U.S shipping 140KG plutonium to France

Originally posted by drfunk
and can't fight

BS,they would have managed the second gulf war better than the marines

not a chance, the french army has a proven bad-track record of fighting. They haven't fought well in a war since Napoleonic times. They lost 1870, wwi the army was on verge of total collapse, wwii they lost again, indochina they lost.

My great grandfather and grandfather served in the first and second world wars and both in france. From what they said they did not leave France with a good opinion of the french fighting man and neither do i.

That said the foreign legion has a long, proud history.

The US marines have the better supplies, logistics and tech to be able to land an amphibious invasion compared to the french.

thanks,
drfunk

Nobody is going to Hijack this boat with the British Royal Navy protecting it. Its not like terroist have a war ship they can take on the British Royal Navy with. Worst case they might be able to blow it up in port with a small bomb boat but thats a slim chance. These terrorist cant over power any army let alone the British, when they go head to head with a military like that they get mowed down. Theres a reason why they resort to bombings and not convential attacks.

Originally posted by drfunk
The US marines have the better supplies, logistics and tech to be able to land an amphibious invasion compared to the french.

in the beginning of world war 2 the french had better tanks than the germans.the germans re-used them and made new panzers thanks to them.the americans had crap tanks called shermans,they only won because they outnumbered the germans that were fighting against millions of russians on the eastern front,if those troops were in normandy the allies would have never won the war.

they still have very good tanks and fighters.
I wonder how well the americans would have defended themselves against the germans if america was france .

americans are great at friendly fire and killing civilians tough

[edit on 3-10-2004 by DarkSide]

Originally posted by DarkSide

in the beginning of world war 2 the french had better tanks than the germans.the germans re-used them and made new panzers thanks to them.the americans had crap tanks called shermans,they only won because they outnumbered the germans that were fighting against millions of russians on the eastern front,if those troops were in normandy the allies would have never won the war.

they still have very good tanks and fighters.
I wonder how well the americans would have defended themselves against the germans if america was france

.

americans are great at friendly fire and killing civilians tough

[edit on 3-10-2004 by DarkSide]

If Germany didnt have to split up its forces the Russians wouldnt have won either. If they could have had all their forces on one side be it Eastern or western front the outcome could have been different for either Russia or US. You also have remember Russia wasnt fighting on two fronts like America was, Russia declared war on Japan after we nuked them

Plus with America getting it hands on the A-bomb first Germany never had a chance even if they managed to stop a allied invasion on D-day it would have just ended with a mushroom cloud like in Japan.

US got there bombs from european scientists that fled europe.loads of european scientists go to the USA because they are better paid.

no wonder they have better technology now

Is was really mostly Germans not people from all over europe. Russia also got their fair share of Germans.

Guys lets get this back on topic okay? Thanks

FredT

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Is was really mostly Germans not people from all over europe. Russia also got their fair share of Germans.

it continued up to now.there are still many eastern europeans going to the USA

the Char tank was a good tank and the fact the french got disheartened so easy and their military collapsed in front of a smaller, superior military force just proves that they aren't great fighters. The french had better tanks and more of them but they got their arses handed to them by the germans.

I understand they weren't prepared for blitzkrieg but once again the adoptation of the tactics by the germans and not the french proves my point once again

The french are lovers, not fighters

[edit on 3-10-2004 by drfunk]

Originally posted by drfunk
the Char tank was a good tank and the fact the french got disheartened so easy and their military collapsed in front of a smaller, superior military force just proves that they aren't great fighters. The french had better tanks and more of them but they got their arses handed to them by the germans.

I understand they weren't prepared for blitzkrieg but once again the adoptation of the tactics by the germans and not the french proves my point once again

The french are lovers, not fighters

They lost because they were unprepared to blitzkrieg,like every other nation in the world.They did'nt think the germans would attack trough the Ardennes.
They didn't see them coming,now I can say the same thing about pearl harbor,the US didn't see anything come and they were blown to bits by the japanese.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
My opinion -

(UN) HOLY CRAP!!

This isn't good. Bad bad bad. France can't be trusted.

What in the world are you worried about? France already produces and refines enourmous amounts of weapons grade plutonium for their nuclear reactors. They are helping the US out greatly in taking this plutonium waste. US nuke plants don't use plutonium normally and its not a waste that the US is really prepared to handle and store. Heck, the US isn't, apparently, capable of handling and storing the current nuke waste. The French, by virtue of their processing their nuke waste to get plutonium fuel, have the facilities to handle and, most importantly, experience and facilities to guard this waste.

I'll bet anyone here that at some point in the future,
that plutonium will be in the hands of terrorists and it
will be used against us or our interests.

Are you serious? Thats patently absurd. The French are not going to be selling weapons grade plutonium to international terrorists! I dislike the actions of their government as much as the next guy, but being opposed to someone in the political arena and doing what you suggest are two entirely and profoundly different things!

I have a hard time believing that America can't convert to
nuclear fuel. I have a really hard time believing that.

Wel you shouldn't, because the US can't. THe US nuke reg authorities decided that processing and storing plutonium, even though it would result in nuke waste that was less radioactive (shorter-lived) and fuel for nuke plants, decided that it was not worth the risk of having it stolen or lost. France decided it was. The US did not develop that ability, France did.

[edit on 4-10-2004 by Nygdan]

I agree with the statement that "we should not trust FRANCE". We all have seen the missles and bombs in Iraq with FRANCE all over them. There is also some involvment of FRANCE in the oil-for-food program that was a scandal. France's government is full of hipocrits and liers. They will stab us in the back as soon as they get another chance, kinda like they did with helping us in Iraq.

Answer this: How wrong and evil could france think the USA is, when we saved them from a Tyrant in a similiar fassion as we are doing for the Iraqis? We helped them have a better future, which is the same thing we are doing in Iraq. So, obviously something is up with the French government. I think they are hiding something very important.

I fee as if the French people feel very different from that of their idiotic president!

Originally posted by Termite197

Answer this: How wrong and evil could france think the USA is, when we saved them from a Tyrant in a similiar fassion as we are doing for the Iraqis? We helped them have a better future, which is the same thing we are doing in Iraq. So, obviously something is up with the French government. I think they are hiding something very important.

I fee as if the French people feel very different from that of their idiotic president!

That was a different type of situation.
You liberated them from an occupying army, not a local leader.

People some of you should listen to what you are saying, we have being brought up to hate France for not being part of the coalition and now resentment and mistrust are in the harts of most Americans, and while we called France and other nations names and stopped drinking French wine, our leaders perform business as usual US trust them enough to ship 140kg of plutonium.

Beware who knows it may end up in Iran.




[edit on 4-10-2004 by marg6043]

Its not that people don't trust France and that the gov is hypocritical for trusting them with the plutonium. People have reacted poorly to france (ok, reasonable people have done this, there are allways a number of podium banging apes around to act irrationally) because France, instead of merely stating that it was opposed to the war, instead of just vetoing a war resolution in the security council, went around the world on a diplomatic crusade to convince other countries, who either were opposed but not to such a degree that they cared to be especially vocal about it, or to convince fence sitters that they should be strongly opposed, to come out in force and in opposition to the war and to also vote agianst it.

People, agian, reasonable people, don't think that France is going to give this Plutonium to terrorists or anything absurd like that, but people are resentful because the French went out of their way, completely unnecessarily, to make ensure that global, not just French, but global governements were adamantly opposed to the war. And the result has been that the US faces stronger than usual criticism for this war (or at least stronger than without french involvment), which makes the war more difficult, gives hope to the insurgents that public global opinion might result in support or pressure for evacuation of US troops (after which they'll be the ones taking over) and has made the financial burden of the war (in my opinion an irrelevant matter, consider we'retalking about people dying on both sides, so what is money anyway) even greater on the US. They've also prevented any chance of the UN becoming involved in the reconstruction, or indeed any sort of workable global solution. Which is all well and good, but if americans want to try spanish and australian wine instead of french wine, who the heck are they to complain?

Originally posted by theshadowknows
I have a feeling that shipment is going to get hijacked, unless the whole thing is a trap.

I dunno, but sure as hell hope they better have top notch security around that!

Who Can Grab it from the Royal Navy? Thats a joke.

As much as I hate France, they will do nothing ill with this cargo....They know better....

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Nobody is going to Hijack this boat with the British Royal Navy protecting it. Its not like terroist have a war ship they can take on the British Royal Navy with. Worst case they might be able to blow it up in port with a small bomb boat but thats a slim chance. These terrorist cant over power any army let alone the British, when they go head to head with a military like that they get mowed down. Theres a reason why they resort to bombings and not convential attacks.

Dont forget, they are cowards also....I mean women and children targets?

Originally posted by drfunk

good opinion of the french fighting man and neither do i.

That said the foreign legion has a long, proud history.


thanks,
drfunk

Most of the Foreign legion are "foreign"........