the emotion-vote, will it help build suport for the administration's actions against Iraq!  yeah, it will help, does it make one bit of difference in this crazy world?  No.

Having a few restaurants change the name of the fried potatoe dregs they serve is no punishment to France, it is a way to acknowledge that one does not appreciate their nonsupport in the ensuing UN vote.  I find it stupid, and the idea that it has stirred so much attention has be dumbfounded (dumb is a good word for this whole topic).

As far as left and right code words - both sides hold the prize for partisan inanity. Political views based solely on allegiance to the political party are the biggest threat to our nation and our freedoms enjoyed through the effort, tears and bloodshed of our forebears and contemporaries.  Do yourselves and the country a favor and pull your heads out of your partisan as...  hats, and take a look at the truths and lies of both sides.

Yesterday is ash, tomorrow is smoke; only today does the fire burn.
Nil Desperandum, Fata viem invenient

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

15 posted 2003-03-13 08:00 PM

LOL! Bizzare is right, JP!

But expecting people to be bi-partisan? Ain't gonna happen in our lifetime.

I just hope the Italians don't turn against us. I'm running out of dressings for my salad!!

defenestrate
Junior Member

since 2003-01-10

Posts 46
nc, us

16 posted 2003-03-14 03:27 AM

politicism, "patriotism", and all other thinly veiled attempts at indoctrination, while serving a purpose, don't tend to serve me. i will happily order french fries or nothing at all. they can have my irreverance when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.

all i am saying, is give thought a chance.

Opeth
Senior Member

since 2001-12-13

Posts 1543
The Ravines

17 posted 2003-03-14 09:29 AM

What gets me about the French government is how they quickly dismissed the U.K. new resolution. For a country and for all those who desire peace, that particular resolution was the answer this world needed.

And for Iraq to lambaste the resolution was a "spat in the eye of peace."

Iraq is willfully and purposely dividing the United Nations and the U.N. is too blind to see this? I think not. Logic dictates that Iraq has some countries of the U.N. secretly tucked away in its back pocket.

How many nations hate America out of jealousy? How many nations would love to see us lose our superpower status? How many nations would love to see our country on its knees at the mercy of the rest of the world?

I'll answer it this way, at the very least one to begin with...

Crazy Eddie
Member

since 2002-09-14

Posts 178

18 posted 2003-03-14 03:20 PM

Balladeer,

I wasn’t referring to any conspiracy, my statement was prompted by the open questions by American journalists to US Government officials aired on national television.

It’s strange though that you’ve decided to deny such depth of feeling and alienation with.....well such depth of feeling.

I’m reassured to see however that here at least, Americans aren’t deriding the French with ludicrous statements and jingoistic outpourings.

I’d also like to mention at this point my gratitude and admiration towards the thousands of Free French and French resistance forces you didn’t mention who valiantly laid down their lives during WWII fighting for their country.

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

19 posted 2003-03-14 06:32 PM

Eddie, I will always respond with depth of feeling....otherwise, why respond?

I didn't mention them because my comments were aimed at the French government and their actions, or lack of. I also salute the common citizen resistance fighters who had to do it on their own.

Strange that you - or no one responded to the actions of the French in the Times story I outlined. That's why conversations like this never work out. Poeple look for what they can disagree with and ignore whatever they cannot dispute which may not coincide with their way of thinking. Ron's response to the Marine letter was an issue of inconstancy which made him feel shame as a Marine. I don't disagree with his conclusion over that point but there were many other things in that letter which were pertinent which went ignored, not only by him but everyone else. This thread is nothing more than a lesson in selective reading and responding. All I see is applauding what's in one's favor, criticizing whatever debatable issue isn't and closing eyes to anything factual that clashes with one's views.

Think I'll go watch Star Trek...

Crazy Eddie
Member

since 2002-09-14

Posts 178

20 posted 2003-03-14 08:48 PM

Commenting on the assertion of one person, in this case Safire, and either holding it up as fact or attempting to shoot it down as fiction would be foolhardy on my part without first reading the allegations in full. Even then my scepticism would force me to seek collaborating evidence especially when the claims are proffered by a journalist/columnist, people that make their money selling news are apt to see news where none exists and change direction more times than the wind. I’m not claiming that Safire is correct nor am I claiming he’s incorrect, I’m keeping my mouth shut because I don’t know enough about the assertion to claim an opinion either way.

I do recall reading one quote I believe was attributed to Safire:

"One difference between French appeasement and American appeasement is that France pays ransom in cash and gets its hostages back while the United States pays ransom in arms and gets additional hostages taken."

William Safire

I’ll read the article and get back to you.

Crazy Eddie
Member

since 2002-09-14

Posts 178

21 posted 2003-03-14 09:38 PM

Balladeer,

Isn’t the Internet a wonderful tool.

I’ve read the article and have distilled the information I gleaned to the points below please feel free to correct me on any parts I may have misinterpreted:

quote:
their nationals have been illicitly supplying Saddam Hussein with materials used in building long-range surface-to-surface missiles.

hydroxy terminated polybutadiene – The resin allegedly sold and delivered to Syria by a Chinese company through the auspices of a French shipping agent can indeed be used as a binder for rocket fuel. It can, and also is, regularly used in a plethora of other none military applications.

The French company involved – CIS - are alleged to have arranged delivery of the resin to Syria obtaining all necessary licenses and breaching no UN sanctions.

No evidence is offered to support the assertion that the final destination was Iraq, in fact Safire seems to allude to the fact that the resin is still in a Syrian warehouse

quote:
We will have to wait until after the war to find out how much other weaponry, for what huge fees, Saddam has stored in currently un-inspectable Syrian warehouses.

In brief - a French shipping agent arranged delivery of a common resin to Syria breaching no UN sanctions.

The amazing part for me is that Safire seems to be bragging that it only took him a week to find all this out:

quote:
I've been poking around for only about a week, starting with data originating from an Arab source, not from the C.I.A. (Anti-Kurdish analysts at Langley have it in for me for embarrassing them for 18 months on Al Qaeda's ties to Saddam, especially in the terrorist Ansar enclave in Iraqi Kurdistan.)

I’m left wondering what he was doing for the other six days!

Thanks for the chance to read and reply

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

22 posted 2003-03-15 12:58 PM

Craig...and thank you for checking into it. The inference that Safire drew from this was that of course the shipments were earmarked for Syria...they couldn't have put Iraq on the bill of lading and that the shipment was then sent to Iraq by truck. Yes, he said that the information was very easy to come by so he is sure the administration has that info also.

Buckley's article tomorrow will state this:

"The French foreign minister does not spend time elaborating the commercial attachments of the French to the government of Iraq, but we know in general what they are. France gets oil from Iraq and sells munitions to Iraq and machinery and some other products. France has, therefore, a stake in continuing such commerce."

Personally I think that these are the main reasons for the automatic and unwavering veto stand they are presenting.

Again, thanks for the interest and the opinions...

By the way..

hydroxy terminated polybutadiene resin

The product bulletin by Sartomer (the producer of this product) for this particular product states one and only one suggested application for this product...

binders for military applications

Crazy Eddie
Member

since 2002-09-14

Posts 178

23 posted 2003-03-15 08:50 AM

Balladeer,

It seems we are using the same Company from which to glean information I could make reference to great minds thinking alike but I wouldn’t want to drag you down to my level.

My understanding is that hydroxy terminated polybutadiene is a family of chemical resins and while hydroxl terminated polybutadiene has a suggested use connected with missile propellant the other derivatives do not. Safire isn’t specific on which hydroxy terminated polybutadiene product was involved in the alleged transaction, which may be intentional on his part. You mentioned earlier about selective reading, in most cases I tend to agree people do cherry pick what supports their argument, our differing views on hydroxy terminated polybutadiene tends to support that notion but it is equally clear that writers and especially journalists/columnists play a similar game. If Safire reported that France was involved in the exportation of an epoxy resin used in the automotive industry he’s less likely to capture the imagination and emotions of the reader.

This selective use of information is used several times in the article and often it’s the parts that aren’t included or that are included but brushed over that are possibly the most interesting. Safire for instance makes a big point about the shipment not being labelled chemical but what was it labelled? If the shipment had glue plastered all over it the story is dead before it started. Who actually shipped the product? Safire goes into great detail about the Chinese and the French agent who arranged shipment with a third party shipping company, would the story smack less of conspiracy if the shipper was an American company? Then there is the issue of licensing, the derivative used as a missile fuel binder is subject to stringent export restrictions by every country in the world and those restrictions are open to even more stringent scrutiny if the receiving country is covered by UN sanctions. Safire offers no evidence to suggest that there was active collusion by the governments of China and Syria (France would not have issued export licenses as the product never entered or left that country).

As I said before the assertion by Safire is that France sold a missile fuel component to Iraq, the evidence in the article, on the face of it, only suggests that China sold a resin to Syria and the shipping agent was a French national.

Let’s presume though, just for arguments sake, that Safire has uncovered a conspiracy to sell banned substances to Iraq, based upon the evidence presented in the article are the French government guilty of any indiscretion in the matter?

As a side issue, if Sartomer was found to have been the original manufacturer of the chemical in question would it be factual to claim that an American country was supplying missile fuel components to Saddam?

Thanks again for the chance to (selectively

) read and reply.

[This message has been edited by Crazy Eddie (03-15-2003 08:55 AM).]

Tim
Senior Member

since 1999-06-08

Posts 1794

24 posted 2003-03-15 10:06 AM

HTPB is a listed substance on the Chinese missile and missile technology control list. It seems the Chinese feel that the export of HTPB is a danger to their security if the substance were to exported and placed in the wrong hands. Not trying to be facetious, but I doubt the Chinese are concerned they are going to be glued.

Poet deVine

Administrator

Member Seraphic

since 1999-05-26

Posts 22612
Hurricane Alley

25 posted 2003-03-15 03:05 PM

Facts instead of emotion? When it comes to the discussion of freedom and patriotism and loss of innocent lives, facts seem to fly out my window.

I am truly saddened by the attitude of some Americans towards the countries that are not joining us in a military action against Iraq. In my opinion, we have no right to tell them how to run their country. If they choose to sit by, then they can do that. Then for some people to boycott ‘French’ words, products and all things French is childish. It’s like saying ‘if you don’t play MY way I’m going to bad-mouth you until you do’. What an immature attitude. This is sure to propagate anti-American sentiments around the world. Do we think to punish people because they don’t see things OUR way? You know, I think we’re better than that. I think if we stoop to name calling and farcical boycotts, we are lowering the respect we have for ourselves as well as the respect we get from others. I often told my kids that they should treat everyone the same – no matter what. If someone screams at them, don’t scream back. BE the person you are no matter what – don’t lower yourself to someone else’s level.

To say that WE 'saved' the French during World War II is an exaggerated statement. We sat back on our butts for most of the war – my opinion again. And lest you say that I should back up my opinion with fact, please read on. I’ve spent a few days looking up timelines for WWII on the Internet. I find it interesting that we didn’t jump to the defense of Europe sooner. President Roosevelt asked Hitler in a telegram dated April 14, 1939 (see below):

quote:

Are you willing to give assurance that your armed forces will not attack or invade the territory or possessions of the following independent nations: Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain and Ireland, France, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Luxemburg, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Russia, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, Iraq, the Arabias, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Iran.

Note: Here is the reference site if you wish to read all of Roosevelt’s speeches: http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-toc.html

On September 1, 1939, Hitler invaded Poland. And we did nothing.
On September 10, 1939, Canada declared war on Germany. And we did nothing.
On April 9, 1940, the Nazis invade Denmark and Norway. And we did nothing.
On May 10, 1940, The Nazis invade France, Belgium, Luxembourg. And we did nothing.
On Oct 7, 1940 , German troops enter Romania. And we did nothing.
April 6, 1941, Nazis invade Greece and Yugoslavia. And we did nothing.

It was only when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor did we enter World War II. How many innocent lives were lost in Europe before we acted?

I think if we go to war we should do so with dignity and pride. If another country chooses not to join us. Ok. So be it, everyone is entitled to their political opinion. We shouldn't start throwing stones at anyone about past involvements in wars.

Otherwise, we’re going to need a heck of a lot of Windex for this glass house we live in…

***

1930
Sept 14 - Germans elect Nazis making them the 2nd largest political party in Germany.
1932
Nov 8 - Roosevelt elected President of the United States.
1933
Jan 30 - Adolf Hitler becomes Chancellor of Germany.
March 12 - First concentration camp opened at Oranienburg outside Berlin.
April 1 - Nazi boycott of Jewish owned shops.
May 10 - Nazis burn books in Germany.
In June - Nazis open Dachau concentration camp.
Oct 14 - Germany quits the League of Nations.

1934
July 25 - Nazis murder Austrian Chancellor Dollfuss.
Aug 2 - German President Hindenburg dies.
Aug 19 - Adolf Hitler becomes Führer of Germany.
1935
March 16 - Hitler violates the Treaty of Versailles by introducing military conscription.
Sept 15 - German Jews stripped of rights by Nuremberg Race Laws.
Nov 11 – Roosevelt’s Address on Armistice Day http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-04.html
“The primary purpose of the United States of America is to avoid being drawn into war. We seek also in every practicable way to promote peace and to discourage war. Except for those few who have placed or who place temporary, selfish gain ahead of national and world peace, the overwhelming mass of American citizens are in hearty accord with these basic policies of our Government, as they are also entirely sympathetic with the efforts of other Nations to avoid and to end war”

1936
Feb 10 - The German Gestapo is placed above the law.
March 7 - German troops occupy the Rhineland.
May 9 - Mussolini's Italian forces take Ethiopia.
Aug 1 - Olympic games begin in Berlin.
Aug 31 – Roosevelt’s statement on the passage of the Neutrality Act
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-03.html

1937
June 11 - Soviet leader Stalin begins a purge of Red Army generals.
Nov 5 - Hitler reveals war plans during Hossbach Conference.
1938
March 12/13 - Germany announces 'Anschluss' (union) with Austria.
Aug 12 - German military mobilizes.
Sept 30 - British Prime Minister Chamberlain appeases Hitler at Munich.
Nov 9/10 - Kristallnacht - The Night of Broken Glass.

1939
Jan 30, 1939 - Hitler threatens Jews during Reichstag speech.
March 15/16 - Nazis take Czechoslovakia.
March 28, 1939 - Spanish Civil war ends.
Apr 14, 1939 = Telegram by President Roosevelt to the Chancellor of Germany Adolf Hitler http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-12.html

May 22, 1939 - Nazis sign 'Pact of Steel' with Italy.
Aug 23, 1939 - Nazis and Soviets sign Pact.
Aug 25, 1939 - Britain and Poland sign a Mutual Assistance Treaty.
Aug 31, 1939 - British fleet mobilizes; Civilian evacuations begin from London.
Sept 1, 1939 - Nazis invade Poland.
Sept 3, 1939 - Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand declare war on Germany.
Sept 4, 1939 - British Royal Air Force attacks the German Navy.
Sept 5, 1939 - United States proclaims neutrality; German troops cross the Vistula River in Poland.
Sept 10, 1939 - Canada declares war on Germany; Battle of the Atlantic begins.
Sept 10, 1938 – Roosevelt’s address before a joint session of the Senate and House of Representatives recommending revision of the neutrality law http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-14.html
"Fate seems now to compel us to assume the task of helping to maintain in the western world a citadel wherein that civilization may be kept alive. The peace, the integrity, and the safety of the Americas-these must be kept firm and serene."

Sept 17, 1939 - Soviets invade Poland.
Sept 27, 1939 - Warsaw surrenders to Nazis
Sept 29, 1939 - Nazis and Soviets divide up Poland.
In Oct - Nazis begin euthanasia on sick and disabled in Germany.
Nov 8, 1939 - Assassination attempt on Hitler fails.
Nov 30, 1939 - Soviets attack Finland.
Dec 14, 1939 - Soviet Union expelled from the League of Nations.
1940
Jan 8, 1940 - Rationing begins in Britain.
March 12, 1940 - Finland signs a peace treaty with Soviets.
March 16, 1940 - Germans bomb Scapa Flow naval base near Scotland.
April 9, 1940 - Nazis invade Denmark and Norway.
May 10, 1940 - Nazis invade France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands; Winston Churchill becomes British Prime Minister.
May 15, 1940 - Holland surrenders to the Nazis.
May 26, 1940 - Evacuation of Allied troops from Dunkirk begins.
May 28, 1940 - Belgium surrenders to the Nazis.
June 3, 1940 - Germans bomb Paris; Dunkirk evacuation ends.
June 10, 1940 - Norway surrenders to the Nazis; Italy declares war on Britain and France.
June 14, 1940 - Germans enter Paris.
June 16, 1940 - Marshal Pétain becomes French Prime Minister.
June 18, 1940 - Hitler and Mussolini meet in Munich; Soviets begin occupation of the Baltic States.
June 22, 1940 - France signs an armistice with the Nazis.
June 23, 1940 - Hitler tours Paris.
June 28, 1940 - Britain recognizes Gen. Charles de Gaulle as the Free French leader.
July 1, 1940 - German U-boats attack merchant ships in the Atlantic.
July 5, 1940 - French Vichy government breaks off relations with Britain.
July 10, 1940 - Battle of Britain begins.
July 23, 1940 - Soviets take Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.
Aug 3-19 - Italians occupy British Somaliland in East Africa.
Aug 13, 1940 - German bombing offensive against airfields and factories in England.
Aug 15, 1940 - Air battles and daylight raids over Britain.
Aug 17, 1940 - Hitler declares a blockade of the British Isles.
Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London.
Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin.
Sept 3, 1940 - Hitler plans Operation Sealion (the invasion of Britain).
Sept 7, 1940 - German Blitz against England begins.
Sept 13, 1940 - Italians invade Egypt.
Sept 15, 1940 - Massive German air raids on London, Southampton, Bristol, Cardiff, Liverpool and Manchester.
Sept 16, 1940 - United States military conscription bill passed.
Sept 27, 1940 - Tripartite (Axis) Pact signed by Germany, Italy and Japan.
Oct 7, 1940 - German troops enter Romania.
Oct 12, 1940 - Germans postpone Operation Sealion until Spring of 1941.
Oct 16, 1940 – US institutes the Selective Service Law –
Roosevelt’s Speech: "Ours must once again be the spirit of those who were prepared to defend as they built, to defend as they worked, to defend as they worshipped." http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-20.html

Oct 28, 1940 - Italy invades Greece.
Nov 5, 1940 - Roosevelt re-elected as U.S. president.
Nov 10/11 - A torpedo bomber raid cripples the Italian fleet at Taranto, Italy.
Nov 14/15 - Germans bomb Coventry, England.
Nov 20, 1940 - Hungary joins the Axis Powers.
Nov 22, 1940 - Greeks defeat the Italian 9th Army.
Nov 23, 1940 - Romania joins the Axis Powers.

1941
Jan 6, 1941 – Roosevelt’s annual message to congress http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-22.html
“Let us say to the democracies: "We Americans are vitally concerned in your defense of freedom. We are putting forth our energies, our resources and our organizing powers to give you the strength to regain and maintain a free world. We shall send you, in ever-increasing numbers, ships, planes, tanks, guns. This is our purpose and our pledge."

Jan 22, 1941 - Tobruk in North Africa falls to the British and Australians.
Feb 11, 1941 - British forces advance into Italian Somaliland in East Africa.
Feb 12, 1941 - German General Erwin Rommel arrives in Tripoli, North Africa.
Feb 14, 1941 - First units of German 'Afrika Korps' arrive in North Africa.
Mar 7, 1941 - British forces arrive in Greece.
Mar 11, 1941 - President Roosevelt signs the Lend-Lease Act.
March 27, 1941 - A coup in Yugoslavia overthrows the pro-Axis government.
April 3, 1941 - Pro-Axis regime set up in Iraq.
April 6, 1941 - Nazis invade Greece and Yugoslavia.
April 14, 1941 - Rommel attacks Tobruk.
April 17, 1941 - Yugoslavia surrenders to the Nazis.
April 27, 1941 - Greece surrenders to the Nazis.
May 1, 1941 - German attack on Tobruk is repulsed.
May 10, 1941 - Deputy Führer Rudolph Hess flies to Scotland.
May 10/11 - Heavy German bombing of London; British bomb Hamburg.
May 15, 1941 - Operation Brevity begins (the British counter-attack in Egypt).
May 24, 1941 - Sinking of the British ship Hood by the Bismarck.
May 27, 1941 - Sinking of the Bismarck by the British Navy.
June 4, 1941 - Pro-Allied government installed in Iraq.
June 8, 1941 - Allies invade Syria and Lebanon.
June 14, 1941 - United States freezes German and Italian assets in America.
June 22, 1941 - Germany attacks Soviet Union as Operation Barbarossa begins.
In June - Nazi SS Einsatzgruppen begin mass murder.
June 28, 1941 - Germans capture Minsk.
July 3, 1941 - Stalin calls for a scorched earth policy.
July 10, 1941 - Germans cross the River Dnieper in the Ukraine.
July 12, 1941 - Mutual Assistance agreement between British and Soviets.
July 14, 1941 - British occupy Syria.
July 26, 1941 - Roosevelt freezes Japanese assets in United States and suspends relations.
July 31, 1941 - Göring instructs Heydrich to prepare for the Final Solution.
Aug 1, 1941 - United States announces an oil embargo against aggressor states.
Aug 14, 1941 - Roosevelt and Churchill announce the Atlantic Charter.
Aug 20, 1941 - Nazi siege of Leningrad begins.
Sept 1, 1941 - Nazis order Jews to wear yellow stars.
Sept 3, 1941 - First experimental use of gas chambers at Auschwitz.
Sept 19, 1941 - Nazis take Kiev.
Sept 29, 1941 - Nazis murder 33,771 Jews at Kiev.
Oct 2, 1941 - Operation Typhoon begins (German advance on Moscow).
Oct 16, 1941 - Germans take Odessa.
Oct 24, 1941 - Germans take Kharkov.
Oct 30, 1941 - Germans reach Sevastopol.
Nov 13, 1941 - British aircraft carrier Ark Royal is sunk off Gibraltar by a U-boat.
Nov 20, 1941 - Germans take Rostov.
Nov 27, 1941 - Soviet troops retake Rostov.
Dec 5, 1941 - German attack on Moscow is abandoned.
Dec 6, 1941 - Soviet Army launches a major counter-offensive around Moscow.
Dec 7, 1941 - Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor;
Dec 8, 1941 - United States and Britain declare war on Japan. Roosevelt’s Speech before joint session of congress declaring war on Japan.
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-31.html

Dec 11, 1941 - Germany declares war on the United States.
Dec 11, 1941 – Roosevelt’s speech to Congress declaring war on Germany http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-33.html
US losses during WWII http://web1.whs.osd.mil/mmid/m01/SMS223R.HTM

Opeth
Senior Member

since 2001-12-13

Posts 1543
The Ravines

26 posted 2003-03-15 03:16 PM

It does not matter how late one gets into the game, but how much they contribute to it - and at what cost. Do you actually believe France would not have been conquered by Nazi Germany without the U.S. and Russian assistance?

"I am truly saddened by the attitude of some Americans towards the countries that are not joining us in a military action against Iraq."

~ I have a problem with this statement. All the U.K and U.S wanted was France and the rest of those countries opposed to war with Iraq to back a resolution that would of forced Iraq to comply with the resolutions already imposed upon on said country - France rejected it. This resolution was not one calling for war or supporting war, but supporting what the UN had already demanded Iraq to comply with - disarmament.

[This message has been edited by Opeth (03-15-2003 03:18 PM).]

Opeth
Senior Member

since 2001-12-13

Posts 1543
The Ravines

27 posted 2003-03-15 03:22 PM

To war with Iraq or not is one issue, but it boggles my mind how so many people believe that Iraq is complying with the U.N. resolutions, when in FACT they are not.

Proof? The easiest proof of all is time itself. If they were in compliance with the resolutions, why are they only now beginning to destroy bombs and coming forth with some information, still not all, about their weapons programs when they have had 11+ years to comply?

Opeth
Senior Member

since 2001-12-13

Posts 1543
The Ravines

28 posted 2003-03-15 03:30 PM

Oh...they just all of sudden threw their hands up in the air and said, "We give up!"

Laughable.

The only reason why is the US show of force. Sometimes a bully has to be bullied in order for the bully to stand down.

Bleed your hearts people. Feel sorry and support the anti-war effort. Mock your president as Saddam grows stronger in the minds of the masses. Make the US a laughing stock among the nations of the earth. Don't rally around the flag when other countries are mocking us, those jealous people, but join them, believe in their "propaganda" over family = our US family.

We are our own biggest enemy on this whole issue

Poet deVine

Administrator

Member Seraphic

since 1999-05-26

Posts 22612
Hurricane Alley

29 posted 2003-03-15 03:36 PM

Most people think I'm against the war. I am not. I stand firmly behind my President and my country. I support the military. But I think we need to STOP being 'holier than thou' when it comes to other countries.

Ok - so we don't want them to join us in the 'fight' but only in backing the resolution. If they don't want to they don't have to..it's their choice.

Remember the children's story about the chicken who asked for help to plant wheat, harvest it, grind it, make it into bread? No one wanted to help with the dirty work. But when it came to eating the fresh bread, they all came running.

So do we turn our back on someone because they didn't offer to help? No. We're better than that. We're supposed to be world leaders. Let's act like it instead of acting like spoiled children ordering 'freedom fries'....geesh!

Opeth
Senior Member

since 2001-12-13

Posts 1543
The Ravines

30 posted 2003-03-15 04:00 PM

"Most people think I'm against the war. I am not. I stand firmly behind my President and my country. I support the military. But I think we need to STOP being 'holier than thou' when it comes to other countries."

~ Most people think I am pro-war and I am not. I did not think of you to be anti-war. As for being "holier than thou" - I think we shouldn't project ourselves that way. We should listen to Teddy about walking softly.

"Ok - so we don't want them to join us in the 'fight' but only in backing the resolution. If they don't want to they don't have to..it's their choice."

~ But here is where I have a problem. Certain countries don't want war, but when the offer is on the table for true disarmament, which would equal the peace that those countries want - they still reject it. Why? With all due common sense, they should support the resolution because it does what they want - no war, and real disarmament. Yet, they refuse to support the resolution...the only logical conclusion that I can think of is that these countries are most likely incohoots with Iraq, otherwise I cannot fanthom one single solitary logical explanation not to support the latest U.K. resolution.

"Remember the children's story about the chicken who asked for help to plant wheat, harvest it, grind it, make it into bread? No one wanted to help with the dirty work. But when it came to eating the fresh bread, they all came running."

~ lol - Yes, I do. The frog said, "I won't." The rooster said, "I won't." I think that is something how it went.

"So do we turn our back on someone because they didn't offer to help? No. We're better than that. We're supposed to be world leaders. Let's act like it instead of acting like spoiled children ordering 'freedom fries'....geesh!"

~ Yeah. The freedom fries thing is penny-ante (sp?). Again, walk softly...I will not purchase any French products, but I am not going to loudly blab it for the whole world to hear. Quiet retaliation in boycotting, is better. And I don't care if people boycott or not, that is a personal decision.

Poet deVine

Administrator

Member Seraphic

since 1999-05-26

Posts 22612
Hurricane Alley

31 posted 2003-03-15 04:17 PM

I will not boycott French products. I'm not sure I even BUY any in the course of a week (French Fries are not truly French are they? LOL)

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean

since 2000-02-02

Posts 27738

32 posted 2003-03-15 05:37 PM

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-0/104771311168115.xml

sigh...now how stupid is this?

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

33 posted 2003-03-15 06:47 PM

Poet deVine, I agree with you that facts must indeed be flying out your window.

I am truly saddened by the attitude of some Americans towards the countries that are not joining us in a military action against Iraq.

As far as I know, America is not asking countries to join us in a military action. It is asking the UN security council to enforce its own restrictions on Iraq. Turkey has turned the US down as far as participating by allowing their land and air space and we have made no complaint against them. That is their choice and their right.

To say that WE 'saved' the French during World War II is an exaggerated statement

I find that an incredible statement. If you can point out a differennt scenario that would have saved France, I would certainly love to hear it. (Can-Can girls kicking Nazi crotches is not acceptable)

We sat back on our butts for most of the war

So you think we should have jumped in much sooner? We're gonna get condemned either way..by sticking our noses in other people's wars or by not doing it. "Sat on our butts"....a very interesting, and sad, way to describe it.

On September 1, 1939, Hitler invaded Poland. And we did nothing.
On September 10, 1939, Canada declared war on Germany. And we did nothing.
On April 9, 1940, the Nazis invade Denmark and Norway. And we did nothing.
On May 10, 1940, The Nazis invade France, Belgium, Luxembourg. And we did nothing.
On Oct 7, 1940 , German troops enter Romania. And we did nothing.
April 6, 1941, Nazis invade Greece and Yugoslavia. And we did nothing.

You seem to have a real love affair with the "we did nothing" phrase. When would you have jumped in, Sharon? At the invasion of Poland? Or Denmark? Or would you have been a protester in the street with a sign stating "Germany and Poland are not our concern. American boys shouldn't die in other people's wars." as there surely would have been. It's really easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. Of course we know now that Hitler would move on to attempt to conquer all of Europe....but who knew that with an invasion of Poland? If you criticize us for not moving in at the beginning before things got out of hand then you must be adamant that we move on Iraq as soon as possible. They already have a record of invading a neighboring country? Should we have moved in during the Iran-Iraq war with troops or any other of the wars that Europe has had over the years. Your "we did nothing" comments are unwarranted. I don't mean to sound insulting but your use of that phrase so much makes it sound like you are saying the people that died before our intervention were partially our fault because we were not there. I won't accept that. You listed a lot of dates there but I didn't see the one where anyone asked us to join in. With the exception of a nice history lesson I don't see the relevance of the list.

we need to STOP being 'holier than thou' when it comes to other countries.

I think that is an insult without a base. Who is being holier than thou? What is holier than thou supposed to mean anyway? If we say that we are convinced that a certain condition exists and that we will do what is in our best interests to neutralize it, not requiring anyone else to participate, does that translate into holier than thou?

Perhaps you can make a new list....

Hussein killed thousands of his own people with biological weapons....and we did nothing.

Iraq stockpiled weapons of mass destruction....and we did nothing.

Terrorists tried to blow up the WTC...and we did nothing.

The USS Cole was attacked, killing Americans...and we did nothing.

Should the weapons Hussein has stockpiled find their way into terrorist hands killing thousands more Americans, would you then say...and we did nothing? If we don't neutralize this threat, you would be right.

Poet deVine

Administrator

Member Seraphic

since 1999-05-26

Posts 22612
Hurricane Alley

34 posted 2003-03-15 07:05 PM

quote:

As far as I know, America is not asking countries to join us in a military action. It is asking the UN security council to enforce its own restrictions on Iraq. Turkey has turned the US down as far as participating by allowing their land and air space and we have made no complaint against them. That is their choice and their right.

I stand corrected by Opeth – see above.

quote:

I find that an incredible statement. If you can point out a differennt scenario that would have saved France, I would certainly love to hear it. (Can-Can girls kicking Nazi crotches is not acceptable)

We HELPED – we didn’t do it on our own.

quote:

So you think we should have jumped in much sooner? We're gonna get condemned either way..by sticking our noses in other people's wars or by not doing it. "Sat on our butts"....a very interesting, and sad, way to describe it.

Yes. I do think we should have gotten involved sooner.

quote:

You seem to have a real love affair with the "we did nothing" phrase. When would you have jumped in, Sharon? At the invasion of Poland? Or Denmark? Or would you have been a protester in the street with a sign stating "Germany and Poland are not our concern. American boys shouldn't die in other people's wars." as there surely would have been. It's really easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. Of course we know now that Hitler would move on to attempt to conquer all of Europe....but who knew that with an invasion of Poland? If you criticize us for not moving in at the beginning before things got out of hand then you must be adamant that we move on Iraq as soon as possible. They already have a record of invading a neighboring country? Should we have moved in during the Iran-Iraq war with troops or any other of the wars that Europe has had over the years. Your "we did nothing" comments are unwarranted. I don't mean to sound insulting but your use of that phrase so much makes it sound like you are saying the people that died before our intervention were partially our fault because we were not there. I won't accept that. You listed a lot of dates there but I didn't see the one where anyone asked us to join in. With the exception of a nice history lesson I don't see the relevance of the list.

I’ve looked and looked for some record of a request for assistance and so far can’t find it. We offered guns and ammunition by no troops to support the war effort in Europe.

quote:

I think that is an insult without a base. Who is being holier than thou? What is holier than thou supposed to mean anyway? If we say that we are convinced that a certain condition exists and that we will do what is in our best interests to neutralize it, not requiring anyone else to participate, does that translate into holier than thou?

“holier than thou’ is MY opinion that’s why it’s in quotes. There are those who think we are the almighty savior of the world (as you stated about France) but as we have also had a reputation of ‘wait and see’ as in WWII I don’t think we should condemn a country for their decision NOT to vote for the resolution.

quote:

Perhaps you can make a new list....

Hussein killed thousands of his own people with biological weapons....and we did nothing.

Iraq stockpiled weapons of mass destruction....and we did nothing.

Terrorists tried to blow up the WTC...and we did nothing.

The USS Cole was attacked, killing Americans...and we did nothing.

Should the weapons Hussein has stockpiled find their way into terrorist hands killing thousands more Americans, would you then say...and we did nothing? If we don't neutralize this threat, you would be right.

I completely agree with you on these Mike. It is MY opinion that Bill Clinton missed many opportunities to avert acts of terrorism. Hindsight again.

[This message has been edited by Poet deVine (03-15-2003 07:05 PM).]

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

35 posted 2003-03-15 07:10 PM

Serenity...of course it's stupid. There are a bunch of nutcases out there who are going to have some fun with this just for fun's sake....not unlike the ones who have Hurricane Parties in the face of the oncoming storm.

They are not worth giving any credence to because they're being characters...they are certainly a microscopic representation of the country and their actions mean nothing. It's sad that anyone would take them seriously or quote their actions as being representative of Americans in general.

Eddie, I couldn't agree more. Professional reporters have the gift of being able to write a story that can be read in different ways, I suppose. You can see what you find in it and I can't refute it. I can see it another way. I combine it with the other circumstances of what's happening and try to decipher it that way. Coincidence that a product which is on a controlled list due to its ability to be used as a rocket fuel being sold to Syria, which has no use for it, strikes me as strange unless they are acting for Iraq. Also strange that it is happening during Iraq's insistence that they are disarming. I could be as wrong as you could be right. That's one of the beauties of the 'net, being able to see how people feel in other countries.

I will say that Tim's remark about China not worried about being glued is a classic - and holds a lot of truth behind the humor.

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

36 posted 2003-03-15 08:34 PM

Sharon....sorry - I wasn't clear enough. When I said WE saved France I was referring to the US and England, the two prominent players in the liberation....the same two that France is vetoing now.

We have been cast in the role as a world leader by default. Any other country may stand up to claim that title and Uncle Sam will say "Fine....lead, follow or get out of the way."

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

37 posted 2003-03-15 08:48 PM

From "Patton":

Mumbling, "The Russians, don't forget the Russians."

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

38 posted 2003-03-15 09:05 PM

This is from Serenity's link:

quote:
And White, who said he's not normally a political activist, was inspired when he saw a news brief about Congress designating new names for French toast and French fries in the Capitol commissary.

His reaction: "Why stop there?" said White, who will be passing out "freedom bread" at his petition table today. "I'm just hoping to send a message as American citizens that we don't appreciate them not supporting us when we've supported them for so long."

Asked why the Quarter couldn't simply be renamed the Vieux Carre, which is more or less its official name anyway, White said: "That's a French name. I don't think we should be calling things by French names. I think American things should be called by American names."

What about the state capital?

"Louisiana is full of French names, so this is just a start," he said.

Doesn't it follow that we give back the statue of liberty as well?

The scariest thing is that someone might actually take that comment seriously.

[This message has been edited by Brad (03-15-2003 09:06 PM).]

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

39 posted 2003-03-15 09:31 PM

I just don't know what ticklers I'm supposed to use now!!

Poet deVine

Administrator

Member Seraphic

since 1999-05-26

Posts 22612
Hurricane Alley

40 posted 2003-03-15 10:35 PM

You won't need them Mike, as now we will just have non-French kisses...

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant

since 1999-12-21

Posts 5767
Southern Abstentia

41 posted 2003-03-16 12:26 PM

At least we can still have Spanish Fly

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant

since 1999-12-21

Posts 5767
Southern Abstentia

42 posted 2003-03-16 12:37 PM

And Polish sausage...

whoever liked Turkish coffee or cigarettes though? ehk...

I'm def giving up Russian roulette though -- total boycott there.

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant

since 1999-12-21

Posts 5767
Southern Abstentia

43 posted 2003-03-16 01:06 AM

Sharon -- kudos for doing your homework --

re: France handing over the keys to Paris...

In 1940 the British and the French forces were smashed in Sedan -- and as much fun as that may sound -- the blitzkrieg continued to roll through without much resistance -- it was only Hitler's incompetence that allowed the English to escape because he wanted the Luftwafe to have a victory at Dunkirk and held in the reigns on the 10th Panzer division.

Given the Nazi Juggernaut at Paris gates -- a good General knows when to retreat -- a good chess player cedes a game he can't win -- a leader of a country who actually cares about it's citizens would surrender rather than fight to the last man...

The Masada scenario just wouldn't have played well in Paris.

No one had really ever seen what an armada of tanks could do before this --

	⇧ top of page ⇧
All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format.