Nor have I.

Nor have I. Basically all I am saying is that intimidating other coutries [like they did with the EU countries, as said in my link] and dealing with a terrorist regeme is a horrible thing. How faulty my reasoning is.

CP

They asked European Union nations to remain silent on the issue, which was largely misreported here in the United States as the French demanding European nations "shut up" if they wanted any chance in joining the European Union. And it hasn't been but a couple days since we discussed the French being no more guilty of trading with terrorist regimes than the United States. When you rely on misrepresented data you rely on faulty reasoning. When two nations behave in the same manner and you defame one, while simultaneously glorifying the other, you're practicing hypocrisy (i.e: faulty reasoning). But that's your right of free speech.

The French basically do what is right for the French.

It is also true to say that there has long been an anti-american impulse - or rather an anti-Anglo-Saxon impulse - running through the French body politic.

When the European Exchange rate mechanism fell apart in the early 1990s, it was the French elite who started blaming crude Anglo-Saxon capitalists for the "conspiracy". It was even rumoured in the press that the French secret service was being asked to find out who had undermined the system.

Don't forget this is a country that has a pathological paranoia about being swamped by lower cultures (as they see them) and again that usually refers to Anglo-Amercian culture and capitalism. They wring their hands about the loss of their language to "les rosboeufs" and have a funded body to conserve the language from further corruptions such as "Le weekend".

The French see the EU as a Greater France. It is their baby and has their DNA and values running through it's institutions. When Chirac effectively told the new EU aspirant nations to 'shut up' about supporting the US in Iraq, it was because those nations were articulating a different view to the French and by extension (in France's view) a different view to EU.

Some years ago, the BBC made a drama-documentary about the EU about 50 years into the future. The title of the programme said it all - "War with America". It extrapolated (apparently using the input of economic and political commentators) the trends within the EU and came up with a menacing superpower where many British europhiles were disillusioned, French people were rioting and attacking icons of American culture, and Britain was ready to pull out due to the threat of an Atlantic war and thereby cause this monster to collapse.

You should be sceptical of French motives.

You should be sceptical of the EU.

You should support those in Britain who wish to undermine the EU's very existence.

How do you know that that's what they meant Abs? I've told you that on the surface the acts look the same, but the reasoning is different [i.e. paying countries off for damages that they might suffer].

CP

Because the French asked them to remain silent. It was misrepresented here in the states in news articles as the French telling European nations to "shut up." They either mistranslated it leading to that misrepresentation or did so intentionally.

It was a far cry from American tactics present during the 1991 Gulf War when Yemen was opposed to American intervention in Iraq. The American ambassador told the Yemeni ambassador at the time that a "no" vote would be the "most expensive no vote you ever cast." Good on our word, we cut funding to their country within three days time. It's unlikely anybody forgot that example this time around.

Coalition of the Willing or Coalition of the Coerced?
The above link is a .pdf file but it may be of some interest if you choose to read it. Most of the nations who supported us were very dependent on us for financial or military aid and would not have been able to afford a repeat of the Yemeni situation. As I said earlier, pot calling the kettle black. But then again, as I also said, you're more than entitled to occupy a distinctly hypocritical position if you are so inclined.

Abs like Jesus,

I think you need to check your facts on what Chirac said. Even the BBC described Chirac's "attack" on EU-aspirant nations as "stinging".

Yes the phrase "shut up" was used but even if it hadn't been, the entire thrust of Chirac's attack was to effectively tell them to shut up.

If it was reported wrongly in America, then it was reporetd wrongly everywhere else too..........

BBC story on Chirac's attack on new EU nations

No, Chirac didn't really say "shut up"

Beyond that, I don't consider his words to have been either intimidating or bullying. Beyond saying they missed an opportunity to remain quiet, he considered their behavior irresponsible and thought it reckless of them to align with the U.S. position so quickly. He addressed in particular those countries awaiting entrance into the European Union, but it doesn't appear to me that he ever threatened their chances of entering the EU, or suggested that their admittance would be opposed as a result of their stance.

There has certainly appeared to be no change in the status of those countries seeking admission and no further disagreements between those countries and France (that I'm aware of). A considerable difference from the blatant intimidation tactics used by our government only 12 years ago -- which was followed through on within three days.

Even had France resorted to intimidation tactics or straight out bullying, such an argument against them from our country would indeed be a hypocritical one.

Come off it !

The approach of picking apart prceise translations is missing the point. British politicians and diplomats often say things which, to the layman are rather innocuous, but in diplomatic-speak are "vicious" and "stinging",

There is no doubt whatsoever in the EU that Chirac was angry and wanted these countries to shut up. In diplo-speak that is precisely what he did. There was never a suggestion that he had the right to stop them entering the EU or anything else (although as President of France, he does have serious clout in the EU).

He still told them to shut up though and everyone - throughout the EU - got the message loud and clear.

It is? I thought picking apart translation, especially since it may have not been said in English, would probably help clarify what was actually said.

So President Chirac said "Taissez-vous" or "Tais-toi" to the Eastern European nations. He also said on interviews televised for the American people that France had been in similar situations to the impending war on Iraq, and that Europe was concerned that America would suffer the same negative consequences that they had suffered.

Some might see this as arrogance. Others see this as probably true, and that we probably should have listened to France and Germany.

In any case, Bush was in no mood to listen to any dissenting opinions, and into the war we rushed with faulty documentation as "evidence" and before having a workable post-war plan.

Was any of this the fault of the Gallic president or his people? Je pense que non (I think not).

OK then. Next time Mr Blair states that he is "disappointed" about something in international affairs, we can be assured that he is a bit fed up and walking around moping. However the press will report that he is "angry". Presumably at that point the International Herald Tribune or some other worthy paper will wheel out an English Linguist to explain how Blair never said he was "angry". He only said he was "disappointed"..........

There is no doubt at all about the message Chirac was conveying. I don't recall the French govt complaining about gross mis-reporting by the world's press after Chirac said what he said

Ok, so the basis of the extreme anti-French reaction in America is on a one word verbal attack by a emotionally upset French president?

Cherac was wrong to tell the East Europeans to "shutup" and I'm sure he regrets that. But does that alone mean that Americans should boycott travelling to France, destroying French wine and being rude to French people?

I don't think so.

There is something that was totally darkened in your discussion on france dealing with Irak, it's that it was authorized by the UN to some extend to deal with it (oil against food, medicines, etc ...) and that France didn't do anything forbidden by the embargo.
And as for the "evidences" on france giving passports to Irak dignities, there were hoaxes (They always have been in Irak, and the us troops are finding them now).

For the ones who have not found out yet, I'm not american, but French, and I want to defend a bit the french against all the sneering and slanders I read here. I will try to explain some of the cliché that continue to exist over the french, as it seems impossible to make people changing their minds about the Irak war.
First of all, let's go with the cliché of the french rudeness : we are not rude, we are just not americans, so we act differently, and something you might consider rude is not for french people. And for the story of the hair on a pizza, I think I would have reacted exactly in the same way than the waiter : after all, what proofs do you have that it's not your own one? That you are trying to have a free half pizza? Nothing
I totally agree with what some people said in this forum : it is somewhat annoying to see tonns of tourists coming and behaving as if they were in a conquest country, not respecting traditions and complaining about everything that is not right (and that's exactly the same when european tourists come to the USA). Just an exemple: have you ever heard about the pamplona feria in Spain? Everyone has to wear white clothes with a red scarf over the shoulders, but there were many people that were not respecting the tradiction, recording everything with a video camera. And guess what? They were americans, and it was obvious that the spanish were looking at them in an oddly way. I am not anti american at all, it's just an exemple to show you that sometimes apparent rudeness is just a cultural misunderstanding between people, or a lack of knowledge, but in no way a characteristic of the people.
And for the socialist thing, I think the french are proud of it, because many believe in the national "Liberté, égalité, fraternité", with an equal importance between the liberty and the two others (And it seems that it works to some extend, as French health care system, for exemple, was ranked number one by the World health organization a few year ago)
Some say we are immoral and are afraid to do the right thing at the right moment. I think this is not true, and that what I'm going to say is also true for mostly all europeans country: on the contrary to what many believe, we don't forget the past, and that's the point, we remember what happen when some people declare to have moral superiority, to be the good ones, and it's not good: ever heard about inquisition in spain? The religion wars? The colonization? and so on until the bush administration.
I wanted to add that France (and the rest of Europe) is not an american colony, we are free people who chooses freely their government, and we do not have to follow whatever the american gov say, unless you give us the right to vote to the US election.

And to cheer my american friend here, americans are still welcome in france (and in europe in general), we know that everyone doesn't think that way, don't believe what you see on TV, americans are not harassed, it's actually the contrary, because people want to show you that you are welcome here, just don't take it personnaly, I had (and still have) many problems with parisian waiters, there are a bunch of swindlers and robbers, but we all have to deal with it.

PS : excuse my english

Just a thing : what do you think of the retaliations that the US promised (like cutting military aid) to the country that would not sign a bilateral treaty placing US citizens out of the International Criminal Court juridiction?
Isn't that looking like a threat ?

Boulou,
No one has slandered the french, we're merely pointing out their governemnts qualities.

reread some of you post (I don't remenber exactly which ones) and tell me if you were not slandering?

Slander can only be committed against entire countries or governments of those countries in this country. No slander has been committed here. That is a violation of the rules here and should be reported if it actually happens.

This, for exemple, is something that might be called a slander, it was denied by the french authorities, by the US government, it doesn't lie on a single evidence and is highly accepted as a slander against france.
There were many others that I'm not going to raise here, and maybe, for the admistrators of this forum it is not, but for me it is.

Excuse me, maybe it would have been better if I had talked about slanders against france, even if talking of the french as cowards and rude people might be consider as a slander (It's possible too that i take too personnaly the slanders against my country)

These are some of the claims made by people on this thread:


(John Locke)

(John Locke)

(Conservapat)

Are these not slander against the French people? Even if there not, they seem totally unfair to the French people, who only dared to critise American policy.

Boulou38, I agree with you. I wonder whether the anti-French campaign was actually done partly by the people to externalise their own realisation that their governments got into a total mess in Iraq, so blaming the "messenger" somehow makes them feel better. Either way, this xingoistic nonsence makes Americans look bitter and twisted throughout the world

Sorry, a truth is a truth.

We provided links to prove all of them.

Opinion is not proof.

Links that ALL the french are cowards and rude? How ridiculous, since my own personal experience contradicts that the french are rude. How can it be a fact, when someone else's experience says otherwise? OH because its an opinion.

The few times I was able to go to France back in the 80's, I had a great time.
Probably having a French friend to take us around helped, but I found everybody to be quite friendly.

I still have issues with the government, but I don't hold that against it's citizens.

I stand by everything I have ever said about the french. Continue to ask for evidence and even continue to report me and my American loving, french hating cohorts....but we have posted evidence for all the claims we've made. Just read the whole thread. Besides, most of what we posted were political reasons and most of those were very up to date.
I still hate france

I wouldn't call that evidences if I were you, evidences would be some official (or off the record) documents signed by either the french governement and the Iraki governement on the subject, so were are these documents? The links you provided just link to articles written by well know france haters journalists that only quote an official source as evidences, as for the roland missile thing, the production have been stoped more than ten years ago, it is so impossible than the french sold some in 2002.
just take a look a this site , all your so called evidences are proved false one by one, but maybe than the counter evidences were not produced in the american press?
Miquelon.org - the view from france - stop france bashing

Slander, give-me-a-break. What I said about the French [meaning the French gov't] is 100% accurate, if you don't like it, tis a shame, but the truth hurts sometimes.


Abs, as much as I like being patronized , it is obvious that you are not paying attention to what I am saying, it's all about whether you are pro or anti, this war. If you are pro-war, such as myself, the USA's "Bribery" was just, because the war is just, so please, stop patronizing me .

Not once have I said that the French people, normal, everyday French people, are horrible or anything, and if you can't face the facts and understand that the French have been immoral, that's a shame.

CP

JohnLocke

You really are the most unbending, bigotted bloke I have ever met, and that includes me.

I am an ex-pat englishman living in Australia who has a few more reasons than you to hate the French and Germans....go check it out when you have time.
Start well before your war of independance and tell me who helped you then and who were at war with each other for the previous 80yrs.

Just remember your mates on the way up 'cos as sure as your bum points to the ground, they will remember you on the way down.

Regards....Alan

I'm sorry, but a journalist claiming something is not a proof, and I think that it's you who don't want to see the truth where it is. (Have you taken a look to the site I provided the link? I don't think so)
For the french anti-semitism thing, have you ever heard of Léon Blum? He was the prime ministre and the first to be jew but this was in 1936 !!!!! Since this, there were a lot of ministers, prime ministres, who were jew, strange for a country famous for his anti-semitism, isn't it? Call me when there will be a jew american president.

I'm gonna say this once more, just to clear this up, I have no problem with most French people, just as I have no problem with most people in general. I only have a problem with the French gov't and those in France who hate America, I have probided links to prove my points as facts, they are facts.

CP

Why can't you understand that your links don't prove anything? If you want, I can provide you links that link to sites which prove that the world trade center and the pentagon were bombed by CIA agents, but is that a fact however? Absolutely not, but maybe you want to take into consideration only things that go in your direction.

Um yeah. Dude, they're what Chirac said, and what the French gov't has done. There really isn't much to say if you can't understand that you're gov't hasn't been choir boys over the past couple o' years. I understand my gov't has done some stupid and immoral things, time to face the truth.

CP

I was not talking about that, and everyone used to deal with saddam, not especially the french (Donald Rumsfeld sold bacteriological and chemical weapons to saddam too), the germe, the russion, the british, everyone

The difference being the US and Britain are trying to remedy there mistakes and take away those WMD from Iraq.

CP

What WMDs??? Have they found some recently? I am not aware of such a discovery, but this is not the topic of this forum, which is hating france

Well, you just said that we gave them to Iraq, didn't you?

CP

And they were distroyed during the first war and during the 7 years of inspections that followed, but as I said, this is not the topic of this forum

No, but it is a connected topic. Anyway, my point is, that if we find WMD or not we know that France has dealt with SH and has done nothing to stop Sadaam from enjoying the luxeries that the French gov't has provided him without any interference, that isn't right.

CP

WMD's are not the topic for this discussion, we have other threads to debate that. Please don't respond to an off topic post with another off topic post.

The question for debate HERE is: Hating France

http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/...cle.asp?ID=9129
Do people really believe in that? If they do, it's really sad.

No, nor have JohnLocke or I have said that the French people are savages, my problem is with the gov't. I've said that many, many times. The French gov't has fed Saddam and his gov't with the money needed to keep their terrrorist regeme satisfied, not good.

CP

That article was such bigotry. And it proves nothing.

A foreigner could find the dregs of our culture (especially in New York City and LA) and write a similar article about the depraved Americans. There's an old saying to remember: When you point at someone, there are three fingers pointing back at you!

Could it be at all possible that some Americans see France as arrogant, bigotted and as self rightuous as themselves and don't like the vision?.

Just a thought.

Regards.....Alan

While you have made the statements that you dont hate the French people, JohnLocke has indeed made those statements. I would suggest that you stop assuming his intentions. Quotes from JohnLocke:



It seems there is little distinction between government and people when it comes to JohnLocke's arguments. If he doesnt like them, so be it, but I still contend that its stupid to hate a group of people for stuff you read in an article that is completely biased. Thats like me saying I hate all Israelis, when nothing could be further from the truth.

AlanWood,
I'm glad you see fit to call out America for her history, need we go into
the history of Australia as well?

Boulou,
You don't have to like America, but if you live on this planet you do
have to live under our economy and our capitolist standards as we
practically own and set the standards for everything. The choice is left up
to each individual whether or not to love us or hate us.... but if you live
in this world, you're going to eat our food, succomb to our culture and
be infected with our righteousness

Although that wasnt directed at me, it is incredibly arrogant and WRONG, to tell someone from another country that if they live in this world they have no choice but to deal with American Imperialism. And I dont think youre entirley educated on how Europe works, especially France, MOST of their produce comes from the EU if its sold in the grocery store, and if its in a market (because you cant throw a dead cat without hitting a market in France) the produce actually comes from farmers, or other locals in France, along with cheese, wine, bread, and meat (fish included). In America, you cant say that about the meat or fruit or wine. In fact, France has a thriving culture that has NOTHING to do with America, that plenty of American tourists support with their money. They have publicly owned cinemas, and when you go to a privately owned theater part of the money goes to fund other French film makers. They dont need to succumb to American culture, and I should hope you dont seriously think that ANY other country should have to succumb on America for survival or for cultural needs.

I am disgusted to have even read that.

Excuse me, but where did I say that I don't like america????? Nowhere, because it is totally wrong, I do like america, but I think the america I like is not the america you like, I like the america which was in Seattle in 1999, who comes to Porto Alegre, which demonstrate against the war, the america which is open minded, which is interested (really interested) in foreign cultures, the tolerant america of the first gay movements, etc ...
And there are parts of america that I don't like, the one of self-righteousness, arrogance, religiosity, to sum up, the one of Georges W Bush.

I dont want this to seem like a pile on, but, John Locke have you ever been to Europe? Your information is astoundingly incorrect. We do not even begin to 'practically own' or set the standards for everything. ' American food ' is an oxymoron exept for corporate peddling of crap that 'some' consider food, certainely not taken seriously in most of the world. Nor are most 'succombing' to our culture, which in contrast to the great history and culture almost all nations have behind them is truly nonexistant. I cant imagine what 'culture' you are speaking of, except 'pop music' or movies, which each nation has its own genre and believe it or not, they listen/view theirs for the most part.
Infected by American righteousness Ill give you, but not necessarily in a positive aspect. I would encourage travel for these sorts of misconceptions, which have been erroneously pounded into American thought for at least 40 years.

Its interesting the tone suddenly turned in this thread, a thread that started out about hating and critisizing France, but when someone from outside critisizes the U.S., well, then dont we get up on a pedestal, the infamous, you dont matter, youre nobody, arguement, however...
France , having supported and fought for our freedom from the British in the Revolutionary war, financed the new US government through unbacked, unsecured loans, sold us the Louisiana Purchase, plus having a culture of their own for at least 1,200 years before ours, might also have a few reasons to 1. Believe in their own culture and ideals. 2. Critisize us as well.

Now with that said, wouldn't the United States, having supported France and fought for their freedom from the Germans in World War II, financed the new French gov't, plus having a culture of our own for at least 300 years, might also have a few reasons to 1. Believe in our own culture and ideals. 2. Critisize them as well?

CP

You are all right. Yes I have been to europe. Several times. I've been to france as well several times. And I take back everything I said. europe isn't absorbing our culture. Of course not, there are not McDonalds all over europe, there is no euro-Disney. There is no need for the American economy. Sure. That must be why france is begging for American tourism by setting up programs like a 10% off card offered to Americans. I know because they keep offering me one. That must be because American tourism (100million dollar/year industry in france) is down 40% in france. It also affected their airshow pretty bad since the American government didn't go. Sellers weren't going to a show where the US Military and Private Business (the largest buyers in the world) weren't going to be. HAHA. The french don't have to admit it, but we know.....the whole rest of the world is reliant on the our economy!!!

CP ,
Might I add that we paid france back in full (thankyou Thomas Jefferson) for the money and support from the french, however if I am not mistaken france never paid us back in full for their immediate defense and the rebuilding of europe. I might also add that france's part in helping America was solely selfish and not a move to help Americans so much as it was to hurt the English. Who's motives out we look at now?