View Full Version : Whats wrong with French?
Justin_stacy
04/02/03, 06:30 PM
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030402/ap_wo_en_ge/eu_gen_france_british_cemetery_1
I dont understand the insanity that has taken root in france (europe). Are there school systems that bad or are there news agency's that corrupt, that the citizens don't understand there own countries history?
billcom6
04/03/03, 04:18 AM
a recent poll done in france says that 1 in 3 french (men i think but im not sure) hope Iraq wins the war, WTF????
Justin_stacy
04/03/03, 04:25 AM
I kind of understand being against the war, well not really, but when they spray paint monuments to people who died for there FREEDOM i cant understand that, and to top it off they spray painted Nazi signs and symbols on them, i mean are these FRENCH so fucked up that they don't understand that they would be under Nazi control with out the help of England?
No wonder these leaders can stay in power, the school systems obviously dont teach the truth or history, and the news agency are all owned by the government, so its no wonder that teh poor french people dont understand there surroundings.
evil zach
04/03/03, 09:19 AM
To oppose the war is one thing, but to deface a cemetary is simply disgusting.
No wonder these leaders can stay in power, the school systems obviously dont teach the truth or history, and the news agency are all owned by the government, so its no wonder that teh poor french people dont understand there surroundings.
Regardless of what country you are in, history class is nothing more then a propoganda lesson.
Justin_stacy
04/03/03, 09:25 AM
Originally posted by evil zach
Regardless of what country you are in, history class is nothing more then a propoganda lesson.
I really hope you dont believe that. Just cause you dont agree with what history has to offer doesn't mean its propaganda.
evil zach
04/03/03, 09:32 AM
well actully history is one of my favorite subjects, but you have to take with a grain of salt. History is mostly written by the winners. When they wright they do say in a way to portray the other side as monsters. They up-play the atrocoties commited by the other guys, and down play their own. When the losers record it, they do so in way to make it apear as if they were the victims of a brutal attack. For example. In japan, the bombings of nagasaki and hiroshima are almost portrayed as an act of unspeakable evil that was commited ofr no real reason, while they very much down play the pearl harbour attack. In The United States (I have been told) that FDR is portrayed as the savior of the jewish people, when in reality he was a HUGE anti-semite.
Justin_stacy
04/03/03, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by evil zach
well actully history is one of my favorite subjects, but you have to take with a grain of salt. History is mostly written by the winners. When they wright they do say in a way to portray the other side as monsters. They up-play the atrocoties commited by the other guys, and down play their own. When the losers record it, they do so in way to make it apear as if they were the victims of a brutal attack. For example. In japan, the bombings of nagasaki and hiroshima are almost portrayed as an act of unspeakable evil that was commited ofr no real reason, while they very much down play the pearl harbour attack. In The United States (I have been told) that FDR is portrayed as the savior of the jewish people, when in reality he was a HUGE anti-semite.
I got you its not history that your saying is propaganda but the people who write it our prapagandist (i think i got that right).
FDR was a huge anti-semite, he personally helped with the holocaust, by not bombing rr lines or auschwitzs.
evil zach
04/03/03, 09:47 AM
I got you its not history that your saying is propaganda but the people who write it our prapagandist (i think i got that right).
exactly
yeat182
04/10/03, 06:59 AM
Originally posted by evil zach
well actully history is one of my favorite subjects, but you have to take with a grain of salt. History is mostly written by the winners. When they wright they do say in a way to portray the other side as monsters. They up-play the atrocoties commited by the other guys, and down play their own. When the losers record it, they do so in way to make it apear as if they were the victims of a brutal attack. For example. In japan, the bombings of nagasaki and hiroshima are almost portrayed as an act of unspeakable evil that was commited ofr no real reason, while they very much down play the pearl harbour attack. In The United States (I have been told) that FDR is portrayed as the savior of the jewish people, when in reality he was a HUGE anti-semite.
i would say that is true about most (if not all) textbooks, but books written by actual historians are generally acurate, or as acurate as can be.
evil zach
04/10/03, 07:04 AM
There are as accurate as possible, but unless you were there, you can only retell what has been told to you.
yeat182
04/10/03, 07:07 AM
Originally posted by evil zach
There are as accurate as possible, but unless you were there, you can only retell what has been told to you.
yeah, totally. i agree that you shouldn't get all your history from your 9th grade text book. all it is, is headlines. its like watching the trailer to a movie and claiming you know what its all about...
Originally posted by yeat182
yeah, totally. i agree that you shouldn't get all your history from your 9th grade text book. all it is, is headlines. its like watching the trailer to a movie and claiming you know what its all about...
nice analogy!!!!
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
I kind of understand being against the war, well not really, but when they spray paint monuments to people who died for there FREEDOM i cant understand that, and to top it off they spray painted Nazi signs and symbols on them, i mean are these FRENCH so fucked up that they don't understand that they would be under Nazi control with out the help of England?
No wonder these leaders can stay in power, the school systems obviously dont teach the truth or history, and the news agency are all owned by the government, so its no wonder that teh poor french people dont understand there surroundings.
ha! what about the french who came to aid america in the revolutionary war?
...no that never happenned... fuck france.
and about the second parograph, the same thing can be said about america.
yeat182
04/11/03, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by blaarg
ha! what about the french who came to aid america in the revolutionary war?
...no that never happenned... fuck france.
and about the second parograph, the same thing can be said about america.
i think we've more than repaid our debt to the french...
Justin_stacy
04/11/03, 07:33 PM
Originally posted by blaarg
ha! what about the french who came to aid america in the revolutionary war?
...no that never happenned... fuck france.
Whats your piont, one happened 200yrs ago and the other happened 50 yrs ago. We saved the grandparents and parents of those that spray painted those monuments. And very few french man died in the revolutionary war, thousands of americans and british died in both wwI and wwII.
Also saying fuck the french is much different from distroying a cemetary.
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
Whats your piont, one happened 200yrs ago and the other happened 50 yrs ago. We saved the grandparents and parents of those that spray painted those monuments. And very few french man died in the revolutionary war, thousands of americans and british died in both wwI and wwII.
Also saying fuck the french is much different from distroying a cemetary.
it doesn't matter how long ago it took place, if france hadden't supported america we wouldn't be around to fight the war they disaprove of. very few french sokldiers died because they only came in with troops at the end (wich is what caused the british to surrender) but they supported america with supplies from just about the start.
it's going a little past saying "fuck france" people are boycoting anything from france simply because they don't agree with this war that we shouldn't be fighting to begin with.
yeat182
04/12/03, 03:44 AM
Originally posted by blaarg
it doesn't matter how long ago it took place, if france hadden't supported america we wouldn't be around to fight the war they disaprove of. very few french sokldiers died because they only came in with troops at the end (wich is what caused the british to surrender) but they supported america with supplies from just about the start.
it's going a little past saying "fuck france" people are boycoting anything from france simply because they don't agree with this war that we shouldn't be fighting to begin with.
1. we also supported the french revelution, so we are even. and we also rescued them from germany in the first world war. we then did it again in the second world war, when we liberated their conquered nation. and then we gave them billions and billions of dollars to rebuild their destroyed nation following the war, and fought to get them a seat on the UN security council. We also allowed them to enter NATO without signing the mutual protection agreement. I consider our debt to the French paid, and if anything, they owe us...
2. people are saying "fuck america" and are boycotting and protesting anything american simply because they don't agree with this war...but i guess thats ok?
Originally posted by yeat182
1. we also supported the french revelution, so we are even. and we also rescued them from germany in the first world war. we then did it again in the second world war, when we liberated their conquered nation. and then we gave them billions and billions of dollars to rebuild their destroyed nation following the war, and fought to get them a seat on the UN security council. We also allowed them to enter NATO without signing the mutual protection agreement. I consider our debt to the French paid, and if anything, they owe us...
2. people are saying "fuck america" and are boycotting and protesting anything american simply because they don't agree with this war...but i guess thats ok?
they may "owe" us but not by fighting an imperialistic war. if america was at risk or under attack then they would help. since we shouldn't even be fighting this war why get mad at the french for not helping?
people are saying "fuck america" because america is fighting an unnecessary war and boycoting french products for not assisting when 1) their assistance isn't needed and 2) the war shouldn't be going on to begin with.
yeat182
04/12/03, 04:05 AM
except this war should be going on...
Originally posted by yeat182
except this war should be going on...
if this war is necessary for us (wich it isn't) why would the french have an obligation to intervene? it's not their war they have no place in it. as i said before: if america was at risk they would help but we aren't so they don't need to.
if this war is so necessary; give me one good reason for it.
yeat182
04/12/03, 08:52 AM
Originally posted by blaarg
if this war is necessary for us (wich it isn't) why would the french have an obligation to intervene? it's not their war they have no place in it. as i said before: if america was at risk they would help but we aren't so they don't need to.
if this war is so necessary; give me one good reason for it.
1. Saddam has broken 17 UN resolutions...
Stompemplay
04/12/03, 08:56 AM
yea
Justin_stacy
04/12/03, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by blaarg
if this war is necessary for us (wich it isn't) why would the french have an obligation to intervene? it's not their war they have no place in it. as i said before: if america was at risk they would help but we aren't so they don't need to.
if this war is so necessary; give me one good reason for it.
France has no obligation to fight, infact we didn't ask for there help.
Justin_stacy
04/12/03, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by blaarg
it doesn't matter how long ago it took place, if france hadden't supported america we wouldn't be around to fight the war they disaprove of. very few french sokldiers died because they only came in with troops at the end (wich is what caused the british to surrender) but they supported america with supplies from just about the start.
Actually, i not tring to be a dick here but, britian actually gave up the revolutionary war because of fear of all out war in europe which they couldn't win with more then half there troops in America and India. Not because the french brought a few troops over here.
And France didn't supply us with supplies until more then 1 year into the revolutionary war, when there was at least a little proof that we could beat the british.
Justin_stacy
04/12/03, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by blaarg
they may "owe" us but not by fighting an imperialistic war. if america was at risk or under attack then they would help. since we shouldn't even be fighting this war why get mad at the french for not helping?
people are saying "fuck america" because america is fighting an unnecessary war and boycoting french products for not assisting when 1) their assistance isn't needed and 2) the war shouldn't be going on to begin with.
Why shouldn't the war be going on, i mean i know you personally take FREEDOM forgranted but why shouldn't other people get a shot at it?
Originally posted by yeat182
1. Saddam has broken 17 UN resolutions...
i guess that justifies bush fighting a war WITHOUT U.N. APPROVAL.
kinda makes you think... bush is fighting a "war" on terrorism, while at the same time fighting a war without u.n. approval or ever declaring war, making the war on iraq nothing more than state funded terrorism.
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
Why shouldn't the war be going on, i mean i know you personally take FREEDOM forgranted but why shouldn't other people get a shot at it?
it's not our war, america only overthrows selective dictatorships, selective meaning the ones that don't do buisness with us.
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
Actually, i not tring to be a dick here but, britian actually gave up the revolutionary war because of fear of all out war in europe which they couldn't win with more then half there troops in America and India. Not because the french brought a few troops over here.
And France didn't supply us with supplies until more then 1 year into the revolutionary war, when there was at least a little proof that we could beat the british.
one of the things that made the english think europe would break out in war is the french intervening.
Justin_stacy
04/12/03, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by blaarg
one of the things that made the english think europe would break out in war is the french intervening.
Thats what i said.
Justin_stacy
04/12/03, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by blaarg
i guess that justifies bush fighting a war WITHOUT U.N. APPROVAL.
kinda makes you think... bush is fighting a "war" on terrorism, while at the same time fighting a war without u.n. approval or ever declaring war, making the war on iraq nothing more than state funded terrorism.
Why do you guys up so much faith in the UN, what has it done in the past say twenty years to help one group of people? The UN is just one big corrupt socialist "one world order" type government and that is the last thing we need in this world.
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
Thats what i said.
yea, had they have not intervened england wouldn't think eorpoe would break out in war, so it's arguable that we wouldn't be america without the french.
remember that next time you go and bash the french for not fighting this war. (directed at everyone who seems to think making fun of the french is the 'cool' thing to do)
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
Why do you guys up so much faith in the UN, what has it done in the past say twenty years to help one group of people? The UN is just one big corrupt socialist "one world order" type government and that is the last thing we need in this world.
Originally posted by yeat182
1. Saddam has broken 17 UN resolutions...
Justin_stacy
04/12/03, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by blaarg
yea, had they have not intervened england wouldn't think eorpoe would break out in war, so it's arguable that we wouldn't be america without the french.
Ya, but the wouldn't be a simi-democratic france with out america (and im talking about our revolution here not ww1 or ww2), because seeing what we did to the british gave the french peasants the idea to rise up.
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
Ya, but the wouldn't be a simi-democratic france with out america (and im talking about our revolution here not ww1 or ww2), because seeing what we did to the british gave the french peasants the idea to rise up.
i know, i never said "america never helped france" cuz i know we did but this just isn't there place to help us, we aren't at any risk and we don't need it.
Justin_stacy
04/12/03, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by blaarg
i know, i never said "america never helped france" cuz i know we did but this just isn't there place to help us, we aren't at any risk and we don't need it.
I totally agree we didn't ask for there help here and we don't want it nor need it, i mean the last thing we need is soliders running back to kuwait (just a joke.).
EmoMoose86
04/12/03, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by blaarg
i guess that justifies bush fighting a war WITHOUT U.N. APPROVAL.
What about Kosovo?
Clinton never touched the UN security council when that war happened. --- plus, it would have been rejected if he did- Russia would not want a fellow Slavic nation to be attacked.
There are also a number of aggresions in the past that have gone on without UN approval.
Its a weak argument.
yeat182
04/12/03, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by blaarg
i guess that justifies bush fighting a war WITHOUT U.N. APPROVAL.
kinda makes you think... bush is fighting a "war" on terrorism, while at the same time fighting a war without u.n. approval or ever declaring war, making the war on iraq nothing more than state funded terrorism.
Saddam broke the cease fire agreement with us, not with the UN. that agreement demanded that he abide by the UN resolutions, which he did not do, and thus he broke his agreement with us, giving us the right to enforce that agreement...
vBulletin v3.6.0, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.