Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________-+__ ihuvpe

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote:

In article , RobertR237 says...

I could even accept his throwing his medals away and would have had some
respect for that if he had not retrieved them and then tried to wear them again
as some badge of honor. You can't have it both ways. Had he simply stood by
his convictions, even when it didn't seem to be the most politically attractive
thing to do, I could have accepted and supported him. I can admire a man who
stands by his convictions, even when the disagree with my own. Kerry had never
show such convictions and neither do many of his most vocal and ardent
supporters.
Exactly how I feel about him . If he would have said something like "Bush sent
our factorys overseas.But if I'm elected I'll have my wife bring all of her
overseas companies back to the USA" Hmmm Now that would show a bit of courage in
ones convictions.

Chuck, I'm no fan of Kerry's nor do I have a stake in Heinz, but check
www.heinz.com for some info about the company, the degree of Mrs.
Kerry's ownership, the percentage of foreign SALES versus foreign
production, and the percentage of their PAC money going to dems vs.
reps.

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in message
...

Thank you very much,we'll remember that when you come begging to us to
save
your worthless asses one more time.

I believe the French came to our aid first during the American Revolution.

Rich


You are right but I am not sure their intent was so much to aid as to injure
England in any way possible. Their motivies then as with Iraq were purely
selfish. The French didn't support the US in Iraq because they had been
dealing around the UN sanctions for years and had everything to gain from the
status-quo.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

In article , Rich says...

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in message
...

Thank you very much,we'll remember that when you come begging to us to save
your worthless asses one more time.

I believe the French came to our aid first during the American Revolution.

Rich

Yes they did and I'm greatful for that .But sadly since then their attitude has
changed.

See ya

Chuck s

On 09 Nov 2004 13:34:31 GMT, osite (RobertR237) wrote:


ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in message
...

Thank you very much,we'll remember that when you come begging to us to
save
your worthless asses one more time.

I believe the French came to our aid first during the American Revolution.


You are right but I am not sure their intent was so much to aid as to injure
England in any way possible. Their motivies then as with Iraq were purely
selfish.

You're absolutely, absolutely, right here, Robert. The French government's goal
during the American Revolution was to stick it to the British, not foster the
cause of freedom.

But...how much difference does that make, when we're talking about a moral
obligation? If you are drowning and the guy who fishes you out of the water is
the same guy to whom you owe thousands of dollars, are you then excused from
feeling any gratitude?

The point is, whether a given entity is morally obligated to assist someone who
helped them earlier depends highly on what actions the entity is asked to
undertake.

I agree that France did not join the coalition out of purely selfish motives;
the only point that I dispute is whether they had some sort of moral obligation
to join because of our part in liberating the country during WWII.

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 06:22:02 -0800, Richard Riley
wrote:

And during the Revolution, the French declared that Lafayette was a
traitor and issued a death warrant for him. It was only at the end of
the war, when the French joined (to make life hard for the Brits) that
the order was lifted.

Lafayette did travel to the new United States against the express wishes of King
Louis..but then, Benjamin Franklin didn't want him to go, either. An arrest
warrant to try to stop him leaving the country was issued *at the demand of the
British ambassador*. Lafayette left France against the will of his king,
against the desires of two of the three American commissioners, and with two
British ships in hot pursuit. Ya gotta admire the guy.... nineteen years old.
Sheesh.

In any case, the American alliance with France was signed less than eight months
after Lafayette's arrival in the US. Little chance that he was considered a
"premature anti-Briton". :-)

However, Lafayette WAS declared a traitor and forced to leave France during the
French revolution. He was one of the early leaders of the revolution, was in
command of its first formal armed unit (the National Guard). He was considered
a traitor to his class by the Royalists, but others in the revolution didn't
consider him radical enough. He was eventually denounced as a traitor by
post-revolution national council and forced to flee.

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 02:11:28 -0600, Barnyard BOb - wrote:
So...is the lack of French gratitude any more immoral than our own?

Ron "a little more gas on the fire" Wanttaja
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When you're as old as I am.... DEPENDS.
[Just in case you were seeking an answer.]

I have to defer to the one man who was at both the liberation of Paris and the
Battle of Brandywine. :-)

Ron Wanttaja

"ChuckSlusarczyk" wrote in message
...
In article , Rich says...

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in message
...

Thank you very much,we'll remember that when you come begging to us to
save
your worthless asses one more time.

I believe the French came to our aid first during the American
Revolution.

Rich

Yes they did and I'm greatful for that .But sadly since then their
attitude has
changed.

See ya

Chuck s


Since then, the French (founder member of NATO) have fought in

WW I
France - 1.3 million troops dead (16% of all it's troops) + 40 thousand
civilians (also see http://www.war1418.com/battleverdun/index.htm)
US 126 thousand troops dead (3% of all it's troops)
Russia 1.7 million troops dead (14% of all it's troops) + 3 million
civilians dead.

WW II (Including fighting the Japanese in Indochina)
France 210 thousand troops dead & 350 thousand civilians dead.
US 292 thousand troops dead & 6 thousand civilians dead
USSR 8.7 million troops dead & 17 million civilians dead.

France has also fought in, kept the peace in, or evacuated civilians from -

Gulf War I
Afghanistan
Bosnia
Kosovo
Chad
Haiti
Sudan
Ivory Coast
Liberia
Rwanda
East Timor
(DR) Congo
Zaire
Franco-Austrian war
Franco-Prussian war
25 years of various battles in Syria.
Numerous battles in Indochina/SE Asia

Off the top of my head, the only war that I can think of, that France hasn't
been involved in, is the current cluster-fk in Iraq.

The USA has lost about 800,000-900,000 troops (combat & non-combat) in it's
entire history. France los about that many in just 5 months of 1916. France
has paid it's price, fighting for freedom.

P.S. I'm not French.

Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________-+__ ihuvpe
From: "Rufio"
Date: 11/9/2004 11:10 Central Standard Time
Message-id: 7R6kd.246522$a85.209030@fed1read04


"ChuckSlusarczyk" wrote in message
...
In article , Rich says...

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in message
...

Thank you very much,we'll remember that when you come begging to us to
save
your worthless asses one more time.

I believe the French came to our aid first during the American
Revolution.

Rich

Yes they did and I'm greatful for that .But sadly since then their
attitude has
changed.

See ya

Chuck s


Since then, the French (founder member of NATO) have fought in

WW I
France - 1.3 million troops dead (16% of all it's troops) + 40 thousand
civilians (also see http://www.war1418.com/battleverdun/index.htm)
US 126 thousand troops dead (3% of all it's troops)
Russia 1.7 million troops dead (14% of all it's troops) + 3 million
civilians dead.

WW II (Including fighting the Japanese in Indochina)
France 210 thousand troops dead & 350 thousand civilians dead.
US 292 thousand troops dead & 6 thousand civilians dead
USSR 8.7 million troops dead & 17 million civilians dead.

France has also fought in, kept the peace in, or evacuated civilians from -

Gulf War I
Afghanistan
Bosnia
Kosovo
Chad
Haiti
Sudan
Ivory Coast
Liberia
Rwanda
East Timor
(DR) Congo
Zaire
Franco-Austrian war
Franco-Prussian war
25 years of various battles in Syria.
Numerous battles in Indochina/SE Asia

Off the top of my head, the only war that I can think of, that France hasn't
been involved in, is the current cluster-fk in Iraq.

The USA has lost about 800,000-900,000 troops (combat & non-combat) in it's
entire history. France los about that many in just 5 months of 1916. France
has paid it's price, fighting for freedom.

P.S. I'm not French.

Comparing any loses to those of WW1 is not a good comparison. The horrendous
loses at Verdun, Somme, Ypres etc was a result of insanity. Insanity is trying
the same action that has never has the desired effect before and won't this
time. Going "over the top" into a meat grinder didn't work for anyone in that
war yet they kept doing it. During WW2 the only people stupid enough to
re-enact that theory were the Japanese with attendant losses.


Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Hello, Richard!
You wrote on Tue, 09 Nov 2004 08:54:10 -0800:

RR A small addenda. Those decisions don't mean I'm compromising my
RR standards, either. French wine can be good, but I generally find
RR California wine better, and a lot less expensive. Austrailian wine is
RR certainly as good as French and getting better every year. With
RR dinner last night I had a wonderful Falerno from Italy. They've been
RR making it for 3000 years, they have it down.

RR A good American micro-brew is world class, and there's nothing from
RR Germany that can compare to a Black and Tan.

cant agree with you there. we have all the latest euro models here in south
africa and there's no problem with reliability!

I guess it has everything to do with assembly and not much with design!

Although we have few american cars here, i am positive that there is NO
american car that comes even close to german engineering!

With best regards, ahlbebuck. E-mail:

"B2431" wrote in message
...
Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________-+__ ihuvpe
From: "Rufio"
Date: 11/9/2004 11:10 Central Standard Time
Message-id: 7R6kd.246522$a85.209030@fed1read04


"ChuckSlusarczyk" wrote in message
...
In article , Rich
says...

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in message
...

Thank you very much,we'll remember that when you come begging to us
to
save
your worthless asses one more time.

I believe the French came to our aid first during the American
Revolution.

Rich

Yes they did and I'm greatful for that .But sadly since then their
attitude has
changed.

See ya

Chuck s


Since then, the French (founder member of NATO) have fought in

WW I
France - 1.3 million troops dead (16% of all it's troops) + 40 thousand
civilians (also see http://www.war1418.com/battleverdun/index.htm)
US 126 thousand troops dead (3% of all it's troops)
Russia 1.7 million troops dead (14% of all it's troops) + 3 million
civilians dead.

WW II (Including fighting the Japanese in Indochina)
France 210 thousand troops dead & 350 thousand civilians dead.
US 292 thousand troops dead & 6 thousand civilians dead
USSR 8.7 million troops dead & 17 million civilians dead.

France has also fought in, kept the peace in, or evacuated civilians
from -

Gulf War I
Afghanistan
Bosnia
Kosovo
Chad
Haiti
Sudan
Ivory Coast
Liberia
Rwanda
East Timor
(DR) Congo
Zaire
Franco-Austrian war
Franco-Prussian war
25 years of various battles in Syria.
Numerous battles in Indochina/SE Asia

Off the top of my head, the only war that I can think of, that France
hasn't
been involved in, is the current cluster-fk in Iraq.

The USA has lost about 800,000-900,000 troops (combat & non-combat) in
it's
entire history. France los about that many in just 5 months of 1916.
France
has paid it's price, fighting for freedom.

P.S. I'm not French.

Comparing any loses to those of WW1 is not a good comparison. The
horrendous
loses at Verdun, Somme, Ypres etc was a result of insanity. Insanity is
trying
the same action that has never has the desired effect before and won't
this
time. Going "over the top" into a meat grinder didn't work for anyone in
that
war yet they kept doing it. During WW2 the only people stupid enough to
re-enact that theory were the Japanese with attendant losses.


Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


Here's a little Google Search that gives some great ingo on the French
military... http://tinyurl.com/6u97

Are you sure it's THEIR attitude that changed?


ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in
:

In article , Rich
says...

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in message
...

Thank you very much,we'll remember that when you come begging to us
to save your worthless asses one more time.

I believe the French came to our aid first during the American
Revolution.

Rich

Yes they did and I'm greatful for that .But sadly since then their
attitude has changed.

See ya

Chuck s

I.m not sure the motives of any country or party are ever really free of
self interest, at any time. If they were, sufficient evidence of self
interest can be conjured up so that the fact would never be clear.

In the case of the U.S. involvment in Iraq, or France's choice to avoid
participation, book could be written about how selfless or selfish their
motives are and the view you choose largely depends on the beliefs you carry
into the arguement. There is no clear answer, in the case of either country.

For those outside of the U.S. I would encourage you to keep your "insights"
to yourselves and respect the choice the American people have made. They
seem deeply divided on the topic and we outsiders shouldn't comment.

After all, you never see them interfering in anyone elses business.