why bush won the election

[Said1]

The French thought that the Welsh women were British soldiers and, when the Yeomanry Battalion arrived in force, the French surrendered as prisoners of war. Armed with her pitchfork, Jemima captured 14 French soldiers herself and she put them into the Fishguard jail.

How cool is that? Tabooouuuurrrrrrrrnache! Being beaten by women. Again!

 

[no1tovote4]

Comrade here,s part of my local history you might enjoy.Even our women kicked France,s arse http://www.greengold.com.au/gilbert/Samuel Gilbert/chapter4.htm

Man it must be embarassing to be born French!

 

[padisha emperor]

Well, taff, it is probably the only welsh victory...

You said it, they berlieve it was english soldiers, not welsh women.


You believe again that French are cowards ? look at Fort Carillon- Said, you know it I think - .... 3000 French kick 16000 Brits.


For De Gaulle and UK in Europe common market : UK was and is still not really behind the EU. When France and Germany created the CECA, and after the CEE in 1957, UK cal to other countries to join UK, to concurrence the CEE.

UK had and have always the behavior of the traitror : I mean they were never right behiond us, disagree with all, lke the Euro, and want to keep their neutrality when some affair engage the EU. When you belong to a such organization, you have to play and follow the rules, not to be isolationalists.


(Taff, for ther rugby match, congratulations, really a great match, the most enjoying for me, since the beginning, I'm disappointed for the second period...but Wales did a good game )

 

[taff]

Well, taff, it is probably the only welsh victory...

You said it, they berlieve it was english soldiers, not welsh women.


You believe again that French are cowards ? look at Fort Carillon- Said, you know it I think - .... 3000 French kick 16000 Brits.


For De Gaulle and UK in Europe common market : UK was and is still not really behind the EU. When France and Germany created the CECA, and after the CEE in 1957, UK cal to other countries to join UK, to concurrence the CEE.

UK had and have always the behavior of the traitror : I mean they were never right behiond us, disagree with all, lke the Euro, and want to keep their neutrality when some affair engage the EU. When you belong to a such organization, you have to play and follow the rules, not to be isolationalists.


(Taff, for ther rugby match, congratulations, really a great match, the most enjoying for me, since the beginning, I'm disappointed for the second period...but Wales did a good game )

Why are you getting angry with me? I cant control our women.If they feel like kicking the shit out of the French military with their broomsticks i cant help it.But i will have words with them for you Padisha.

 

[Said1]

You believe again that French are cowards ? look at Fort Carillon- Said, you know it I think - .... 3000 French kick 16000 Brits.

This is going back to gr. 7 history class here, but I'll do my best.

Firstly,the Indians in that area were in allience with the french, who reported British movements. This allowed the french to send for reinforcements form Montreal. Secondly, a year or so later, do you remember what happened? Something about French forces from Carillon joining the British, but only after they tried to blow up the fort first. LO freekin L.

Where do you get these examples from? Your butt?

 

[padisha emperor]

Dear Said, you are discussing about Fort Carrillon ? IF everybody would do like you, all the victories wouldn't belong to their winners..... Becayuse there is always a part of chance, a part of something else....
Take Waterloo : if you want to discuss, i'm here.

Taff, your hate for France is really pitiful. Fortunatly you're not Scottish, I would be quite disappointed if you were...

 

[Comrade]

Dear Said, you are discussing about Fort Carrillon ? IF everybody would do like you, all the victories wouldn't belong to their winners..... Becayuse there is always a part of chance, a part of something else....
Take Waterloo : if you want to discuss, i'm here.

Taff, your hate for France is really pitiful. Fortunatly you're not Scottish, I would be quite disappointed if you were...

Padisha, I remember putting you in a corner and recieving the same kind of nonsense about me suddenly 'hating France.' And others here certainly remember the same from you... it's getting kind of old.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17980&highlight=hate+france

First Sir Evil, it is easy to quote only a part of my message...
....
Maybe because you hate france, and you want your revenge, even if it is illogical......

If Sir Evil really hated France you would be banned by now, lol.

But its not just him, of course. You've complained to Kathianne, Said1, and even me about us suddenly 'hating France' just because you were unable to refute our arguments about the merits of our foriegn policy vs. your own country.

I hope you'll realize someday that the kinds of statements you make sometimes are really indicitive of false bravado, not part of the learned debate we are used to on this board.

For example:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11979&page=1&pp=40&highlight=hate+france

So, now, shut up boy...
the french army lost quickly, but fought against Germans !
Sedan, and lots of others battles....de Gaulle, who won against Germans because he was unsing their tactics.

I read a book about the WWII, and for the 1940's invasion, th auathor say : "a great defeat make forgotten braves fights."
What about Dunkirk, boy ? dare to say that here, French didn't fight !

You hate France, so for you we are bastards. And we lost all the wars. Read the thread "frenhc military victories"....you'll see, my dear....
Anyway, you'er a close-minded dumb, i could show you the evidence, you would always deny...

How is that helping you reach this persons point of view? Well certainly it didn't help at all.

So what do you say about us being hated? Is the kind of venom from your own mouth below a trend among your young countrymen? If so, we'll have more problems between our two countries in the future than you could wish for.

Stupid. you are stupid.
First, i'm not jealous, second it is not YOU world.
jealous of why ? I prefer live in France, the life is better - why do you think so much people come to live in France ? People from UK, USA, Netherlands....so, not poor countries....
Jealous of USA's might ? not at all !
It is not YOUR world, you know why, redneck ?
because the WHOLE population of the world don't like, or even HATE USA.

Bush, people like you,, everybody hate you. so arrogant, so ....self confident of the USA's might. Fortunatly, not all the Americans are like you, theim.

But it is not enough for the USA popularity : with people like you, it would never grew up.

It cannot be YOUR world. How can you rule about a world who HATES YOU ?

You see, the world does not revolve around France. The coming vindication of America with respect to our Middle East foreign policy will become an undeniable fact that your media will not be able to obscure. And if you carry that chip on your shoulder any longer it will drag you down into nihilism.

And while your still open to forming your own opinions about the shape of the world, I just hope you have the mental flexibility to accept when your highly biased media and knee-jerk nationalism may not be the best platform from which to base your view of the rapidly changing world around you.

 

[Said1]

Dear Said, you are discussing about Fort Carrillon ?

Yes.

IF everybody would do like you, all the victories wouldn't belong to their winners..... Becayuse there is always a part of chance, a part of something else....

I didn't say it wasn't a victory, but it wasn't so great. Considering the distance between the lake George area and Montreal, your french troops had approximately 3+ weeks to prepare and set up in positions of advantage in order to surprise the British (away from the fort right?). But, they didn't hold the fort or the area for long now did they?

Take Waterloo : if you want to discuss, i'm here.

Yes doll, when all else fails, there's always Waterloo. But I really don't see what Waterloo has to do with control of the St. Lawrence. Well I do, but you've been humiliated enough today.

Oh well, nice try. Smell ya later!

 

[padisha emperor]

Said, of course, the fact that the French were only 3000 and the Brits 16000 didn't count...
For Waterloo : you said that Fort Carillon os not a so great victory. So, I said that with a such thought, you can say that all the battles are not qso great victories : Waterloo, considered as one of the most important english victory, can also be considered as not so great.

I took Waterloo, I could take Austerlitz.



Comrade : maybe you don't hate France.

You quote some of my posts. OK

But you can't deny that the majority of the people with whom I speak have lot of bad feelings with France & French, you bash France and the French everytime you can....So, a psychologue would say : it is love, but with a strange way, or it is hate.

Look at all the messages baching rance, french, french history, look at all the pictures posted on line, against France.
Look at all the jokes against French.

You believe hard as a rock that French soldiers are badbadbad, surrenders, cowards, and that France never won a battle.
And when i try to make you change, only on the istory point, you continue to believe that France lost all with her cowards amry.

it is quite irritating, from people who say they are open minded, uh ?

How many times have I read that France is USA's ennemy, on this board ?
How many times have I read that USA should attack France ?
That's the French were America's foes, and that they were really bastards ?

Wow, if it is not hate, it is not far from it.

You - not only you Comrade - are more bashing France than the terrorists. amazing, no ?

 

[Said1]

Said, of course, the fact that the French were only 3000 and the Brits 16000 didn't count...
For Waterloo : you said that Fort Carillon os not a so great victory. So, I said that with a such thought, you can say that all the battles are not qso great victories : Waterloo, considered as one of the most important english victory, can also be considered as not so great.

I took Waterloo, I could take Austerlitz.

Take what ever you want, just be clear about the point you are making.

Again, I did not say it didn't count. Let me re-phase the jist of my post for you. Basically, I said the french had the advantage of time, preparation and intelligence. I would be much more impressed has the battle taken place at the fort against unsuspecting french troops. This can be applied to any battle where the "winner" was seriously outnumbered, but had many more things to their advantage than their enemy. See?

Comrade : maybe you don't hate France.

You quote some of my posts. OK

But you can't deny that the majority of the people with whom I speak have lot of bad feelings with France & French, you bash France and the French everytime you can....So, a psychologue would say : it is love, but with a strange way, or it is hate.

Look at all the messages baching rance, french, french history, look at all the pictures posted on line, against France.
Look at all the jokes against French.

You believe hard as a rock that French soldiers are badbadbad, surrenders, cowards, and that France never won a battle.
And when i try to make you change, only on the istory point, you continue to believe that France lost all with her cowards amry.

it is quite irritating, from people who say they are open minded, uh ?

How many times have I read that France is USA's ennemy, on this board ?
How many times have I read that USA should attack France ?
That's the French were America's foes, and that they were really bastards ?

Wow, if it is not hate, it is not far from it.

You - not only you Comrade - are more bashing France than the terrorists. amazing, no ?

All the same has been said about Canada. Do you see me acting like you?

 

[no1tovote4]

Said, of course, the fact that the French were only 3000 and the Brits 16000 didn't count...
For Waterloo : you said that Fort Carillon os not a so great victory. So, I said that with a such thought, you can say that all the battles are not qso great victories : Waterloo, considered as one of the most important english victory, can also be considered as not so great.

I took Waterloo, I could take Austerlitz.



Comrade : maybe you don't hate France.

You quote some of my posts. OK

But you can't deny that the majority of the people with whom I speak have lot of bad feelings with France & French, you bash France and the French everytime you can....So, a psychologue would say : it is love, but with a strange way, or it is hate.

Look at all the messages baching rance, french, french history, look at all the pictures posted on line, against France.
Look at all the jokes against French.

You believe hard as a rock that French soldiers are badbadbad, surrenders, cowards, and that France never won a battle.
And when i try to make you change, only on the istory point, you continue to believe that France lost all with her cowards amry.

it is quite irritating, from people who say they are open minded, uh ?

How many times have I read that France is USA's ennemy, on this board ?
How many times have I read that USA should attack France ?
That's the French were America's foes, and that they were really bastards ?

Wow, if it is not hate, it is not far from it.

You - not only you Comrade - are more bashing France than the terrorists. amazing, no ?

Awwww, are you upset that Americans don't love the French? Please....

This was going on since before we were colonies of the Brits. Take it like a man, PE. Most of the time they are just jabs, the kind that men take at each other all the time regardless of how long they have been friends. Of course, sometimes even friends disagree and those will be the times when the jabs are more serious.

 

[padisha emperor]

Again, I did not say it didn't count. Let me re-phase the jist of my post for you. Basically, I said the french had the advantage of time, preparation and intelligence. I would be much more impressed has the battle taken place at the fort against unsuspecting french troops. This can be applied to any battle where the "winner" was seriously outnumbered, but had many more things to their advantage than their enemy. See?

Right.

But it didn't make the victory less great.

When I refered tyo Waterloo, it was because people can say that without the Prussian the Brits would lost the battle, without the numerical inferiority of the French The Grande Amrée would won...

If you study exactly a battle, of course you can find all the excuses that you want.

But in fact, we were according since the beginning, about what you said.
Sorrry



No1 :

Of course, sometimes even friends disagree and those will be the times when the jabs are more serious.

I Hope you're right here.

But even if it is like you mean, only jokes, and no hate or animosity, you can understand that since september, excpet maybe 10 posts - upon the 800 I've posted - were not followed by insults or critics.
I know that I post often some thing disturbing for you.

but if everybody would say that all is beautiful in the best world, and that everybody is perfect, life would be boring.
Some of this board's users are always critisizing the foreigner countries; specialy France and Europe, and find that USA are perfect.
When i post some thing with a link , with prooves, even here, users say I 'm telling stupid things.

It is really boring when the argumentations of some people are turning around, to avoid the subject : I say something (A), people say to counter me (B), then I say (C) to counter him, and he say something (D), but the (D) can be countered by (A)...So, it is turning around.

My links are stpuid and wrong, your links are of course te best links of the world.

When Ali was here, he was able to put links in english, good links, but even here you deny.

I come back to you, dear no1 : you say it is jokes.
Allright. But you - users, not speacially you - use and abuse of these hundreds of jokes against France. But when I, I post ONE joke anti-USA, I get the biggest quantity of insults of the world. For only ONE joke, everybody open the fire on me.
So, if the users of this board don't accept the fact that I post anti USA joke, why should I have to take good all these anti French filth ?

It is a little strange, no ?

 

[Said1]

But in fact, we were according since the beginning, about what you said. Sorrry

What are you saying here?

Also:
Do you know the distance between lake George and Montreal?
Did you know the battle did not acutally take place at the fort?
Did you know the same troops you find so terrif, were traitors and joined the British AFTER they tried to destroy the fort the following year?

Unless I do a google search, that is roughly all I can remember. Perhaps you could wow me with some other facts that have escaped my memory.

As for Waterloo, you're saying the British would have won without the help of the Prussians?

 

[padisha emperor]

No no no for Waterloo
I think that without the Blücher's army, Wellington would had some problems with the victory...

Without the Prussians, the french probably would have won. Why? :

Napoleon sent the Maréchal Grouchy behind the english-dutch lines, to take them back.
When Napoleon saw behind the english lines a dust cloud, he said "Grouchy !"
But unfortunatly, it was Blücher with his Prussian army.

The, the big numeric superiority of the Allies did the difference.

The heroical charges of the Maréchal Ney with the french imperial cavalry didn't success to break the english lines, reorganized afetr the Blücher's coming.

And Ney lead the last charge, at feet - all his horses were killed under him - , to find the death instead of be defeated.

I have read that before the Blücher's coming, the french were taking the advantage against the english.

And what is really sad for Napoleon, it is that 2 days before Waterloo, in Ligny, the french army defeat the Prussian army, but this one could walk back, and 2 days later........


Sad defeat.

It ends an odyseus of 20 years.

 

[taff]

No no no for Waterloo
I think that without the Blücher's army, Wellington would had some problems with the victory...

Without the Prussians, the french probably would have won. Why? :

Napoleon sent the Maréchal Grouchy behind the english-dutch lines, to take them back.
When Napoleon saw behind the english lines a dust cloud, he said "Grouchy !"
But unfortunatly, it was Blücher with his Prussian army.

The, the big numeric superiority of the Allies did the difference.

The heroical charges of the Maréchal Ney with the french imperial cavalry didn't success to break the english lines, reorganized afetr the Blücher's coming.

And Ney lead the last charge, at feet - all his horses were killed under him - , to find the death instead of be defeated.

I have read that before the Blücher's coming, the french were taking the advantage against the english.

And what is really sad for Napoleon, it is that 2 days before Waterloo, in Ligny, the french army defeat the Prussian army, but this one could walk back, and 2 days later........


Sad defeat.

It ends an odyseus of 20 years.

You sound like you are proud of Napoleon.Wasnt he the earlier version of Hitler in the 18th century?Infatuated with European domination.Fortunately us Brits was around then as well to kick you garlic chomping , onion smelling frog suckers all the way back to France.So kiss my big fat hairy British arse.

 

[Said1]

No no no for Waterloo
I think that without the Blücher's army, Wellington would had some problems with the victory...

Had they not shown up eventually, yes there would have been problems.

Without the Prussians, the french probably would have won. Why? :

Napoleon sent the Maréchal Grouchy behind the english-dutch lines, to take them back.
When Napoleon saw behind the english lines a dust cloud, he said "Grouchy !"
But unfortunatly, it was Blücher with his Prussian army.

]

Didn't Grouchy get "lost" on his way to battle? I thought he was fairly redundant with resepect to his role in Waterloo since he couldn't read a map?

The, the big numeric superiority of the Allies did the difference.

The heroical charges of the Maréchal Ney with the french imperial cavalry didn't success to break the english lines, reorganized afetr the Blücher's coming.

And Ney lead the last charge, at feet - all his horses were killed under him - , to find the death instead of be defeated.

I disagree, the Prussians appeared at the end, to saving the day. The Dutch forces ran away, and I think (I maybe wrong) everyone else was too far away. Wasn't bad weather a significant factor too?

I have read that before the Blücher's coming, the french were taking the advantage against the english.

You know, I've read that too, but it wasn't as easy as you make it sound. How long did they fight before the Prussians showed up? And, where are the answers to the other questions I asked you?

 

[padisha emperor]

Said, it was a pleasure to have this discussion with you, really.
For the questions you asked me, about the distance between lake George and Montréal, and the others, i don't know at all.

About Grouchy, yes he was not really excellent...France had thousands of Maréchal best thazn him . He was eating strawberries while the armies were fighting - it is the legend -

You sound like you are proud of Napoleon.Wasnt he the earlier version of Hitler in the 18th century?Infatuated with European domination.Fortunately us Brits was around then as well to kick you garlic chomping , onion smelling frog suckers all the way back to France.So kiss my big fat hairy British arse.

Taff.....
You seems to be the english guy proud of the english victory, when Prussia and Russia made the biggest job.

Yes, I'm roud of Napoleon.
he was a real great war man, with a awesome strategical sense. The napoleonic wars are considered as the first modern wars.

I have admiration for him : on ther interior point, he did great things : the "Code Civil" of 1804 and the "Code Pénal" in 1810, 2 codifications of the laws about the penal laws and the civilian laws - contract names, family, divorces, marriage.... - These codifications are still used in France, of course with modification, but it is the same base.

Napoleon created also some Institutions, and reorganized the country. Example : he created the "Préfet", with the law of the "28 pluviose An VIII" (02/17/1800 - fucking reviolutionnary calendar ) - the Préfets are the representants of the State in the regions and departements.

he also created the "Lycée", in 1802. (secondary schools, when you are from 15 to 18 years old, just before university).

So, for the legislation and the administration, great Man.

And about the exterior point : probably trhe man who won the bigger number of battles of all the History, and only from 1793 to 1815.
he defeat England, Austria, Prussia, Russia, and after armies of coalitions, multinational.

He was obviously a great war leader, best than Philippe II, Retz, Charles VII, Vendôme, Villars or Saxe, for France. You can't deny it.

Even the last years show his genius : the "Campaign of France", in 1814, show to the Allies that the french army was still able to win battles, even when it was less numerous. This Campaign saw the french army won a lot of battles.

You can't compare him with Hitler : first, Hitler was a dumbass compare to the military genius of Napoleon, and above all, Napoleon was not racist and antisemist, didn't organized an awful deportation program.

The domination about Europe is the only common point.

No others : maybe Napoleon was a tyran, but not at all the butcher who was Hitler, the monster who was this nazi man.

And, taff, know that even in UK lots of people were for Napoleon and a peace and accord with France, like Charles James FOX.
And at the end, in 1815, when the Bellerophon took Napoleon to send him tyo England, lots of people were on the harbour to see and applause the ex-Emperor.
But the English made a treason, and Napoleon was transfered to the Northumberland, and travel to Sainte Hélène.

 

[taff]

Yeah right, a lot of people in the UK was for Napoleon.I suppose a lot of Americans are for Chirac also?End of the day it was another war you lost.

 

[no1tovote4]

No1 :

I Hope you're right here.

But even if it is like you mean, only jokes, and no hate or animosity, you can understand that since september, excpet maybe 10 posts - upon the 800 I've posted - were not followed by insults or critics.
I know that I post often some thing disturbing for you.

but if everybody would say that all is beautiful in the best world, and that everybody is perfect, life would be boring.
Some of this board's users are always critisizing the foreigner countries; specialy France and Europe, and find that USA are perfect.
When i post some thing with a link , with prooves, even here, users say I 'm telling stupid things.

It is really boring when the argumentations of some people are turning around, to avoid the subject : I say something (A), people say to counter me (B), then I say (C) to counter him, and he say something (D), but the (D) can be countered by (A)...So, it is turning around.

My links are stpuid and wrong, your links are of course te best links of the world.

When Ali was here, he was able to put links in english, good links, but even here you deny.

I come back to you, dear no1 : you say it is jokes.
Allright. But you - users, not speacially you - use and abuse of these hundreds of jokes against France. But when I, I post ONE joke anti-USA, I get the biggest quantity of insults of the world. For only ONE joke, everybody open the fire on me.
So, if the users of this board don't accept the fact that I post anti USA joke, why should I have to take good all these anti French filth ?

It is a little strange, no ?

No matter how many posts you post you will find that they will be followed by some insults here. As I said, the animosity between the US and France began long before the US was even a country. How long have the Brits and French been doing this? Do you really think one statue would solve the whole issue?

However during peace time and when we are agreeing the US doesn't have the bite on their insults that the Brits do, it is further from us and not as personal. However, during times of disagreement even friends sometimes fight. And clearly there is disagreement between your Government and ours.

Have you never fought with somebody that you think of or thought of as a friend? Sometimes the disagreements are larger than others and it becomes more than just insults and jibes. Right now, the worst you are getting is some insults and jibes used to get just the reaction you give. I don't think the US is planning any attacks in that direction, there is little you need to worry about from us right now.

I just don't see how you expect everybody on the site to simply agree with whatever you post. I certainly wouldn't expect it of you.

 

[padisha emperor]

I personly don't think that USA will attack France, not at all.

Some on this board think it wold be a good idea.

You can't deny that there is an awesome anti french feeling in the US.

But nevermind.




I saw Farenheit 9/11 yesterday.

I don't take all the movie as sacred speech, of course, there is some propazganda, but lot of things are quite disturbing.