France intervenes against 'terrorists'

[Sallow]

That count for Afghanistan?

Sure.

If Al Qaeda sets up a government any place, any where in the world..it deserves to be bombed into oblivion.

They have yet to relinquish hostile acts against America. As such..we are still in a state of war with them.

Al Qaeda hasn't ever set up a government anywhere.

Even before 9/11 the CIA estimated there were never more than 200 members total in Afghanistan.

All that Al Qaeda has the ability to do is teach and train insurgents.

That's not exactly true.

Bin Laden was funding the Taliban in Afghanistan.

 

[Sallow]

An older ally...really? The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.

The French and English have been at each other's throats since the 12th century. If some clown tries to tell you how much the French cared for the colonists, read about the Massachusetts Deerfield Massacre of 1704. In truth the French used the American Revolution to continue their war against the British. They have only been "a friend" to the US (or anyone else for that matter) when it has suited their purposes.

An older ally? Debatable but certainly not the French.

Let's see, 1778 (to clarify, this was the year France began to help) minus 1704 makes 84. An incident generations before American independence disqualifies the French nation from being recognized for what it is, the longest-running friend of American democracy and ideals (many of which came directly from French philosophers)?

For you, readers, to decide.

Why did France wait until 1778 to side with the colonists? Saratoga was a battle fought in October, 1777. Americans won a significant victory against the British that gave everyone cause to believe that Americans could prevail and win against the British.

Up to that moment we had been begging the French for their help. Only when they thought we could win did they join the cause. They saw that we could provide them with a victory against their traditional enemy. Had we not won the battle, they would have probably told us "tant pis pour vous" - too bad for you.

If we look at our relationship with the French to the present day, it is extremely difficult to see anything that could equate to a real act of friendship on their part.

I am sure that anyone here can list at least a dozen instances of French arrogance. Doubt that the opposite is true.

Why?

Seriously?

They wanted to make sure it was a serious revolution capable of succeeding with their help.

This is pretty silly.

Bottom line?

No French help..no America.

 

[Swagger]

What does "intervene" mean? Are some interventions more justified than others? The US intervened in Vietnam and later Iraq and Afghanistan and was universally condemned for it. Clinton intervened in a thousand year old war in Bosnia and was praised for it. What makes a "good" intervention? When a democrat is in office?

Regardless of which party held the White House, the break-up of the former Yugoslavia was a civil war up until NATO involvement, with the usual - yet largely unavoidable - displacement of people and bloodshed. It was only until after the NATO bombings that the "ethnic cleansing" and massacres by Serbian forces began and the gloves really came off.

 

[Sunni Man]

Sure.

If Al Qaeda sets up a government any place, any where in the world..it deserves to be bombed into oblivion.

They have yet to relinquish hostile acts against America. As such..we are still in a state of war with them.

Al Qaeda hasn't ever set up a government anywhere.

Even before 9/11 the CIA estimated there were never more than 200 members total in Afghanistan.

All that Al Qaeda has the ability to do is teach and train insurgents.

That's not exactly true.

Bin Laden was funding the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Although, Osama bin Laden was very wealthy and did give the Taliban financial support.

It was Pakistan that provided the lions share of the money needed to run the Taliban government.

 

[Sunni Man]

Regardless of which party held the White House, the break-up of the former Yugoslavia was a civil war up until NATO involvement, with the usual - yet largely unavoidable - displacement of people and bloodshed. It was only until after the NATO bombings that the "ethnic cleansing" and massacres by Serbian forces began and the gloves really came off.

NATO needed to find something to justify their existence after the end of the Cold War.

The Serb's were the ethnic cousins of the Russians; and received weapons and funding from them.

So the conflict was tailor made for NATO to jump in the fight against their former commie foe and try to be seen once again as relevant..

 

[there4eyeM]

^^^ Why do you love the "Frogs" so much??

Because one kissed me and turned me into a prince.

See, even dealing with such doesn't eliminate my sense of humor.

 

[Decus]

Let's see, 1778 (to clarify, this was the year France began to help) minus 1704 makes 84. An incident generations before American independence disqualifies the French nation from being recognized for what it is, the longest-running friend of American democracy and ideals (many of which came directly from French philosophers)?

For you, readers, to decide.

Why did France wait until 1778 to side with the colonists? Saratoga was a battle fought in October, 1777. Americans won a significant victory against the British that gave everyone cause to believe that Americans could prevail and win against the British.

Up to that moment we had been begging the French for their help. Only when they thought we could win did they join the cause. They saw that we could provide them with a victory against their traditional enemy. Had we not won the battle, they would have probably told us "tant pis pour vous" - too bad for you.

If we look at our relationship with the French to the present day, it is extremely difficult to see anything that could equate to a real act of friendship on their part.

I am sure that anyone here can list at least a dozen instances of French arrogance. Doubt that the opposite is true.

Why?

Seriously?

They wanted to make sure it was a serious revolution capable of succeeding with their help.

This is pretty silly.

Bottom line?

No French help..no America.

Too funny. I said that France came to the aid of the Americans because of their desire to punish the British - not out of any sense "friendship" for the Americans. They used us to serve their ambitions. Get it - not friendship - understand?

That this also served our needs is clear but don't romanticize France's motivation for joining the fight.

Just for fun - whether we would have lost if the French hadn't shown up, is a question that has been discussed by numerous authors. Some points that were in our favor regardless of French participation:
- The local population was increasingly hostile to the British
- Americans were adept guerrilla fighters, proving numerous times that they could prevail against superior forces
- The British were stretched thin given their global empire,
- The writings of men like Thomas Paine were winning hearts and minds back in England

Could the rebels have won without French assistance? Some believe they could have.

The Viet Cong ultimately proved guerrilla warfare could result in a modern day David versus Goliath victory. But again – my position was and continues to be that France did not come to the aid of Americans because of any warm fuzzy sense of friendship for us.

 

[Unkotare]

I like french fries.......

You are what you eat.

So I am a potato??

You are shit.

 

[Unkotare]

The Viet Cong ultimately proved guerrilla warfare could result in a modern day David versus Goliath victory.

...not really...

 

[Unkotare]

^^^ Why do you love the "Frogs" so much??

Because one kissed me and turned me into a prince.

See, even dealing with such doesn't eliminate my sense of humor.

Hasn't really improved its quality either...

 

[Unkotare]

The World's Rudest Nations For Travelers - Forbes

 

[Decus]

The Viet Cong ultimately proved guerrilla warfare could result in a modern day David versus Goliath victory.

...not really...

I'd love to hear your argument.

 

[Unkotare]

The world?s worst tourists? The answer might tick you off - USATODAY.com

 

[Unkotare]

The Viet Cong ultimately proved guerrilla warfare could result in a modern day David versus Goliath victory.

...not really...

I'd love to hear your argument.

David wasn't a guerrilla fighter. He stepped right out and confronted Goliath. And, the Viet Cong didn't win one major battle during the Vietnam War (against American forces).

 

[there4eyeM]

If the 'rebels' could have won on their own, how is it that it took at least five years assisted by France's massive help?

Your arguments are identical with those who say America has never helped but by its own interests. Well, if interests are republican democracy, that is true.

No one anywhere is altruistic by the poster's definition.

 

[Decus]

If the 'rebels' could have won on their own, how is it that it took at least five years assisted by France's massive help?

Your arguments are identical with those who say America has never helped but by its own interests. Well, if interests are republican democracy, that is true.

No one anywhere is altruistic by the poster's definition.

Are you French? (same as asking - are you stupid? - just a little more polite). Again, I answered if the rebels could have won without the French 'just for fun'. The success of the guerrilla tactics used by American forces is still being taught in military colleges like West Point.

Shortly after the American Revolution, those ungrateful slaves who did not appreciate France's altruistic intent in forcing them to live in poverty while France profited from their sweat and misey took up arms and fought the French. Stupid slaves, didn't they know how much France cared? For those of you interested in learning about the love the French have always displayed towards their fellow man please look up the Haitian Revolution 1791–1804.

A French Lesson in Altruism

"White masters extensively used the threat of physical violence to maintain control and limit this possibility for slave rebellion. When slaves left the plantations or disobeyed their masters, they were subject to whipping, or to more extreme torture such as castration or burning, the punishment being both a personal lesson and a warning for other slaves."

Haitian Revolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sunni Man]

I saw this classified ad in Guns & Ammo magazine:

For Sale
Like new French Army WWII rifle.
Never fired and only dropped once.

 

[Decus]

I saw this classified ad in Guns & Ammo magazine:

For Sale
Like new French Army WWII rifle.
Never fired and only dropped once.

This never fails to make me laugh.

Ask a Frenchman the following question: Why is the Champs Elysee lined on either side with trees?

Often they will say something like it was a landscape design of Andre Le Notre or other landscaper.

The answer: So the German army can march in the shade.

I have made so, so many French laugh with that one.

 

[Decus]

...not really...

I'd love to hear your argument.

David wasn't a guerrilla fighter. He stepped right out and confronted Goliath. And, the Viet Cong didn't win one major battle during the Vietnam War (against American forces).

I meant David in respect to firepower, but I will try to be more clear in the future. Thanks.

 

[Sunni Man]

And, the Viet Cong didn't win one major battle during the Vietnam War (against American forces).

Which in reality amounted to zip......because in the end....... N. Vietnam won the war........