Shove off, France. Leave it to the British.
- Thread starter Blackleaf
- Start date
Re: RE: Shove off, France. L
Ah yes--
In europe the british-monarchist-fascists together with Hitler mussolini, and Franco defeat democrasy in Spain
ah yes---then --the spineless hypocrites change their mind--
it seems hitler really was a bad guy---
wow----I guess the spanish had figured that out before you great leaders
and then after the the war the CIA , british intelligence and the catholic
church help much of the nazi command to escape to south america.
where--their partners in crime--the US takes over to crush any attempts south american people to acquire freedom.
The UK and the US ----rogue states of spineless hypocritical mass murdering lying hypocrites
and only a spineless hypocrite would say something like----Franco was quite liberal---you ask me to think objectively
The anglosaxon dementia you exhibit is a menace to the human race
and as far as your language goes--it is a means not an end
you arent fit to kiss the boots of the french
Daz_Hockey said:
Ah yes--
In europe the british-monarchist-fascists together with Hitler mussolini, and Franco defeat democrasy in Spain
ah yes---then --the spineless hypocrites change their mind--
it seems hitler really was a bad guy---
wow----I guess the spanish had figured that out before you great leaders
and then after the the war the CIA , british intelligence and the catholic
church help much of the nazi command to escape to south america.
where--their partners in crime--the US takes over to crush any attempts south american people to acquire freedom.
The UK and the US ----rogue states of spineless hypocritical mass murdering lying hypocrites
and only a spineless hypocrite would say something like----Franco was quite liberal---you ask me to think objectively
The anglosaxon dementia you exhibit is a menace to the human race
and as far as your language goes--it is a means not an end
you arent fit to kiss the boots of the french
RE: Shove off, France. L
ha "Anglo-Saxon" 2 seperate tribes
ha "hypocrite" - Franco was VERY different to the two other facist dictators of the time (why are you even argueing this point?.).it's been proven?...did Franco order all jews to be removed from spain?..no, did he even enter the war on the side of the nazi's? no, did he directly re-establish democracy in spain? yes...completly different.
Obviously you know little about world politics then, or history. Yeah, the french, lovely people "fit to kiss the boots of the french" - we were fit enough when they bloody need help though lol francophile.
ha "Anglo-Saxon" 2 seperate tribes
ha "hypocrite" - Franco was VERY different to the two other facist dictators of the time (why are you even argueing this point?.).it's been proven?...did Franco order all jews to be removed from spain?..no, did he even enter the war on the side of the nazi's? no, did he directly re-establish democracy in spain? yes...completly different.
Obviously you know little about world politics then, or history. Yeah, the french, lovely people "fit to kiss the boots of the french" - we were fit enough when they bloody need help though lol francophile.
Im not surprised you would defend Franco--you are after all what you are.
Enjoy your slide to the bottom and do try and HANG ON to that smelly butt of america as well as kiss it--post colonial decline can get pretty rough.
say does the UK just kiss americas smelly butt--or do they FRENCH kiss it---- maybe they taught you that when they conquered you in 1066--and civilized you
no wait--tried to civilize you
I guess thats one thing the French failed at--civilizing Albion--but one cant expect the impossible --even from such a great people as the French.
oh well--they tried
Enjoy your slide to the bottom and do try and HANG ON to that smelly butt of america as well as kiss it--post colonial decline can get pretty rough.
say does the UK just kiss americas smelly butt--or do they FRENCH kiss it---- maybe they taught you that when they conquered you in 1066--and civilized you
no wait--tried to civilize you
I guess thats one thing the French failed at--civilizing Albion--but one cant expect the impossible --even from such a great people as the French.
oh well--they tried
Re: RE: Shove off, France. Leave it to the British.
(Before you spout any more nonsense, I'd take a look at that, have look at the surnames, see if you can find a frenchman there lol)
You really know nothing about history do you?...it's almost laughable, you've fallen into a peice of french nonsense....the french are fully aware the Normans (full name NORSEMEN) were actually GERMANS, as GERMAN as the SAXONS 1066 HAD NOTHING...YOU UNDERSTAND N-O-T-H-I-N-G to do with the french...read a book, learn something, it was all about bitter germanic infighting ACTUALLY..ask a frenchman, he'll tell you, they derspised Guilliem "Le Batard" Hocke ACTUALLY (and where do you think my surname comes from?).
Why do you think the french got rid of the Duchy of normandy eh?...cus it's not french....the ANGLO SAXONS are the last people to rule Britain you stupid fool.
And Franco handed over all his powers in the end to the spanish democratic government and re-installed King Juan ACTUALLY. THE FRENCH were and still are brutal, they were still guillotining asians in their own colonies until the 1960's.
when you know ANYTHING about Britain or infact world history, get back to me, cus frankly, your way out of your depth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_I_of_Englandcortex said:
(Before you spout any more nonsense, I'd take a look at that, have look at the surnames, see if you can find a frenchman there lol)
You really know nothing about history do you?...it's almost laughable, you've fallen into a peice of french nonsense....the french are fully aware the Normans (full name NORSEMEN) were actually GERMANS, as GERMAN as the SAXONS 1066 HAD NOTHING...YOU UNDERSTAND N-O-T-H-I-N-G to do with the french...read a book, learn something, it was all about bitter germanic infighting ACTUALLY..ask a frenchman, he'll tell you, they derspised Guilliem "Le Batard" Hocke ACTUALLY (and where do you think my surname comes from?).
Why do you think the french got rid of the Duchy of normandy eh?...cus it's not french....the ANGLO SAXONS are the last people to rule Britain you stupid fool.
And Franco handed over all his powers in the end to the spanish democratic government and re-installed King Juan ACTUALLY. THE FRENCH were and still are brutal, they were still guillotining asians in their own colonies until the 1960's.
when you know ANYTHING about Britain or infact world history, get back to me, cus frankly, your way out of your depth.
Graeme said:
I was never arguing who had the better relationship with NATO, nor was I arguing the reasons (or lack thereof) why one Nation has a larger military. I posted what I did because of this statement by Blackleaf:
I pointed out that France has both a larger air force and more troops deployed abroad than the British. My aim was to shoot down Blackleafs pomp, which I did. Also this statement:
Their committment of troops has nothing to do with their status as a World power. The fact that they have 33,000 men and women deployed abroad cuts in to their force capability, and frankly the Israeli/Hezbollah issue has to rank pretty low on France's to do list. Their chief military goal since the close of the Second World War has been the defence of their own boarders. They were invaded twice in less than 50 years, and their present day military has the primary task of making sure that doesn't happen again. France, to this day, remains leery of Italy and Germany, depsite the fact that they're "Allies".
With regard to:
No, they are not more powerful. They have the benefit of an alliance with the only remaining super power, but that doesn't make them a super power by proxy. The United States cannot (and should not) be counted on to assist Britain. The U.S. is a selfish Nation whose own goals come long ahead of any allies'. A war with France and Britan would never occur, such a conflict would split NATO, with many Nations on either side. With that in mind, the chief point of this crass thread was to make France out to be militarily weak, when in reality the French Armed Forces are one of the best equipped and best trained on the planet. Some quick figures:
Worlds Largest Armies: (ground troops)
1. China - 1,700,000
2. India - 1,200,000
3. North Korea - 900,000
4. South Korea - 560,000
5. Pakistan - 520,000
6. United States - 475,000
7. Myanmar - 325,000
8. Russia - 320,000
9. Iran - 320,000
10.France 238,000 (including Naval infantry divisions and Foreign Legion)
Worlds Largest Air Forces: (combat aircraft)
1. Russia - 3,996
2. China - 3,520
3. United States - 2,598
4. India - 774
5. Taiwan - 698
6. France - 642
7. North Korea - 593
8. Egypt - 583
9. Ukraine - 521
10. South Korea - 488
Worlds Largest Navies: (personel)
1. United States - 369,800
2. China - 230,000
3. Russia - 171,500
4. Taiwan - 68,000
5. France - 62,600
6. South Korea - 60,000
7. India - 53,000
8. Turkey - 51,000
9. Indonesia - 47,000
10. North Korea - 46,000
cortex said:
I'm not inclind to label the British and American rogue states, but I do have to admit I agree with most of that post cortex. The French indeed do make home defence their primary goal, with everything else being secondary. The British and Americans I will admit are more aggressive on the international stage. Good post.
RE: Shove off, France. L
what even the claptrap about the french ruling britain?...I mean, I admire you for having a Mallrats quote, but you must know he's talking gibberish?
I'm afraid his world view is somewhat strange in my opinion, and why the need for a huge army anymore?....besides, it would be interesting to see the size of the commonwealth nations armies together.....I see india is listed there.
what even the claptrap about the french ruling britain?...I mean, I admire you for having a Mallrats quote, but you must know he's talking gibberish?
I'm afraid his world view is somewhat strange in my opinion, and why the need for a huge army anymore?....besides, it would be interesting to see the size of the commonwealth nations armies together.....I see india is listed there.
Nothing in his post that I quote refered to France ruling Britain. He made a good point however, France has a large, well equipped, military, yet doesn't feel the need to use it. Perhaps that's why Blackleaf feels as he does about France? Having never seen France in action (post-Gulf War of 90-91 that is), he assumes they're incapable?
As for cortex and his World views. Yes, they're somewhat strange, but everyone is entitled to their opinions, no matter how screwball they are. I'm not saying I agree 100% with the man, just on that one aspect of his post we're in agreement.
As for having a large army. You sound like the global village pre-World War I. The reality Daz is that a large military is invaluable to a Nation. It serves many purposes, not only combat, but humanitarian, disaster relief, promoting international sovreignty, etc. Also, with the way the World is today, a large Army isn't a bad thing. Lords know that right now in Canada there are those in Government wishing they'd not short-changed the Canadian Forces for decades, considering now we're in the middle of a War in Afghanistan, where a few extra thousand troops would be appreciated. Hindsight is 20/20 no?
As for cortex and his World views. Yes, they're somewhat strange, but everyone is entitled to their opinions, no matter how screwball they are. I'm not saying I agree 100% with the man, just on that one aspect of his post we're in agreement.
As for having a large army. You sound like the global village pre-World War I. The reality Daz is that a large military is invaluable to a Nation. It serves many purposes, not only combat, but humanitarian, disaster relief, promoting international sovreignty, etc. Also, with the way the World is today, a large Army isn't a bad thing. Lords know that right now in Canada there are those in Government wishing they'd not short-changed the Canadian Forces for decades, considering now we're in the middle of a War in Afghanistan, where a few extra thousand troops would be appreciated. Hindsight is 20/20 no?
Logic you really don't understand the conflict do you? How can the Israeli invasion of Lebanon be either the United States or the U.K.s fault? Also how can Israeli soldiers set up a buffer zone between Israel and Lebanon? That's intellectually bankrupt.
Re: RE: Shove off, France. Leave it to the British.
Use your logic, 2 soldiers were kidnapped, result? israel decided to invade , comits war crimes,supported by USA,CANADA, UK, claiming, israel has the ritght to defend themselves, WHEN FRANCE HAS OPPOSED THE ATTACK,so usa, canada, uk and israel should provides troops, simple deduction, so next time, they will think about what they support.
Mogz said:
Use your logic, 2 soldiers were kidnapped, result? israel decided to invade , comits war crimes,supported by USA,CANADA, UK, claiming, israel has the ritght to defend themselves, WHEN FRANCE HAS OPPOSED THE ATTACK,so usa, canada, uk and israel should provides troops, simple deduction, so next time, they will think about what they support.
Re: RE: Shove off, France. Leave it to the British.
why thank you mogz
and for my world views--of course you must realize that i exaggerate to make a point
Of course I dont REALLY believe the US and the UK are rogue states--but there are lawless elements in the military-industrial structuress of those countries--and others of course---that drive those societies to unjustly use their capabilities---POST ww2----and in effect in the long run make future more devastating wars more likely
I do have the utmost respect for the military --really-- so long as it is used JUSTLY and with restraint for the sole purpose of DEFENSE--and as DETERRANT to war---so long as one can.
IMHO---The wise use of military potential is exemplified by the French model.--not the Anglo-american which in my opinion is arrogant- and paranoid.
A true sign of strength is to be powerfull, to have the capability to ruthlessly destroy ones enemies--for self defense--but NOT to do it simply because one can
or because one can make a profit-- ie oil
or becausee one is afraid-ie--the anti terrorism hysteria
--but always find a better way out--that is what a strong and intelligent and just nation would do.
A morally weak nation acquires power and delights in using it in order to feed a basic inferiority complex ( in the case of the UK---the shame of post colonial decline) or paranoia-aggression ( The US)
Mogz said:
why thank you mogz
and for my world views--of course you must realize that i exaggerate to make a point
Of course I dont REALLY believe the US and the UK are rogue states--but there are lawless elements in the military-industrial structuress of those countries--and others of course---that drive those societies to unjustly use their capabilities---POST ww2----and in effect in the long run make future more devastating wars more likely
I do have the utmost respect for the military --really-- so long as it is used JUSTLY and with restraint for the sole purpose of DEFENSE--and as DETERRANT to war---so long as one can.
IMHO---The wise use of military potential is exemplified by the French model.--not the Anglo-american which in my opinion is arrogant- and paranoid.
A true sign of strength is to be powerfull, to have the capability to ruthlessly destroy ones enemies--for self defense--but NOT to do it simply because one can
or because one can make a profit-- ie oil
or becausee one is afraid-ie--the anti terrorism hysteria
--but always find a better way out--that is what a strong and intelligent and just nation would do.
A morally weak nation acquires power and delights in using it in order to feed a basic inferiority complex ( in the case of the UK---the shame of post colonial decline) or paranoia-aggression ( The US)
RE: Shove off, France. L
"( in the case of the UK---the shame of post colonial decline)"
what a complete load of BS, check your history, check your current events, it is infact FRANCE who have had the problems of post colonial decline, the uk went about it in about the most admirable way, unlike the french (have you any idea about Vietnam then? or perhaps Algeria?, how about Niger?).
*Morally weak?....come here and say that little web warrior.
"( in the case of the UK---the shame of post colonial decline)"
what a complete load of BS, check your history, check your current events, it is infact FRANCE who have had the problems of post colonial decline, the uk went about it in about the most admirable way, unlike the french (have you any idea about Vietnam then? or perhaps Algeria?, how about Niger?).
*Morally weak?....come here and say that little web warrior.