8236
VIP Member
War on 'terror'?
Why do you not hate Germany?
Why do you not hate Germany?
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.
8236 said:War on 'terror'?
Why do you not hate Germany?
8236 said:War on 'terror'?
Why do you not hate Germany?
freeandfun1 said:Perhaps because the French have ALWAYS been self-righteous in their views.
MrMarbles said:Pot calling kettle black alert!!
8236 said:War on 'terror'?
Why do you not hate Germany?
I take it this girl you work with is french?nbdysfu said:that said, this girl I work with is very diligent and one of the nicest persons you would ever meet.
8236 said:War on 'terror'?
Why do you not hate Germany?
For better or for worse, America will remain involved in the world to an extent not seen since the era of the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam, for the foreseeable future. In case you hadn't heard, we had a couple skyscrapers knocked over a couple years back, and we're still a little pissed off about the whole thing. From Marrakech to Manila, from the Rio Grande to the Rio Plata, we're all kinds of tied up in world events.
And like it or not, we're going stay that way. Another 9/11-scale terror attack is more likely involve us further in world affairs, than it is to force us to sue for peace. That's just how Americans are. We don't usually ask for peace; we prefer to dictate its terms.
The Muslim world in general, and the Arab world in particular, will continue to dominate our strategic thinking and our defensive worries for a long time to come. We're not about to retreat from Latin America, especially in light of recent events in Venezuela. And whether out of charity, fear, or both, we'll find ourselves increasingly entangled in the internal affairs of most every sub-Saharan African nation.
China will keep us busy arming Taiwan, and will keep the US Navy running war games and maneuvers just in case. Japan is quiet in the way North Korea isn't which means northern Asia will never be allowed to drop completely under our radar. Other long-term concerns include the democratization of Vietnam, the stability of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, China's demographic (if not military) threat to Siberia, Caspian oil, and the under-reported and seemingly-unending conflict between Christianity and Radical Islam in the Sahel. The threat of loose Russian nukes will keep us involved in the former USSR to an extent far larger than Russia's current stature would dictate.
So France and Germany can go on being just as bratty as they want, but the US is not about to retreat from the world stage. Far from being the cause of some resurgent US isolationism, Franco-German failure to bear their burden in the new War will only enhance the US presence on the world stage, while minimizing their own. That said, re-read the two paragraphs above this one.
What region did I leave out of the strategic assessment? Bar Russia, I've left out all of continental Europe.
I didn't do so out of forgetfulness or spite well, maybe a little spite. But in all honesty, given our concerns today, what concerns do we have left in Europe?
For almost the entire 20th Century, the American foreign policy experience was defined by Europe. When the Anglo-French alliance couldn't force the Germans back, we stepped in. When almost the entire continent was under Nazi rule, we stepped in. We Soviet tanks and intentions were both poised to turn all of Europe into Stalinland, we manned the barricades and stayed there for fifty years. When no one could get a handle on the ethnic slaughter in the Balkans, we stepped in.
We've bled for Europe. We put Europe under our nuclear umbrella, claiming we'd allow our own cities to be destroyed, if the Soviets ever threatened Paris or Bonn. American dollars paid for Europe's postwar reconstruction.
Yet when we were attacked on 9/11, all we got in return for our troubles was a linen hanky pressed to a dry eye. France even went so far as to scuttle NATO or even UN involvement in Iraqi peacekeeping.
I don't know what big crisis France or Germany may someday face. But if they find they can't handle it, and they come running to us for help. . .
. . .if we tell them to get lost, will they have anyone to blame but themselves?
freeandfun1 said:Not at all. We have done MORE for Europe than Europe has EVER done for us. And the French like to think they are so superior. Then why the fuck did we have to come to their rescue in WWII? So YOU ARE WRONG! History is on MY SIDE!
MrMarbles said:which in turned allowed it to spread it's views on other peoples.
While America was practicing an attempted neutrality during the beginning of WWII, it was hardly sitting on its hands. America was helping out the allied powers in many ways short of actual troop commission - from arms to intelligence. America's isolationism actually stemmed from the commonly held idea (at the time) that European affairs ought to stay in Europe. As it turned out, both sides of the ocean had to work together for the benefit of the whole world. It's interesting how in today's age, Europe (principally France) likes the idea that America ought not to meddle in European affairs. Unfortunately, history teaches us that Europe simply can't take care of itself in the end.MrMarbles said:Um, okay, whatever. It took pearl harbour to bring America into the war, and that was in the South Pacific. Hitler in turn declared war on America, this was roughly two years after France was overrun. America, not you, came to France and helped liberate it, yes. But not after a whole lot of sitting on it's hands. And in the end, WWII was the best thing to happen to the US. After that, with everyone else weak, it was able to assum the role as a super power, which in turned allowed it to spread it's views on other peoples.
Shazbot said:While America was practicing an attempted neutrality during the beginning of WWII, it was hardly sitting on its hands. America was helping out the allied powers in many ways short of actual troop commission - from arms to intelligence. America's isolationism actually stemmed from the commonly held idea (at the time) that European affairs ought to stay in Europe. As it turned out, both sides of the ocean had to work together for the benefit of the whole world. It's interesting how in today's age, Europe (principally France) likes the idea that America ought not to meddle in European affairs. Unfortunately, history teaches us that Europe simply can't take care of itself in the end.
-Douglas
Not at all. We have done MORE for Europe than Europe has EVER done for us. And the French like to think they are so superior. Then why the fuck did we have to come to their rescue in WWII? So YOU ARE WRONG! History is on MY SIDE!
MrMarbles said:America did help plenty. But understand, they didn't come running in to save the day when they had a chance to. They did so when the war finally came to them.
Thats the blanket staement which is wrong.
MrMarbles said:America did help plenty. But understand, they didn't come running in to save the day when they had a chance to. They did so when the war finally came to them.
Thats the blanket staement which is wrong.
freeandfun1 said:Perhaps because the French have ALWAYS been self-righteous in their views.
As for the Germans, I myself have always enjoyed the Germans. Many of us vets have at least served SOME time in Germany and I think that, for the most part, most of us agree that during that time we did spend there, the Germans were pretty cool to us. Sure, the "outlook" has changed and they are not as friendly now, but I have no first hand experience of Germans being rude to me because I am American, but I have had experiences with French that have been rude to me for that reason.
Kathianne said:Surely I wonder why do I get asked these kind of questions? Why not SE or MB or DK? Never mind Jimnyc, we all know NOT to ask him this kind of question. Is it something I've done? Dang, for the most part here I am minding my own business, just reading and plugging away at some responses.
Well Mr/Ms Number, let me say that I don't HATE the French. I just do not believe they are a US ally, indeed, I believe they are at best a nuisance, at worst an enemy.
Actually, read this: http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10454
and you'll see that my instincts were correct, the French were addressing this nearly 60 years ago.
Germany is a different kettle of fish altogether. I'm not so sure the German people care for US all that much, but their leadership does, Schroeder's pandering campaigning aside. See, even us conservatives are nuanced enough to get the difference.
8236 said:I presume you saw Josker Fischer's outburst in the presence of his holiness Donald Rumsfeld (good German name btw)
I do think American anti-French feeling has become as irrational as the Iraqvasion.