France and Germany
- Thread starter Coffee Bean
- Start date
flavio
Banned
Hey Gonz, your idea could be interesting but the problem isn't so much any of our stances on the situation right now. We can have reasonable discussions about this issue all we want. The problem arises when the thread starts out with flamebait like this:
....and then the person who posted this shit starts calling others a troll. But then the very nature of flamebait is that your suposed to ignore the idiot who posts it, which I neglected to do. Even after being specifically warned about CoffeeBean's crap as soon as I replied to the thread.
I really doubt that anything of value will be gained from this thread at this point.
flavio said:
....and then the person who posted this shit starts calling others a troll. But then the very nature of flamebait is that your suposed to ignore the idiot who posts it, which I neglected to do. Even after being specifically warned about CoffeeBean's crap as soon as I replied to the thread.
I really doubt that anything of value will be gained from this thread at this point.
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
It was implied. Did you actually read into that statement that I was somehow insinuating ordinary citizens (i.e., not representatives in any capacity) have the authority to make decisions on the behalf of others in official matters? C'mon flav. Who has that authority? Elected representatives. How could it possibly be read any other way?flavio said:
Yes, ultimately it is my problem if I don't like it... I can either continue not liking it, or ignore it... not much I can do about it, other than pointing out to others (as I have done here) how completely ridiculous that accusation really is. However, if your reading comprehension doesn't allow you to distinguish the difference between flamebait and a rational opinion, then that is most certainly your problem.
I did no such thing. Again, this is just an utter lack of reading comprehension on your behalf. We're talking about going to war - taking military action. My original comment actually made that explicit when I said "alternative to war until the bombs start dropping." In that context, when I said "don't want to do anything until after Saddam kills thousands" it should be obvious that it is a reference to making war. Of course they want to do something, just not take military action. Are you going to nit-pick every single misplaced pronoun, vague adjective, and dangling participle that I might write? You're trying to win your argument based on semantics (which you seem to have trouble with in any case) instead of content, and that is almost always a losing proposition, just as is the case here.
Go ahead, continue dissecting my posts pulling words out of context, and I'll continue with the reading 101. Or, if you'd like to do something more constructive, I'd love to know why my claim that France is acting selfishly is baseless conjecture, while your claim that they are not is somehow different (having read the thread several times, I just don't see the sort of detailed explanation from you that you seem to be requiring from us).
flavio
Banned
Outside - Unfortunately it looks as if you would actually like to salvage some reasonable discussion out of this thread (while of course using your usual insulting tone).
If that is really your intent I don't think this thread is the place for any serious discussion. It hasn't been so far and I doubt it's going to change. If you would really like to discuss something we can take it up in another new or existing thread.
I will respond to your point below but that's about it for me in this thread as far as serious discussion goes.
If you actually have read the the thread several times you would have seen that I never actually claimed that France is not acting selfishly. I don't know if they are or not.
If someone claims to know one way or the other then they should back up what they say.
If that is really your intent I don't think this thread is the place for any serious discussion. It hasn't been so far and I doubt it's going to change. If you would really like to discuss something we can take it up in another new or existing thread.
I will respond to your point below but that's about it for me in this thread as far as serious discussion goes.
outside looking in said:
If you actually have read the the thread several times you would have seen that I never actually claimed that France is not acting selfishly. I don't know if they are or not.
If someone claims to know one way or the other then they should back up what they say.
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
I generally don't have an insulting tone, until I'm accused of posting baseless conjecture and flamebait.
There are other threads on the subject (like the "why we are going to war") which does have much more actual content, so you're right... it would probably be best to make any serious attempt at discussion elsewhere. Just FYI, that other thread has some of my thoughts (though hardly an exhaustive list) on exactly why France is acting selfishly... I just didn't see the need to reproduce all of that here.
There are other threads on the subject (like the "why we are going to war") which does have much more actual content, so you're right... it would probably be best to make any serious attempt at discussion elsewhere. Just FYI, that other thread has some of my thoughts (though hardly an exhaustive list) on exactly why France is acting selfishly... I just didn't see the need to reproduce all of that here.
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
I read that to mean that you believed their motives were other than selfish (since I had figured most US citizens not supporting the war have that stance for clearly unselfish reasons). Looks like we're both guilty of making assumptions I guess.flavio said:
HeXp£Øi±
Well-Known Member
Americans blast French Embassy
EYE ON THE GULF
Americans blast
French Embassy
'It never stopped, it was crazy,'
said diplomat after 1,000 calls
Posted: February 12, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
France's resistance to U.S. policy on Iraq, capped off by its role in blocking U.S.-backed plans to bolster Turkish defenses against a possible Iraqi missile attack, is resulting in a massive outpouring of U.S. anger against France, evidenced by the 1,124 angry calls received by the French Embassy in Washington, D.C., in just one day.
Coming in the wake of Secretary of State Colin Powell's speech to the U.N. on Iraq, the embassy felt under siege, reports the Scotsman newspaper. "It never stopped. It was crazy. Unbelievable," said one French diplomat.
Although the embassy's Nathalie Loiseau notes that some letters and e-mail are supportive of Paris' position, she admits in a Financial Times report that some "would like to boycott France and French products."
With some U.S. talk radio shows openly calling for repatriation of America’s war dead, noted the Scotsman, the phrase "if it weren't for us you'd be speaking German" has become a popular refrain.
"The French attitude is self-defeating," says Gary Schmitt of the Project for a New American Century, said the report. "They are undermining the credibility of the U.N. and now throwing NATO into disarray. I don't know if they realize how they're also causing a split in Europe. If you total up all the things they are interested in, you find that they're making a hash of all of them."
Meanwhile, as WorldNetdaily reported, France was found to be more unpopular among Americans than at any time in the past decade in a new Gallup poll. Unfavorable opinions of France have jumped 17 points in the past year while favorable opinions have dropped 20 points.
American attitudes toward Germany, another European power unwilling to support the U.S. on Iraq, also have become more negative, according to the annual Gallup Poll Social Series Update on World Affairs, conducted Feb. 3-6.
In its editorial yesterday the Washington Post argued that France and Germany now "behave as if they share the same over-riding goal as the Iraqi dictator: thwarting U.S. action even when it is supported by most other NATO and European nations."
Great Britain ranked at the top of the list of 26 nations with a +83 percent favorable rating, while Iraq rounded off the bottom with a -85 percent score. Iran and North Korea, the other two nations identified by President Bush as comprising the "axis of evil," joined Iraq at bottom of the list.
Bush 'disappointed'
The White House yesterday scoffed at Paris's offer to fortify U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq after President Bush complained he was "disappointed" with France's refusal to cooperate with NATO.
The Bush administration's exasperation with Paris is affecting public perception, reported the Financial Times, noting as an example the New York Post's coverage of the international dispute. The paper ran a picture of WWII American soldiers' graves near Omaha Beach Monday, headlined: "They died for France but France has forgotten."
New York Post reporter Steve Dunleavy, depicted near the grave of a young American soldier, wrote: "The air is chilled, but I feel an unnatural glow of rage -- I want to kick the collective butts of France. These kids died to save the French from a tyrant named Adolf Hitler. And now, as more American kids are poised to fight and die to save the world from an equally vile tyrant, Saddam Hussein, where are the French? Hiding. Chickening out. Proclaiming, Vive les wimps!"
Presidential press secretary Ari Fleischer said yesterday that French President Jacques Chirac hadn't mentioned France's intention to block Turkey's request for NATO assistance during his meeting last week with Bush. He claimed Bush didn't feel exactly "blindsided," but rather "disappointed at the "setback" for both NATO and Turkey.
Clinton administration deputy national security adviser Jim Steinberg says anti-French feeling is increasing in the U.S., according to the Financial Times. Concerned that it could get worse, Steinberg added: "The next two weeks are going to have a profound impact on transatlantic relations. There is a consensus that whatever the U.S. has done wrong, it does not justify the way the French and the Germans are playing this."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31001
EYE ON THE GULF
Americans blast
French Embassy
'It never stopped, it was crazy,'
said diplomat after 1,000 calls
Posted: February 12, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
France's resistance to U.S. policy on Iraq, capped off by its role in blocking U.S.-backed plans to bolster Turkish defenses against a possible Iraqi missile attack, is resulting in a massive outpouring of U.S. anger against France, evidenced by the 1,124 angry calls received by the French Embassy in Washington, D.C., in just one day.
Coming in the wake of Secretary of State Colin Powell's speech to the U.N. on Iraq, the embassy felt under siege, reports the Scotsman newspaper. "It never stopped. It was crazy. Unbelievable," said one French diplomat.
Although the embassy's Nathalie Loiseau notes that some letters and e-mail are supportive of Paris' position, she admits in a Financial Times report that some "would like to boycott France and French products."
With some U.S. talk radio shows openly calling for repatriation of America’s war dead, noted the Scotsman, the phrase "if it weren't for us you'd be speaking German" has become a popular refrain.
"The French attitude is self-defeating," says Gary Schmitt of the Project for a New American Century, said the report. "They are undermining the credibility of the U.N. and now throwing NATO into disarray. I don't know if they realize how they're also causing a split in Europe. If you total up all the things they are interested in, you find that they're making a hash of all of them."
Meanwhile, as WorldNetdaily reported, France was found to be more unpopular among Americans than at any time in the past decade in a new Gallup poll. Unfavorable opinions of France have jumped 17 points in the past year while favorable opinions have dropped 20 points.
American attitudes toward Germany, another European power unwilling to support the U.S. on Iraq, also have become more negative, according to the annual Gallup Poll Social Series Update on World Affairs, conducted Feb. 3-6.
In its editorial yesterday the Washington Post argued that France and Germany now "behave as if they share the same over-riding goal as the Iraqi dictator: thwarting U.S. action even when it is supported by most other NATO and European nations."
Great Britain ranked at the top of the list of 26 nations with a +83 percent favorable rating, while Iraq rounded off the bottom with a -85 percent score. Iran and North Korea, the other two nations identified by President Bush as comprising the "axis of evil," joined Iraq at bottom of the list.
Bush 'disappointed'
The White House yesterday scoffed at Paris's offer to fortify U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq after President Bush complained he was "disappointed" with France's refusal to cooperate with NATO.
The Bush administration's exasperation with Paris is affecting public perception, reported the Financial Times, noting as an example the New York Post's coverage of the international dispute. The paper ran a picture of WWII American soldiers' graves near Omaha Beach Monday, headlined: "They died for France but France has forgotten."
New York Post reporter Steve Dunleavy, depicted near the grave of a young American soldier, wrote: "The air is chilled, but I feel an unnatural glow of rage -- I want to kick the collective butts of France. These kids died to save the French from a tyrant named Adolf Hitler. And now, as more American kids are poised to fight and die to save the world from an equally vile tyrant, Saddam Hussein, where are the French? Hiding. Chickening out. Proclaiming, Vive les wimps!"
Presidential press secretary Ari Fleischer said yesterday that French President Jacques Chirac hadn't mentioned France's intention to block Turkey's request for NATO assistance during his meeting last week with Bush. He claimed Bush didn't feel exactly "blindsided," but rather "disappointed at the "setback" for both NATO and Turkey.
Clinton administration deputy national security adviser Jim Steinberg says anti-French feeling is increasing in the U.S., according to the Financial Times. Concerned that it could get worse, Steinberg added: "The next two weeks are going to have a profound impact on transatlantic relations. There is a consensus that whatever the U.S. has done wrong, it does not justify the way the French and the Germans are playing this."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31001
unclehobart
New Member
I love marmite
