It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The French Will Never Forget

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Quote from Terran Blue

Meow.....

Did someone fart on your baguet or something?

Nope but atleast i showed the reason for my disgust with the country with some fact's.

That is more than you showed me when you tried to be critical with my post and failed due to lack of substance.

The lowbrow in me says your a French citizen however if i made such a comment i would indeed be a lowbrow.

Regard's
Lee


[edit on 22-7-2007 by h3akalee]




posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Given time the UK would have definitely fallen to Germany without any men or materiel support from the U.S. Without having to fight the U.S. or Britain, Germany would have been table to eventually nullify Russia as a force with the help of Japan on the east, even if it wasn't truly under control through occupation.

Eventually Japan and/or Germany would have developed the atomic bomb, something the U.S. wouldn't have done if it remained neutral in the war. Most likely they would then try to attack the U.S. and the rest of the Americas, but even if it didn't living in a world where all of Europe, Africa and Asia is under fascist control wouldn't be so great.

[edit on 7/22/2007 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Dj, it probably wouldn't have to come to the UK falling. Had we been on our own for any longer, we would have sued for peace, which is what Hitler wanted with Britain anyway.

Churchill was a fool. A brave fool with noble ideals, but he risked an awful lot for the sake of warring with a country we were not ready to fight.

I'll just quote from another thread I posted on, to illustrate:




But, in the vein of historical accuracy, the reality would have been a ceasefire with Germany and an allowance for them to prosecute whatever they wanted on the continent. Maybe some territorial concessions in the Empire.

After the Battle of Britain was won, Germany realised that they could not actually invade the UK. Not with the given resources and technology of the time. Operation Sea Lion was put on hold indefinitely.

Hitler actually would have preferred peace with Britain and the Empire (and France too). The reality is that Churchill insisted on prosecuting a War we could not realistically win in the long term alone and bankrupted the nation, costing us the Empire in the process. Had we sued for Peace after the Battle of Britain, then things would be a whole lot different. We would have kept the Empire, for one.

I might add that a significant proportion of US public opinion (and arms of Government, including Congress and the State Department) were actually against the UK and pro-Hitler. It took alot of work from the President and some "activity" from British Secret Service types to "sway" opinion....

I am a WW2 buff....


I might add that the combination of the RAF and RN would have dragged the War on for several years.

The fall back plan IF the UK was lost would have been for the King and Government to retreat with the RN to the Empire and continue the war from there.

It was only mainland UK that was threatened.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 10:54 AM
link   
France, during WW2 suffered a severe case of split personality, imo. With the French Underground active against their own countrymen (Vichy Government) as well as their German occupiers, I'd have to assume that there were French of every type... brave, cowardly or indfferent.

To attempt to color a population of any country with broad strokes is always a mistake, whether it's France, United States, England, Scotland or Holland.

The thing people tend to forget is the actual cost in human lives during this war;


Country Men in war Battle deaths Wounded
Australia----1,000,000----26,976-----------180,864
Austria--------800,000----280,000----------350,117
Belgium-------625,000------8,460------------55,513
Brazil-----------40,334---------943-------------4,222
Bulgaria-------339,760-------6,671-----------21,878
Canada----1,086,3437---- 42,042-----------53,145
China------17,250,521--- 1,324,516-------1,762,006
Czechoslovakia----—---------6,683------------8,017
Denmark-------------------— 4,339---------—-------
Finland---------500,000------79,047------------50,000
France-------—-----------201,568----------400,000
Germany---20,000,000--3,250,000--------7,250,000
Greece---—--------------------17,024-----------47,290
Hungary--—----------------------147,435-------89,313
India---------2,393,891----------32,121---------64,354
Italy---------3,100,000-----------149,496-------66,716
Japan--------9,700,000---------1,270,000------140,000
Netherlands---280,000------------6,500-----------2,860
New Zealand---194,000---------11,625---------17,000
Norway---------75,000-------------2,000-------—--------
Poland----—-----------------------664,000--------530,000
Romania-------650,000----------350,000-------—-------
South Africa---410,056--------------2,473---------------—
U.S.S.R.—-----------------------6,115,000------14,012,000
United Kingdom-5,896,000-------357,116--------369,267
United States---16,112,566-------291,557---------670,846
Yugoslavia-------3,741,000--------305,000--------425,000



www.infoplease.com...


There are some factors available on this page which play into these statistics, but as you can see, France paid a heavy price during the occupation.


[edit on 22/7/07 by masqua]



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 12:03 PM
link   
The French don't hate Americans or America. What nonsense. I know the country extremely well as I've lived there and have many French friends.

France and the US share a rivalry over, believe it or not, culture. The young are very attuned to US youth culture, and everyone is always looking to see what the US is up to. There are endless books and magazine articles analyzing all facets of America, it's a staple of French intellectual life.

The French are very proud of their way of life and traditions and yes technology too. They've got super-fast TGV trains, Airbus, and a real space program, and they built an SST with the Brits while we begged off. Much of this is now subsumed in the EC, but they remain the driving force.

As for politics, someone above posted that their politics is the dregs of a beer glass. Well, actually they're rather concerned about the direction we've taken, as is the rest of Western Europe. Politics is a national sport; turn over a rock in France and you'll find politics underneath. But the populace is deeply involved, highly unionized, and fights ferociously to maintain their "social acquisitions"--what we call the safety net. Here, from apathy and brainwashing about unchecked capitalism as some kind of miracle drug, we've let it all be taken away. Now they're working on our fundamental rights.

As for Iraq, Chirac gave the US excellent advice--don't go there, you're get dragged into a quagmire, it's not worth it. Isolate and contain Saddam, he's a tin-horn dictator. The Neocons mocked France mercilessly, but why should France suport the US's madness, and who do you think has the last laugh, though no one in France is laughing over Iraq. They're deeply concerned about the destabilization of the ME, as they should be. And yes they had lots of financial interests and dirty dealings there, but no more than the US, or Germany and Britain.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Of course, every weapon and military vehicle in the Iraqi inventory was either Russian/Eastern European bloc or French. France also had many business deals with Saddam so of course they opposed the invasion, ditto with Russia.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 12:29 PM
link   
I've never harbored any hatred towards the French. I am a quarter French myself on my mother's side, and I appreciate that they've helped us in the distant pass, and the statue of liberty, etc.

Thats really all I have to say.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Double post

[edit on 22-7-2007 by h3akalee]



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChrisF231
Of course, every weapon and military vehicle in the Iraqi inventory was either Russian/Eastern European bloc or French.


And British, American and just about anyone else who ever sold weapons or systems.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by xyankee
Why don't they show it by being polite when we visit there country? My experience is not a positive one. When I visited I happened to get lost and was looking for my hotel, I happen to over hear two people speaking English so I thought I would ask them for help. There response was "no English" and then turned and ignored me!



maybe you should have approached them with

Pardon, madame et monsieur tu parlez anglais?

if they said oui you would have been all good.

I love that people expect the French to know English, but not only know it but speak it when you are present. You ARE IN THEIR COUNTRY!!!!! if you don't want to speak in french... DON'T GO TO FRANCE.

if somebody came up to you only speaking in french (in the States, or in the UK) would you try to communicate with them in french or would you tell them "sorry no french"? Now allowing that same standard to the francophone's you approached is just a bigotted viewpoint.


Coven


P.s. I love how the only people who are posting extreme hatred for the French are those still stuck in the UK. You know my Family came from England, and we love French culture and society. So what are you brits still pissed about?

100 years war?

or because the French had enough sense to stay out of Iraq?
(h3akalee this is directed at you buddy...)

h3akalee wrote:
1) The french government did not want to go to war with the U.K and U.S.A to Iraq not only due to the fact they could not afford it. But due to the fact they supplied Iraq with most of its N.B.C protection.


if this were the case, wouldn't they have agged the war on as to make massive profits? If the Iraqis were such a nuclear threat wouldn't they need all the N.C.B. protection they can get?


h3akalee wrote:
2) The french government did not want to go to war with the U.K and U.S.A due to the fact they were making terrible profit's with there oil for food program.

and where is this program now? IT IS STILL THERE... only the US and UK own it now... great for France, ehh??



My personal opinion is that france is one giant world leach the french would rather role over in submission than protect there own country.. You know what i am saying.

if this is the case, and you are so assured of it... go talk to Al Qaeda and tell them you have a sure fire way to attack the French... I'm sure they'll load you up with explosives and let you walk right into the middle of Paris. the only problem is the French police (Gardien de la paix), or Police Nationale, are going to catch you. They are the best police force in the world(intriguing for a country that isn't concerned about its national security) and French prison is NOT fun... so enjoy




The above is my personal opinion and i am allowed it.

Regard's
Lee


theres an age old saying. Opinions are like rectums.... Everybodies got one, and most people think yours stinks.

tata


Coven



[edit on 22-7-2007 by coven]



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Nice, Chorlton, nice


I can see where this thread is going.

I can't believe that the French felt they needed to do this though. Seriously. Their own resistance and the Free French Force had a big part to play in their own liberation.

I assume this is a move from Sarkhozy to show he is "pro-Anglo..."

EDIT: It seems wholly "un-French" to do something like this as well. Very much a "show for Americans", I think.

[edit on 22/7/07 by stumason]


Very true, and Patton himself had great respect for the Free French Forces as well as the French Underground who all fought very bravely. Operation Overlord(D-Day landings in Normandy), were undertaken by Americans, British, and Canadians. All of whom fought bravely, I don't think it wrong to honor the Americans who fought at Omaha and Utah beaches, but it is a bit short to not recognize all forces involved in the operation that gave the allies a foothold on the continent. I do agree that this is somewhat of a stunt, but the honor given is deserved.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   
i. Germany would invade Russia, and done so far more successfully had it not been for the major preoccupation with the U.S. forces, and renewed French push.

ii. Doubting Japan's fanaticism, ie. willing to fight where told till' death is absurd.

iii. This was not in the United State's financial interest, at least, that was not the forefront. Our President was one of very few who was pro-war, during a time when the United States was STRICTLY ISOLATIONIST.
There had to be a massive movement towards war before our government, let alone citizenry had the desire.

Say what you will -- But at 2,500 citizens, I think this is more of a brief 'Thank You' then any 'You were our one and only savior!'.

Think before you speak.

[edit on 22-7-2007 by Iblis]



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 03:17 PM
link   
I remember the 60th anniversary of VE day, as televised. A whole load of British veterans went over to France for a ceremony where they were honoured in such a heartfelt way by French people of all ages that I had a lump in my throat for the duration. Children and adults, many of them in tears, went out of their way to make those veterans realise just how much the sacrifices made by them and their colleagues meant. It was one of the most genuinely touching pieces of TV I have ever seen.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   


Originally posted by Coven
Pardon, madame et monsieur tu parlez anglais?


Sorry but if you said that you would be considered rude...to address strangers as 'tu' in French is impolite. They may help but you would probably get a funny look.

now if you said 'Excusez-moi mais, parlez-vous anglais s'il vous plait' that would be better.


anyway,

The US entered the war after the US was attacked by the Japanese at pearl habour. Japan declared war on the US after the attack then Germany declared war on the US not the other way around...

the question is would the US have directly entered the war if they were not directly attacked? or would they have continued to sell arms to the UK (and almost bankrupting us in the process)....

are we still paying the lend / lease money back?? Without US intervention there would have been a stalemate in Europe on the western front and the soviets would have taken what they wanted. US involvement in the war was inevitable, it would have been much appreciated a bit sooner....



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerevar


Originally posted by Coven
Pardon, madame et monsieur tu parlez anglais?


Sorry but if you said that you would be considered rude...to address strangers as 'tu' in French is impolite. They may help but you would probably get a funny look.

now if you said 'Excusez-moi mais, parlez-vous anglais s'il vous plait' that would be better.




EKkkk!!!

I knew that was coming...

thats what I get for learning French in southern public high schools...

The focused on the informal as opposed to the formal... =P

but the key point is the French are more willing to work with you if you put forth an effort to approach them speaking their language.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 04:16 PM
link   
With all the help the French gave the US in the American Revolution, the least that could have been done was help France during the World Wars. The American Revolution may have very well failed had it not been for French aid.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerevar


The US entered the war after the US was attacked by the Japanese at pearl habour. Japan declared war on the US after the attack then Germany declared war on the US not the other way around...


I believe it was coming either way... FDR wanted a reason to get involved, he just knew he had to wait for the public to be committed to the war.



the question is would the US have directly entered the war if they were not directly attacked? or would they have continued to sell arms to the UK (and almost bankrupting us in the process)....

If we had not been directly attacked with Pearl Harbor, the involvement would have been further delayed. The response would have been much more harsh for the Germans though. There are Numerous German Mini Subs Found all around New York and the Eastern US. Imagine how many didn't sink.

I would assume if Japan had failed in its attack plan, Germany was in place to do massive damage to the east coast.



are we still paying the lend / lease money back?? Without US intervention there would have been a stalemate in Europe on the western front and the soviets would have taken what they wanted. US involvement in the war was inevitable, it would have been much appreciated a bit sooner....


I thought the lend / lease debt was absolved in the 70s? I agree US involvement was inevitable, and FDR was sitting on his laurels waiting for his chance to jump in. They should have just gone for it... Maybe we wouldn't have lost SO MANY people during ww2.


Coven

(yes England is my Motherland... BUT... I'm Welsh and British...)



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 04:18 PM
link   


Textthe French police (Gardien de la paix), or Police Nationale, are going to catch you. They are the best police force in the world


May I ask why that is? As someone who is in law enforcement I would like to know more.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ninthaxis
With all the help the French gave the US in the American Revolution, the least that could have been done was help France during the World Wars. The American Revolution may have very well failed had it not been for French aid.


without a doubt.

the next revolution will be fueled by the French (and hopefully the rest of the world)

America Version 3.0 coming soon to an Earth Near YOU!


Coven



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by SwatMedic



the French police (Gardien de la paix), or Police Nationale.


May I ask why that is? As someone who is in law enforcement I would like to know more.


First and foremost I made a mistake... they are ONE of the best police forces in the world...

Think Militarized National Police... Like the Ruskies...

French National Police

Coven Out

Edited to add translation

(LOOSE)
Gardien de la paix = Guardian of the Peace


Police Nationale = National Police






[edit on 23-7-2007 by coven]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join