please stop bashing France

In article ,
"John Mullen" wrote:

Oh, I 'got' the 'joke' ok. Just saw it for what it was, a diversion from the
fact you have nothing to contribute and have lost the argument.

As far as getting the joke, you really didn't - or you wouldn't have
called it a "spelling flame" and would have bitched about "bad jokes"
before it was explained to you...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:13:20 +0200, Pierre-Henri Baras
wrote:

My understanding is that some people think he is innocent.

It is my understanding that large numbers of people think that
UFOs are manned by space aliens, that Elvis is alive or that
72 virgins await them in heaven for dying while killing westerners.

I suggest that "some people think" is poor support.

First, why the US should prevent other countries for preserving their
interests in the world just to serve their interests ?

Because that is just international politics and to be expected. Nations will
have competing interests and denouncing a nation for pursuing their interests
is ridiculous (even though it happens to the US on a daily basis).

Seems to you that
UKs & France's interests don't count in this case.

First, Ike took no action to impede UK and French action outside of a UN
resolution. Second this was most definitely a case of competing interests.
Eisenhower believed that the Suez crisis was going to foil a US attempt to
peacefully reunite Germany and could lead to a full scale regional war in the
middle east. Both of these scenarios would have had a significant negative
impact on US national objectives. Obviously both the French and British
government believed the action they were taking was in their national interest
as well. I fully recognize that, I was just showing how the action *did* impact
US national objectives.

Second : if France really had trade interests with SH, as some people
assert, then why do you blame France for protecting its interests ?

Well there's, probably, the biggest gripe most Americans have with the French
actions. Most Americans believe the above statement to be true, and if that's
the case that would explain French actions, but France denied having any
current or future trade designs with Iraq.

Wouldn't the US have done the same thing ?

Absolutely, so are you ready to admit what Chirac has long since denied?

So what major impact had SH on
national security matters ?

First, the jury is still out on WMD. I know the French expected it to be
stored in big warehouses with a sign on the door that said; "VX agent", but
that hasn't happened. Second, even if no actual weapons are found, in the days
leading up to OIF, *some* US inteligence sources believed WMD was in existance
in Iraq and there is proof that Hussain was dealing with international
terrorists (Abu Nidal died in Baghdad in early 2002 of a self inflicted gun
wound....7 or 8 of them). While our intel may have been poor (although see
sentence number one, jury is still out), Hussain's government didn't help
themselves out in their book keeping. By the UN's owns counting, their were
tons and tons of chemical agents unaccounted for in Iraq. The Iraqis claimed
they destroyed them, but could provide not records.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"Pierre-Henri Baras" wrote in message ...
"Chad Irby" a écrit dans le message de news:
.. .
"Pierre-Henri Baras" wrote:

"Chad Irby" a écrit dans le message de news:

Do you even *read* your own papers?

Don't worry for me, I read them!
But I'm still waiting for even the slightest example of french front
page
articles crying out that "America is Evil", or that "America is the
ennemy",
or some other dumb thing.

Find some similar "front page" articles in the mainstream American
press, first.

I'll do that when you find French front pages reading "America is evil!".
OK? If I can research US papers, you can research french ones, right? They
all have English versions.


snip

Pierre-Henri,

If you know something that I don't, please enlighten me. I looked at all the
major french newspaper sites when the Afgan fracas began, and none of them had
an english version available. I went again after reading your message, and
looked at Le Monde, and nothing had changed there. I haven't checked on the
rest again, but if you know of any that actually do have an english version
please let us know. Perhaps that is part of the problem. It is really hard
to get your message out if you won't put it in English

Dave

"Franck" wrote in message
...
without vioaling US Law.

lol, incredible

Round and round the mullberry bush, the monkey chased the weasel ...

In article ,
"John Mullen" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote:

As far as getting the joke, you really didn't - or you wouldn't have
called it a "spelling flame" and would have bitched about "bad jokes"
before it was explained to you...

That's 'really' meaning 'according to you, unsupported by any evidence'

Nope. The evidence is that you didn't say anything about the pun until
after I pointed it out.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"John Mullen" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote:

As far as getting the joke, you really didn't - or you wouldn't have
called it a "spelling flame" and would have bitched about "bad jokes"
before it was explained to you...

That's 'really' meaning 'according to you, unsupported by any evidence'

Nope. The evidence is that you didn't say anything about the pun until
after I pointed it out.

Riiiight. Of course, I couldn't possibly just have been doing my best to
ignore a crap joke.

Unless you mean Chile.

Chili genocide refers to killing all of the peppers.

And also one in which you manged to avoid answering the point the OP was
making. Which you still haven't done.

John

In article ,
"John Mullen" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message

Nope. The evidence is that you didn't say anything about the pun until
after I pointed it out.

Riiiight. Of course, I couldn't possibly just have been doing my best to
ignore a crap joke.

"Ignoring" it by complaining about a spelling flame that wasn't there.

In your own term, "riiiight."

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Frank Vaughan" a écrit dans le message de
.. .


Yes, and the decision by the mayor of Paris to name a convicted
American cop killer as an honorary citizen was what???? Just one
more magnanimous effort at humanitarianism?

Who is that cop killer?


Abu Mumia Jamal

**** the French.


We have a pretty good record at doing it without external help, but thanks
anyway...

ArVa

Finally, at least some humor can be found in the world.

Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"John Mullen" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message

Nope. The evidence is that you didn't say anything about the pun
until
after I pointed it out.

Riiiight. Of course, I couldn't possibly just have been doing my best to
ignore a crap joke.

"Ignoring" it by complaining about a spelling flame that wasn't there.

In your own term, "riiiight."


Unless you mean Chile.

Chili genocide refers to killing all of the peppers.

And also one in which you managed to avoid answering the point the OP was
making. Which you still haven't done.

John