US voices 'concerns' at sale of French warships to Russia

originally posted by: namehere
why don't people get that russia is our real enemy and has been since 1912

Current proof please?... REAL PROOF that they are your enemies... not some national MSM national source please.

Kindest respects

Rodinus

originally posted by: Rodinus

originally posted by: namehere
why don't people get that russia is our real enemy and has been since 1912

Current proof please?... REAL PROOF that they are your enemies... not some national MSM national source please.

Kindest respects

Rodinus

LMAO

Are you for real?

What about the Cold War?

What about WWII and prior to that even?

Or was it all just a big joke?

What about the soviets and Russians funding and selling weapons to every enemy the west has?

My word are you really trying to deny reality and history?

Please for your own benefit do some research and brush up on your history instead of conspiracy and fantasy

originally posted by: TritonTaranis


What about the Cold War?

Or was it all just a big joke?

Actually it was

At least after Stalin death.

It was akin to two bickering school kids arguing who idea was right.

No reason the USA + allies and USSR couldn't not have just shut up after Stalin death and coexist in there separate parts of the world rather than conduct the biggest and most expensive penis waving competition in history.

I'm thinking it's a smart move on the part of France. France isn't going to be 'France' anymore rather soon. Their immigration policies are making sure of that. I can see Russia coming in to help France when the fruits of those immigration policies come crashing down. Russia and France will share a common problem with extremists so France might as well arm up Russia ahead of time to help them with the coming problems.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: TritonTaranis


What about the Cold War?

Or was it all just a big joke?

Actually it was

At least after Stalin death.

It was akin to two bickering school kids arguing who idea was right.

No reason the USA + allies and USSR couldn't not have just shut up after Stalin death and coexist in there separate parts of the world rather than conduct the biggest and most expensive penis waving competition in history.

Perhaps you don't understand the rivalry either then...

There opposing policy's and aspirations will keep them competing until it reaches boiling point... They have been doing so since the turn of the 19th century

The US and the USSR didn't just come to odds after WW2. Tensions between the Soviet Union and the Western, capitalist states went back long before WW2 - for instance, the US didn't officially recognize the Soviet Union until 1933, many years after the revolution that overthrew the Russian monarchy; Western capitalist countries supported the anti-Bolshevik "Whites" after the 1917 revolution; Britain and the USSR were regularly accusing one another of subterfuge and meddling in one another's internal affairs; both Lenin and Stalin were tremendously distrustful of the West; countries in the West felt quite threatened by the possible spread of Soviet and Bolshevik influence westward.

The alliance between the three main allied powers - Britain, the US, and the USSR - was a classic case of, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Throughout WW2, there was a great deal of distrust between Britain and the US on one side, and the Soviet Union on the other (and, to a certain extent, Britain and the US, for that matter). Prior to Germany's invasion of the USSR, the Soviets had a pact with the Germans that allowed for German expansion eastward and Soviet expansion westward, and both had promised not to attack one another. Stalin was quite cooperative with the Nazis up until Operation Barbarossa - continuing to ship raw materials and supplies to the Nazis and trade with them up until the point of invasion, even.

Throughout the course of the war, Stalin was extremely distrustful of his Western allies. Stalin was convinced that Churchill and Roosevelt were delaying the opening of a second, Western front in Europe, leaving the Soviets to fight the Germans alone and suffer massive losses.

The Middle East?

The relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union in the Middle East was governed for more than four decades, from the end of World War II to the end of the Reagan presidency, by the Cold War with all of the attendant assumptions, concepts, institutions and policies essential to "fight" the Cold War. American views of the Soviet Union and of the Soviet bloc, and the policy requirements deriving from that perspective, formed the core of United States foreign and security policy worldwide. Wherever and whenever a policy was framed, and challenges were identified and met, the lens through which the policy was seen had a Soviet filter, with accompanying Cold War assumptions.

This was particularly true in the case of the Middle East, which became a major venue of United States-Soviet Union competition soon after the Cold War began. Over the course of more than four decades, the competition and rivalry of the superpowers in the Middle East was a central if not dominant theme in international relations.

The end of the Cold War and the dismantling of the Soviet bloc in Eastern Europe cast doubt on the assumptions and called into question the policies that were designed to deal with regional issues. Nowhere have these assumptions been more soundly challenged than in the Middle East.

a reply to: JohnTheSmith

Aaah, the good old French bashing.
France has never forgotten and will never forget the sacrifice done by US to send its boys to help Europe (France AND other European countries).
Should I also mention that France itself sent some boys back in the 18th century to support US in its fight for independance? Does Lafayette ring a bell to you?

Your post is full of hate for the French and should get signalled to the mods.
You are just inciting hatred towards a country/people (and it is based on wrong facts).

Also love the way your world is black & white. Perhaps been watching too many hollywood movies?

a reply to: Rodinus

Very nicely put, thank you Rodinus.

originally posted by: JohnTheSmith

The best example i can think of is WW2 , the french laid their arms down to the germans and their so called 'defence' of france lasted 3 days , I find that shocking , as battles are fought for weeks often , but a whole country the size of france was occupied in 3 days ! the only reason it took 3 days not less was because it probably took the germans 3 days to walk through france.

The French and British forces in France at the time of the invasion (apart from the navies, which were useless in a land battle) were totally outclassed, under prepared and using equipment and strategies that could not cope with the new type of warfare that the Germans bought in terms of arms, communications, training and speed. They were set for static warfare.

Think how Iraq faired in '91 and 2003 when faced with modernised western military, thats how outmatched they were.

Having said that the French forces volunteered to stay on the beaches at Dunkirk to hold off the Germans long enough move as many people as possible back across the channel, and the resistance did so much to help the allied war efforts in terms of disruption, intelligence gathering and assisting POW escapees getting back home, often with the potential for brutal reprisals to the civilian populace.

With regard to the invasion of Afghanistan and the second Iraq war which the French opted out of (they were part of the UN measures for the first one) - and suffered a whole load of BS from ignorant people for - how many dead French kids have come back from there exactly fighting for the lies that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair et al put forward?

Lets end the ignorance.

a reply to: JohnTheSmith

We won't be there to take back their country for them this time when their own troops refuse to fight. Cowardly nations do cowardly things, like selling weapons and ships to a potential enemy. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Ignorance or sarcasm?

French troops didn't refuse to fight. French forces were still fighting by 1945. Some did mutiny during the First World War, but I doubt you're referring to that. Even during the First World War the French lost many more men than the United States, who only started to make an impact in the latter half of 1917 and had to rely on British and French equipment.

Your nation sells weapons to all and sundry including repressive regimes like Saudia Arabia etc.

Pot calling kettle!

a reply to: JohnTheSmith

I hope your kiding and behing sarcastic

a reply to: FlyersFan

Russia and France will share a common problem with extremists so France might as well arm up Russia ahead of time to help them with the coming problems.

What are you going on about? What coming problems?

a reply to: neformore

Lets end the ignorance.

Agreed!

a reply to: Rodinus

www.youtube.com...

Just saying

So sad to see this type of ignorance, pretty sad to see theres still people in 2014 so ignorant to post bigoted comments on french people.

Plz good sir learn about other cultures, it will make you a better person.

I feel yucky and im only french canadian

a reply to: Rodinus

The Sea Harrier is somewhat slightly different to the Harrier, ref the F35 which will probably be the worst MRCA in the world when it enters service ..... due to the fact it has STOVL in built on all variants, no work around or design changes on central workings. End

a reply to: neformore

The German's were technologically advanced, far further than most of the Europian nations. I know all about Blitzkrieg. I was just really angry at the French for obvious reasons, you know, like selling Warships to an upcoming enemy of the EU and NATO??

In response to KarmaComa, SoapusMaximus, Kram09 and DukeofJive696969: My initial 'hit piece' i did on the french on the first page at around 4 in the morning before I went to work was not sarcastic, but it was a joke. I don't hate french people. As I've posted over 3x since then, I completely withdrew from my bad attempt at humor of the french.

I even changed my title to Ignorant Bigot to remind me that those kinds of jokes aren't very funny.

Again we have the USA trying to tell people in europe what they can and cannot do.

My guess is that Russia only placed the order as a swetner with the french so that they would not get too upset with the trade imbalance but if you want to argue that the people who built most of the space stations are unable to build ships then sorry but I don't need to listen.

Get the yanks out of Europe and we would all be happy and that includes most americans who are paying for all the US millitary bases all over Europe.

a reply to: JohnTheSmith

Thanks for the update JohnTheSmith...
Unfortunately humour is very rarely working in forums, as we can only read your words, we cannot see your smile, or another hint pointing to your humour...

a reply to: VirusGuard

Or again, we have politicians lying through their teeth trying to get headlines and raise a fuss over nothing at all, and people ready to instantly blame the US for anything.

But a French official, who asked not to be named, told France’s AFP news agency that the US has never taken up the sale and hit back at Nuland.

"The United States, like the Europeans, has never voiced privately any concerns about this," the official said. "And we are anyway used to such thundering declarations from her. She's a neo-con. And the fact that it comes from her is actually reassuring."

Fabius said in March that Paris may cancel the sale if Moscow does not change its policy on the Ukraine crisis.

www.english.rfi.fr...

So we have the FRENCH saying that the US never raised any concerns, and the FRENCH saying the sale may be cancelled if Russia doesn't change its policy. But somehow it's still the US' fault, right? Because it's ALWAYS the US' fault.