padisha emperor
Senior Member
- Thread starter
- #21
And you cannot understand that your ally didn't follow you, it is correct ?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
padisha emperor said:Do you think that it is a good idea ?
In Vietnam the USA did that, a vietnamisation of the war. At least, the communist tanks entered in Saigon.....so failure.
Originally Posted by padisha emperor
And after you dare to tell me that French are arrogant....
Alexander, Caesar, August, Trojan, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Philippe II Auguste, Charles VII, Charles Quint, Louis XIII, XIV, Nelson, Napoleon, Bismarck, Foch, Joffre, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Nimitz....you are right, the US invasion of Iraq have to be put on the side of these men....it is the same thing...
No, you're ridiculous : think one second : maybe it took 10 years for Germany and Japan : but after this time, the 2 countries belong to the heavy weight of the world economy.
In 1957, only 12 years afetr the war who totally destruct Germany, France and Germany grounded the EU. Before, the both countries alreadu have trade arrangements.
Kathianne said:NightTrain, it's good to see you here and right on target! This poor French guy, doesn't understand that what happened to Germany, in the sense of 'destruction' was the result of the real use of 'carpetbombing' since there was no such thing as 'precision bombing.'
Japan of course, was a different case altogether, the harbinger of what 'could have become' the face of the next modern war.
Originally Posted by padisha emperor
And after you dare to tell me that French are arrogant....
Alexander, Caesar, August, Trojan, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Philippe II Auguste, Charles VII, Charles Quint, Louis XIII, XIV, Nelson, Napoleon, Bismarck, Foch, Joffre, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Nimitz....you are right, the US invasion of Iraq have to be put on the side of these men....it is the same thing...
Joan of Arc, Louis XV, Duke of Wellington, General Washington, General and President Grant, Roosevelt, Truman, John Kennedy, Lincoln, Reagan could also be added
For the list of the great men, I forget Patton, yes. I forget also Leonidas, Themistocle, Miltiade, Turennes, Condé, Vauban - great man - , Bailli de Suffren, La Fayette, Rochambeau, De Grasse, Dumouriez, Hoche, Jourdan, Murat, Davout, Lannes, Augereau, Soult, Ney, Blücher, Sherman, Lee, Jackson, JEB Stuart, Grant, Longstreet, Farragut, Mc Arthur, Halsey, Spruance. You see, the great men of military History are really a lot.
padisha emperor said:post by nbdysfu
posted by me :
so, you see, i did an add-on after
But you give name of President, I gave name of military men. I put Philippe II, Charles VII, Louis XIII, Louis XIV because they lead perosnly their army when they could. they were real military chiefs.
Like the french/austrian/ but more spanish Charles Quint.
For what you said, sure, occupation is different than liberation.
But explain what you've posted to Insein, I only said that the situation between Iraq and germany/Japan should not be comapre, and alos that the Iraq campain of 2003 have not to be compare with the great military events of History, and above all not to Austerlitz and Overlord.
padisha emperor said:ho ho ho....
And you, you're proud of your army's leader, a fanatic evangelist who only read Bible, and who don't speak correctly ?
when would the US wars finish ? 2001 : Afghanistan, 2003 : Iraq, 2004 : Iran ? 2005 : Syria ? 2006 : Lebanon ? 2007 : Rest of the World ?
padisha emperor said:you said something stupid. I don't want to waste my time to answer to you.
I could say everything, you won't change of mind. So, i say nothing. Believe what you want, if it enjoy yourself, i'm happy for you......
padisha emperor said:No.
where do you see the arrogance ?
arrogance would be : "we are the best, we don't care about the others, we do all we want, let us quiet, we are the strongest".
oh ! it was Bush do actually... it's amazing
padisha emperor said:No.
where do you see the arrogance ?
arrogance would be : "we are the best, we don't care about the others, we do all we want, let us quiet, we are the strongest".
oh ! it was Bush do actually... it's amazing
"We dont care about others". Pretty hard to justify given that the United States provides tons of foreign aid in the form of materials and money to many other countries.
"We do all we want". Ummm...that's why we formed a nation in the first place; so did the good citizens of France and any other country in the world. We dont have to do what "they" want.
I meant :
"we don't care about others" : "what they think ? we don't care. we do the world justice because we are the stronger". No. It should not be like that.
"we do all I want" : not in the country, but in the world : " we make war when it pleases to us, the international rules, it is useless, we want attack a poor country ? let's go".
I don't speak of US citizens, but of GW Bush.
Now, dilloduck : i'm not arrogant, and I do'nt think I am superior. I only meant that you believe that france is rules by Kofi Annan, so if you want. I can do all the answers of the world, you 'll think always that.
padisha emperor said:"We dont care about others". Pretty hard to justify given that the United States provides tons of foreign aid in the form of materials and money to many other countries.
"We do all we want". Ummm...that's why we formed a nation in the first place; so did the good citizens of France and any other country in the world. We dont have to do what "they" want.
I meant :
"we don't care about others" : "what they think ? we don't care. we do the world justice because we are the stronger". No. It should not be like that.
"we do all I want" : not in the country, but in the world : " we make war when it pleases to us, the international rules, it is useless, we want attack a poor country ? let's go".
I don't speak of US citizens, but of GW Bush.
Now, dilloduck : i'm not arrogant, and I do'nt think I am superior. I only meant that you believe that france is rules by Kofi Annan, so if you want. I can do all the answers of the world, you 'll think always that.
I'll try a simpler question---would France wait for UN approval to defend itself?
padisha emperor said:"We dont care about others". Pretty hard to justify given that the United States provides tons of foreign aid in the form of materials and money to many other countries.
"We do all we want". Ummm...that's why we formed a nation in the first place; so did the good citizens of France and any other country in the world. We dont have to do what "they" want.
I meant :
"we don't care about others" : "what they think ? we don't care. we do the world justice because we are the stronger". No. It should not be like that.
"we do all I want" : not in the country, but in the world : " we make war when it pleases to us, the international rules, it is useless, we want attack a poor country ? let's go".
I don't speak of US citizens, but of GW Bush.
Now, dilloduck : i'm not arrogant, and I do'nt think I am superior. I only meant that you believe that france is rules by Kofi Annan, so if you want. I can do all the answers of the world, you 'll think always that.
We dont care what the rest of the world thinks because the US citizens KNOW the rest of the world does not have OUR best interests at heart. Each nation has their own interests at heart....even France. International rules made by whom? The UN? France? Countries that want to restrict the actions of one nation under international law while they ignore that same international law to pursue their own interests?
As for the US attacking poor countries just because we feel like it, then I guess we had better stay out of Sudan, Rhuwanda, Ethiopa and all those other "poor" countries. We'll leave those problems to the UN I guess, because they are so effective at resolving conflict.
As for the US attacking poor countries just because we feel like it, then I guess we had better stay out of Sudan, Rhuwanda, Ethiopa and all those other "poor" countries. We'll leave those problems to the UN I guess, because they are so effective at resolving conflict.
We dont care what the rest of the world thinks because the US citizens KNOW the rest of the world does not have OUR best interests at heart. Each nation has their own interests at heart....even France. International rules made by whom? The UN? France? Countries that want to restrict the actions of one nation under international law while they ignore that same international law to pursue their own interests?
padisha emperor said:So, give the dirty job to UN, and let us make war....
i only maent that if USA ratificate the UN charter and approve the UNO, they MUST conform themselves to it. Like everybody.
When you play football, you agree the rules. And even if you begin to loose, you 'll not change the rules, even if it is against your interests - the victory - .
So, respect the UN. respect the rules of the games.
We are in agreement. My comments about poor countries were sarcasm; sorry, I should have been more specific. As for the comments about abiding by the UN Charter, I was implying that your attitude is exactly that of the French government: The United States should, rather MUST, abide by the UN's wishes. In the meantime, the nation of France ignores the UN resolutions and sells weapons to Iraq. That is what we mean by French arrogance and hypocricy. Thanks for making my point
So i don't tell you to subvert the US Constitution to the UN charters, but only to respect what you've signed. For France also, about the trade of weapons. UN charters is not superior. but If USA aproove it and ratificated it.....