please stop bashing France

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 14:37:01 +0200, lekomin inc wrote:

I agree that Polish armed forces (including the air forces) are
substandard compared to the major NATO members.. Poland is on par with
Spain, I would think. It cannot be compared with DE, US, UK, FR or IT.

Hmm. I'm not sure this is true? What fighter does Poland currently
use? I'm guessing it's the MiG-29, which is better than anything the
RAF has (until Typhoon becomes operational) or the elderly
Starfighters italy uses.

Yet
in comparsion to the Eastern Europe there is nothing except Russia (of
course...) Ukraine and maybe Belarus that can match Poland. The Polish army
is changing fast. We have 48 F16bl52+ on order, which will be quite a
capable plane (with Pantera XR pod, Aim-9X, JSOW, JDAM to name the more
novel systems). Army has around 700 Patria AMV on order, which are the most
up to date wheeled infantry carriers on the market.

That's similar to what Finland, Sweden and Norway use, IIRC. There's
also a 6x6 vehicle in the same family, the XA. It seems a capable
family of vehicles. I particularly like the idea of a dual 120 mm
mortar, shown he

http://members.surfeu.fi/stefan.allen/amv8x8.html

Note that this is better than the UK's new vehicle, which is
basically an overpriced and lightly armoured 4x4 truck.

The UK did have a program for an 8x8 vehicle, the Boxer. They spent
large amounts of money together with Germany and the netherlands
developing this vehicle (why? there's plenty of wheeled armoured
vehicles on the market -- the patria series, the MOWAG Piranha, the
BTR-80 and -90, etc. A new one is unlikely to be much better since
automotive technology is mature).

Then Britain decided it didn't want the Boxer, it wanted something
lighter that could be easily transported. So it's now paying over
the odds (GBP 400k per vehicle IIRC) for something that's likely to
be little better than the land rovers ans Saxons the British army
already uses (and are cheaper) or the Humvees the USA uses (and are
also cheaper).

So it seems to me that Poland is paying less overall and getting a
more combat-capable vehicle than Britain.

(The Patria vehicles are costing c. EUR 600k or GBP 400k per
vehicle, about what Britain is paying; but Britain has also thrown
away the money for the Boxer development).

We have just taken over
128 Leopard 2 A4 MTBs from Germany, and now there are talks of upgrading
them to the A5 or A6 standard.

This is a pretty decent tank, comparable to the British Challenger
II.

There are around 220 PT-91 Twardy MTBs in
line. Those are modifided T72Ms. More of the old T72 might get so called
NATO modification (including 120mm smoothbore gun).

Britain had some Challenger I tanks, not the latest thing, but
still a respectasble tank. Instead of storing them or using them for
reserve units, it stupidly gave them away (to Jordan).

Medium range anti tank
will be handled by Israeli Spike systems.. I know that Javelin is better but
the price is outragous.

Spike is longer-ranged than Javelin (4 km v. 2.5 km). Did Poland
consider the Russian Kornet (range 5 km)?

The UK is currently considering either Javelin or Spike.

They aren't (AFAIK) considering Kornet, presumably because it might
offer better value for money (longer range, and probably cheaper).
AFAICT, the UK govmt isn't interested in value-for-money when buying
military equipment.

Programs that might start sometime in near future
include a medium range UAV (Predator being the front runner of course)

In a sensible world Poland would look to jointly developing with
other European partners a family of cheap UAVs/UCAVs/cruise
missiles. (Finland would be a good partner, since like Poland it
doesn't have money to waste on over-priced development programs).
iof a guy in New Zealand can build a cruise missile in his garage
for $5000, this ought to be a sensible proposition.

medium and heavy lift helo (personally I love EH101 but I'm pretty sure we
will end up with UH-60L and hopefully some Chinooks)

Chinook is nice because it can carry heavy loads. EH101 is a good
general-purpose helicopter, that could be used for transport,
recce, or adapted as an attack helicopter.

(I am as yet unpersuaded that dedicated attack helicopters such as
the WAH-64 used by the UK are value for money).

To sum up, Poland might be a dwarf in comparsion to the UK

I dispute this point of view.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

"tscottme" wrote in message
...
Since you seemed to miss the reasons the first time around you might
want to read this.
snip

If I had neighbours like theirs I'd be claiming to be pretty adequately
tooled up too. Still doesn't answer the question about where it all went
too. You'd think someone who'd have no compunction using such weapons on his
own people would eventually use them as a last ditch attempt to save his own
regime, if he had them.

Si

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:18:59 +0200, lekomin inc wrote:

Sure. You want GDP voting? ;PPP Take the GDP of EU15, subtract the GDPs of
Germany, France and Belgium (the anti-US countries) and add the GDPs of 10
new memberstates (all pro-US). I can bet in this sort of GDP voting Germany
France and Belgium would loose.

I think you will find that Germany's GDP on its own exceeds all 10
of the 2004 entrants, plus both the 2007 entrants, together.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:11:35 -0400, Stephen Harding wrote:
phil hunt wrote:

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 03:54:40 GMT, Tank Fixer wrote:

In case no one has mentioned it lately.

Your sentence no verb.

Thank you for you're support.

"Thank you for you are support."??

It is too bad it took nearly 50 years for Poland to gain it's freedom.

"It is too bad it took nearly 50 years for Poland to gain it is
freedom."??

I wonder how long it'll take for ****wit to learn elementary
grammar. Perhaps ****wit's as cultureless as it thinks the French
are.

Quick! Get to your Oxford English Dictionary and look up the definition
for the word "ANAL"!

It will make you a better person.

I wouldn't have made my comment if the OP hadn't said France has no
culture. Calling someone cultureless while being aparently unable to
construct grammatically correct sentences in inviting derision.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

"tscottme" wrote in message
...
Victor Davis Hanson makes a good point that what threatens the French
and the radical anti-Americans around the world is the eagerness of
their young to embrace what the US offers while considering their local
culture as dated.

I think the article came over a bit self-indulgent, but I think there's some
truth in what he says, (and what you suggest above.) Though in Europe at
least I don't think it's about the young considering their own cultures as
dated, but often the American money that comes with the imported
movies/clothing/music/food ensures that local products aren't able to
effectively compete. (Consider that the majority of movie theatres in the UK
are now owned by Amercan movie distributors, (like WB for example), it's
damn hard to get an audience for home grown movies without at least US
investment in the production. ) In effect, we're increasingly not given the
choice of accepting American cultural influence but feel it's being forced
upon us. Of course there are plenty of fine US movies/clothes/music/food,
but whoever remembers the good things?

Si

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:47:37 +0200, Pierre-Henri Baras wrote:

"phil hunt" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 22:04:14 -0700, Frank Vaughan
wrote:

Yes, and the decision by the mayor of Paris to name a convicted
American cop killer as an honorary citizen was what?

Souind bizarre -- do you have details?

Pff. The gay, socialist mayor of Paris made Mumia Adbu Jamal (spelling?) an
honorary citizen.

Correct spelling is Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Seems to me he was making a point against the death penalty and
against perceived miscarriages of justice in the USA.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:59:09 +0200, "ArVa" wrote:

"tscottme" a écrit dans le message de
...

9/11 is why we spend time going after the groups we see as dangerous and
less time sitting in cafes sipping bad coffee and worrying if they like
us or not. If you want a say in world events, become a US citizen or
get your country to take the responsibility to become powerful.

When one's acts have repercussions on the whole world, everyone has a say.
Aren't freedom of speech and democracy the very concepts your country was
built upon?


The Europeans have lived in a protected little green house so long they
seem to think that if all the nice people just agree to be nice there
will be nothing but joy for all of us. Someone has to shoot the wolf at
the door, even if the loud noise disturbs your garden party.

Does the 20th century in Europe really match your idea of a garden party?
Yes, we have experienced wars and yes, we have experienced and still
experience terrorism; just like you...

Nobody denies that the wolf has to be taken out but the problem is that the
beast is not at the door but hides deep in the forest. One can go after it
swiftly, with dogs and horns, but then the wolf might escape (sounds
familiar?), or one can go stealthy, ambush, and shoot it while it's drinking
at the pond.

ArVa



The French put out a bowl of food and a bowl of water for the "wolf",
rather than help to control or kill it.

Al Minyard

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:29:53 +0200, "ArVa" wrote:

"Chad Irby" a écrit dans le message de
om...

Are you seriously denying that there was a French bashing campaign in the
US? I read a lot the US press avalaible on the Internet and believe me,
there was such a campaign! And for some (fewer and fewer every day to be
honest) it's not even over yet...

According to me, the most infamous piece was Ron Marr's article titled "Why
I hate the French". Just an excerpt :

"[...] The French eat horse. They eat glands. They eat bugs. I know this
because they rarely brush their teeth. Their women whine and complain and
braid their armpit hair. Their men are beret-wearing twig-boys with bad
complexions. All French people consider themselves intellectually superior,
and I suppose they are if the comparison is to an incontinent house cat.
Give them two minutes and they will inevitably rave of their sexual prowess,
which is a little like Christopher Reeve bragging about his speed in the 40
yard dash.[...]"
The rest at : http://www.americandaily.com/item/1287, but you probably
already had a good laugh reading it before.

OK, that kind of bs was not on the front page of the LA times, of the Dallas
Morning News or the Washington Post but it is printed in many local papers
throughout the country and reach million people.
OK, the vast majority of these people of course don't take it for word, but
it spreads hatred and distrust. For instance, how many of your fellow
citizens actually think, beyond any odds and despite the lack of evidence
and the denials, that France actually supported and helped SH's regime
*against* the US?


ArVa

The vast majority of US citizens believe, correctly, that France
was/is supporting Saddam. France has been an enemy of the US for many
years.

Al Minyard

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 08:04:13 +0200, "ArVa" wrote:

"Cub Driver" a écrit dans le message de
.. .

Aren't freedom of speech and democracy the very concepts your country was
built upon?

Many Americans don't understand the concept of free speech, so I'm not
surprised that the concept should elude a Frenchman.

Freedom of speech is not a concept known and practiced only by Americans.
Don't be so self-centered.

The U.S. Constitution imposes upon me the duty to give another man the
freedom to speak his mind. It does not, however, impose upon me a
duty to listen.

Last time I checked, the US constitution had not been adopted yet as the new
UN chart, not even as the new Usenet one. Anyway, I get your point and
you're right, but the other poster seemed to raise conditions to that
freedom to speak, a sort of "you want to talk? Then you have to got a GDP or
a gun at least as big as mine"... Have we learn nothing from the previous
century?

As for democracy--ayuh! That's what Americans for more than a hundred
years have bled for, bringing democracy to Cuba, France, Iraq, and
other unfortunate places. But loving democracy does not oblige us to
treat M. Chirac with respect. Quite the contrary, in fact. The
American brand of democracy has always had a strong vein of
irreverance built into it.

Irreverance and objective criticism are fine. You can say whatever you want
about Chirac's policy or even the man himself, I don't care. He's a public
man, a politician, and therefore is exposed to that kind of treatment as it
goes with the job. What I can't stand is the concept of bashing an entire
country and its population with specious and tasteless arguments just
because you don't agree (or not even understand) its position.


ArVa

We understand the French "position", standing with both hands raised
in surrender.

Al Minyard

The vast majority of US citizens believe, correctly, that France
was/is supporting Saddam. France has been an enemy of the US for many
years.

this same 'vast majority' vote for the Big Arnold or Mickey Mouse ))))

In fact only the US citizens ignorants like you believe that. I'm sure it's
not 'the vast majority'. look on this NG, you're only 5 or 6 with always the
same poor discourt

--
Franck

www.pegase-airshow.com
www.picavia.com