So, American's doing this kind of trading is O.K. but any kind of trading by the French isn't? I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

What's your point? That is, could you elaborate on this?

Must I keep posting the ways in which the french Government oppresses Jews and promotes anti-Americanism? Stop acting as though the french were innocent and America the only guilty party.


And Danya,
You say that morals are subjective, yet you accuse the US of having some sort money grubbing "do for ourselves and burn the rest of the world" mentality. Well, which is it? Do morals exist or is America amoral? Please decide then reply.

Our morals as a nation are listed in our Constitution, Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence. These are things I strongly support...which is what it means to be patriotic to your country and not to your party or candidate or president if they contradict those morals. Obviously we disagree on that so morals are subjective.

And we haven't even begun to start listing the ways our personal morals differ on things like religion and human rights. Those would probably differ more often than not. But I have no interest on forcing you to live by my morals nor should you force yours on me. Because they are subjective.

I hope that came out to make sense...I feel like I was rambling.

VIVE LA FRANCE!!!

I, personally, like France.

Please make sure your posts are constructive to the debate.

I have no idea what this thread is about but on July 4th private citizens in France put one rose on the grave of every American soldier that died there in WWII. I cant hate people like that, even though I sometimes find them annoying.

Anarchy put that extremely well. Pat, you say that we should at least hate their government though. That's not the topic for debate. The topic is: why hate France? The French are great people. In my mind, it just doesn't make sense then why tons of americans all make fun of them, harass them, slander them, and especially, come up with groundskeeper-willy-ish phrases like "cheese-eating surrender monkeys." It just doesn't make sense to me.

Actually, I never suggested that you hate France, I am defending why I do. I don't hate some of the French people, though a large majority of them are anti-American and that is what I dislike. Bean, come on, you don't think that they make fun of us, be realistic. Slander, slander? Everything I've said has been true, thereby not slander. So what's your point? I don't harrass them, and I don't call them stupid names, I fail to see what is so wrong with my view.

CP

Is there anything to support this claim that the majority of the French populace is anti-American? And as to name calling, it seems a juvenile tactic regardless of the practitioner. When last I checked, two wrongs do not make a right, and just because somebody else may call you a name does not mean you must return the favor.

Hold on, I think there is a poll, here's one.
Actually, Most French are indifferent or are anti-American. Most of which are indifferent. However, my point is they voted for Chirac, the French like Chirac, thereby supporting an Anti-American regeme.

CP

Do you have a link for that poll? I can't tell what the numbers are supposed to represent, whether they are the feelings of American or French citizens, or if depicting both.

Jacque Chirac does not appear to be anti-American from where I'm sitting. Nor do the French voters in their support of their leader appear to me to be anti-American. Chirac opposed us on one international issue along with China, Russia, Germany and a host of smaller nations throughout the world. Their opposition in that one regard does not by any means translate into their countries, governments or populations being anti-American.

Edited to add: Actually, if I'm reading it right, it would appear that only 16% of the French polled viewed Americans with distaste. Again, if I'm reading it correctly, it would appear that of those polled, 39% of the French felt sympathy for Americans, 44% said neither and 1% had no opinion. "Most of which" polled were not indifferent or anti-American as you suggest, Pat

How the French feel about us is on the bottom, our feeling for the French is on top.

Sorry, I misspoke. I don't hate all French people. Just those that are anti-American. I dislike the French gov't because it is acting like the Mafia. Bean, this isn't just about the French people, at least it doesn't say that in the title. As I said, there is not excuse for the acts of the French gov't, as a result of these acts, I dislike them, is that so unreasonable.

CP

I figured the poll out, but thanks anyway Pat. As I mentioned before, your conclusions from the poll results were incorrect. If you choose to accept "antipathy" as anti-American sentiment, that is your choice. If you choose to do so, however, it's worth noting that you are only opposed to a mere 16% of their population.

It's not that unreasonable, Pat. It may be useful in the future if you realize that there are those French citizens and other citizens around the globe who dislike our government and some of our people for precisely the same reason. As mentioned earlier, the French are really doing nothing we haven't already done, or don't continue to do today.

Point taken, however, the thread's purpose is for anti-French individuals to explain why they feel as they do. Our gov't has made mistakes in the past, okay, who's hasn't? However, shouldn't we, and everyone else that bore witness to those mistakes learn from them? Just because we've done stupid things in the past, doesn't give those who do them in the future a free pass. Also, you're probably right about us acting as the French are now, but can you give me some examples?

CP

We have given you some examples, Pat. You asked not more than a week ago I believe, and we provided them in direct relation to the arguments you were making against the French. I'm sure you can take a few moments and read back through them. As you've essentially said yourself now, "just because we've done stupid things in the past... doesn't give those who do them in the future a free pass." No more so than it gives those in the present a free pass.

So far what's been said [and links have been provided saying] is that US companies have traded with horrible regemes, I've already said that the US gov't is not to blame, greedy CEOs are. It's also been said [and provided with links] that the French have helped us before, I've said that we've helped the French before also, it's a stalemate, also, that doesn't make the French immune from Anti-French sentiment. What other links are you talking about? I see no such links that prove that our gov't has bullied or bribed.

CP

You're right. It is a stalemate. They are guilty of no more than our own government and businesses are. You complain because the French government didn't intervene in French corporations doing business with Iraq, all the while the U.S. government does little or nothing to intervene in U.S. corporations doing business with other sanctioned regimes.

As to bribing or bullying, if you truly have forgotten, I suppose I could dig up those articles about us trying to bribe Turkey for their support and use of their airspace. I wouldn't think anybody would have forgotten about that so soon...

I'm not talking about corporations, I'm talking about the gov't. The French gov't does business with Iraq, along with Germany, and Russia, I might add.

If a country is going to put the lives of its people at a risk, don't you think it is a moral thing to do by giving them money, is that so horrible?

CP

I think this will be my last post in this pointless argument. The US traded with Iraq as well and in at least one case can be directly tied to the government



Cheney worked in the White House both before and after he ran Halliburton. Don't pretend there aren't any ties. Want more US corporations that traded with Saddam?
CBC

You can continue to hate France all you want. You will anyway.

The US government has most certainly dealt with Iraq. Remeber all those weapons we sold him before Gulf War I? I don't think corporations were doing that ...

Is there actually any evidence that the French governmant dealt with Iraq despite the UN sanctions?

Iraq's business Partners, a shady bunch.
Okay, now that was the info I was looking for. Yes, our VP did do those things, though they are very dumb, again, the thread is about hating Iraq, not our gov't. I think that our gov't has righted that wrong by ousting SH and given the resources that have been traded back to the Iraqi people, so that wrong seems to be righted. Whereas, the French who's gov't has traded with Iraq did not take part of the war didn't seem interested in the Iraqi people, kinda selfish.

Moif: Yes there are, unfortunately I have been unable to locate them, I got that info from another thread, I'll look for it again. Here's the link: Iraq's trading partners.

CP

Freudian slip? I thought it was about how you hated France not Iraq.

Okay. This is my point, and it is very simple, the French are:
A: Not helping us in our war against Iraq because of money.
B: Bribing and threatening other countries to do the same thing.
These acts are not to be taken lightely, and our companies involvements in Iraq, and our providing WMD's to SH, were very very very stupid [and also they were not done by GWB the II, so it is somewhat unrelated], we have kinda, made up for that, considering we are now taking the WMDs out of SH's hands.

CP

Your point, whether you realize it or not, can be summarized rather simply:
"The pot calling the kettle black."
If that's not short enough, hypocrisy might suffice.

It is your right, however, to be a hypocrite and criticize one nation (France) for the very same actions you support another nation (Untied States) of doing.

I fail to see the hypocrisy, France pay people off to not join a war, we pay countries to reimburse them for any civilian losses that they [Turkey] might suffer by entering the war. One is honest, the other isn't.

CP

Conservepat



No where in that article does it say that the French government authorised trade with Iraq...




Well I can accept that as a personal arguement. If you believe that France is duty bound to always assist the USA by some reason or other, then this makes sense.

However, in return, I would question America's motives for waging the war in the first place. I do not believe that this war was fought for the reasons put forward. The PNAC documents show quite clearly that those in the current US government sought to invade and subjagate Iraq well before GW Bush even came to power.

No matter what was said about WMD's, they were never more than an excuse. Had/ If they exist/ed then Bush would have been justified.

If the Iraqis had been liberated, then that also would have been a justification of America's war in Iraq. But as things now stand, then there is no reason to suppose that Iraq has been liberated. The majority of Iraqi's and Arabs in the middle east certainly do not think so.




Please provide an example of a nation which was actually threatened to side with France against the USA.
I think you may be making far too much of Jaques Chirac's comments to the eastern European application nations. They knew just as well as he did that his words in this context were devoid of any credible threat. France alone does not decide who may and who may not join the EU.




Since there are no WMD's found, then this point is invalid.

The French Gov't was trading with them too.

No, but if they are going to disagree with us, they should at least have a decent reason, not just trade and cash.

I've already provided links, and France does have the power to veto nominations, just like they did in the UN.

The war isn't over, that's kinda unfair.

CP

Conservpat



I've seen this claimed several times, both here and else where, but I've yet to see any evidence of it. I've also seen articles which showed that the previous US administrations ALL dealt with Iraq. I'm not sure I accept that either.

Its very easy for some journalist to write up a clever article which 'proves' his point, but I'll with hold judgement until I see something substantial. With regards to both nations.




The majority of the French people did not oppose this war for economic reasons.

People do not take to the streets to demonstrate on behalf of petrochemical company profit margins. No matter what country they are from.
The fact is that Chirac, what ever he himself (or his good friends in ELF) thought of it all, was actually following the will of his people.




The EU does not work like the UN. If France actually used its veto for its own gain in this manner, it would destroy the union. No other EU member state is going to allow France to do that.

My own nation (Denmark) would immedietly vote to leave the union if that happened. France is the most unpopular nation in Europe, and if the French started to throw their weight around, they would soon be called to order.

It is my opinion that Chirac was bluffing.




It doesn't matter. As long as there are no WMD's and no evidence to support the claim that they constituted a direct threat then they cannot be used as any sort of justification.

You provided a link that mentions France, Pat, but it doesn't discern between whether Iraq was trading illegally with the French government or merely with French businesses. If you want to continue claiming corruption in the French government it might be helpful if you provided sources making such a connection.

Remind me again when the French put forth as their reasoning trade and cash. As I recall, their government opted not to support American aggression against Iraq because they thought the inspectors should have been given more time to hunt for WMDs so that a war might be averted. Considering there was no use of WMDs and none have turned up, their reasoning is looking more decent by the day.
There haven't been any weapons found or taken out of Saddam's hands. The point was invalid.

As for the hypocrisy I mentioned previously, Turkey wasn't going to be put at any more risk lending air space than if they didn't. They aren't the only country who were offered or received perks for their "support," whatever form it may have taken. The French had no more financial interest in opposing the war than our government did cheering for it [A]. They no more bribed countries to oppose the war than we did to gain support [B]. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure I heard about the French paying anybody to oppose the war.

They didn't, but neither did the US gov't [so I guess the war for oil arguement is out of the question]. It is easily assumed that France did it for money, because they are Iraq's main trade partner [at least one of them].

SH no longer runs the country, of course the WMDs are no longer in his hands.

What this all comes down to is whether you supported the war, if you don't then Bush is acting immorally. If you support it Bush was paying countries off to support a morally acceptable war. Clearly you didn't and don't support the war, then you will find it immoral, it's that simple.

CP

However Chirac And Hussein were like brothers and Chirac was in charge during the Seventies of setting up Iraq's Nuclear Energy Program, and Iraq was selling oil to france at fourty percent market value and then france would sell it for as much as three times as high on the market and to their own people (it costs a lot to run a socialist country doesn't it?) not to mention that when a french corporation deals with Iraq it's very different from when an American corp does...because we don't keep tabs on every little thing the corps do here in America because bussiness is set up to be from government rule a heck of a lot more than in france (because they are socialists). All this however and I still could care less. The main thing that upsets me aside from these few petty things and the slew of other stuff I've listed including the french's anti-semetic stances. But what really upsets me is the Cowardice that the french people, government and the rest of europe displayed by taking a hardline stance against the US. Though in the end most countries sided with us their seems to be a very real problem here. What happened to fighting for causes you believe in? What happened to warring for your chance to see people grow up free? what happened to taking a stand against government oppression and Empirical rule? The Hellens knew very well what they stood to lose every time they took up arms side by side with their brothers, but it didn't matter. All that mattered was the right to be free from a ruler or whole set of them. Where is the european dignity? How can one be proud to be of any european
country when they are afraid to stand up for their own freedom? Oh I know how....The US will just come fight for you...again and again and again, because we know the price of freedom is high, but well worth it. The Greeks would roll over in their graves at the sight of any frenchman.

So because Chirac was in charge at a time when relations in Iraq were common place they were like brothers? By that logic we could lump Donald Rumsfeld and George W.H. Bush into that family tree. You mention the mark up in price as though that's something unique. I thought that was common place both in French and in American business ventures.

It was cowardice to oppose the most powerful nation in the world and opt out of fighting against an undersized, ill-prepared fighting force in Iraq? And from what I recall, the French and others didn't believe in going to war with Iraq. They said as much and stood their ground.

They haven't to my knowledge demonstrated any aversion to standing up for their own freedom. And despite their failing to turn back aggressing armies in the past, that does not translate into the French being afraid to stand up for their own freedom. Seems to me you're resorting to nothing more than cheap mud slinging.

johnlocke



It was hi jacked by Osama Bin Laden.

In Europe, the bulk of the people do not believe in war. Its as simple as that. We do not believe that war can solve an issue. The difference between us and you is that we actually know what war is. We don't need Veterans Day and Hollywood films to tell us what it is, we can still remember when our cities were flattened, our countries annexed and our people dragged off to the extermination and labour camps. Europe has been a bloody battleground for all of two thousand years and the scars from the last war are not yet healed so why should we be so eager to rush into yet another war, just because some war eager politician from the United States demands it?

Before you taunt us with cowardice, living in your safe comfortable nation, perhaps you'd like to actually try living through a war, or with the aftermath of one.




War kills people. It does not set them free.




Ask the Iraqi's who are apparently trying to free their nation of unwanted 'help'...




Alive and well.

I am proud to be a European. I am proud that my nation supported the USA, but I am equally proud of my fellow Europeans who had the courage of their convictions and the casual slurs of an American (note caps) make no difference to me or any other European. We will stand by what we believe, regardless of how strong or powerfull the USA is.

Here is an interesting article from the International Herald Tribune regarding American perceptions of Europe;

http://www.iht.com/articles/101523.html

Where's your proof that they make fun of us? I never saw or heard a single person over there make fun of americans or america in any way. Almost all of them speak english, and there are tons of ads in public places: the street, metro system, bulletin boards, museums, etc. for student exchange programs to send people to america to study, get a job, and even live there. The French people don't really hate americans at all.

I clarified that earlier, I only dislike the French gov't and the French people who hate the US, this is in no way unreasonable at all. The French gov't has done what it's done, and now they have to face the reaction of the rest of the world.

CP

The rest of the world? Who else is reacting negatively toward France or renaming fast food items? While some people may have felt some justification in criticizing the French -- even going so far as to say they hate them -- it would appear it only took root in America. From everything I saw or continue to see today, it's us who is having to "face the reaction of the rest of the world."

There is no way of knowing that Abs, maybe we're the most vocal, but that doesn't mean we're the only one's by any extent.

CP

Being vocal about it is what counts, Pat. Nobody in the world cares if you hate the French as long as you don't vocalize about it at all or too much. But when it's taken to the extent that the US has taken it, with freedom fries and whatnot, then it becomes an issue.

Oh I see, I can think whatever I want, as long as I don't express it, three cheers for freedom of expression/speech, hip hip hooray.

CP

We're also forgetting the anti-American rallies in Paris too, but I guess those are okay, right?

CP

Weren't they anti-war rallies, Pat?

That's what they were called, and that's what they were until there were visable pictures of GW with a Hitler moustache, devil horns, ect.
Let's take a look at some anti-Bush signs, shall we:
The *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** of Evil (Pictures of Bush, Rice and Rumsfeld)
Buck Fush (and, Duck Fubya)
Liar! Liar! If there're no smoking gun, How come my pants are on fire?

These slogans from http://www.witherspoonsociety.org/02-12/si...f_the_times.htm

CP

Sounds like you might have a case for extending anti-war rallies to include anti-Bush rallies, but none of those slogans say anything against Americans as a whole. We had many of those same slogans here in America. Besides this, I would again offer my opinion that attempting to justify a wrong with a wrong doesn't justify it at all, and indeed is descending to the level of juvenile. Work with whatever reasoning you like, though.

I was simply stating that we aren't the only ones who have strong feelings against a gov't. It's not like we are the only ones being "juvenile" about it. France hasn't exactly been little angles through this whole period of time [before the war, during the war], so give me a good reason not to dislike it.

CP

That's a very acute observation.

Sorry, couldn't resist. No offense intended, and I did mean it in both senses of the word.

LOL. Okay I'll write this so everyone can understad, France hasn't been little since the war started, happy Platypus

CP

You're going to dislike France regardless of what I say. I've already said, however, that you are free to dislike them and say whatever you will. That won't change the poor reasoning you seem to put behind it, but you are free to do so anyway. The French government did not -- to my knowledge at least -- openly insult our entire country, claim that we should no longer be, or no longer were, allies, or any of the other measures our elected officials took to demonize our French friends.

But hey, Jesus could walk through Paris giving a seal of approval for a nation opposed to war and violent resolution and you'd still probably scoff at them. That's your right, however faulty your reasoning may be.