Home Forums Miscellaneous Topics Military French soldier surrenders

Holding true to his training I suppose <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
CONNANTRAY-VAUREFROY, France Dec 6, 2004 � A French soldier who locked himself in an explosives depot and threatened to blow it up surrendered Monday, ending a three-day standoff, the Interior Ministry said.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=305358

As a Canuck, I just don't understand the scorn heaped on the French, or their soldiers.

As a history teacher, it's always been my understanding that in the American Revolution, that the outcome was teetering back and forth between Britain and the Colonists until the arrival of the French.

Yet today, so many Americans seem so ungratefull and seem to take so much delight in belittling the French, directing heaps of scorn towards the French and never passing an oportunity to make jokes at the expense of the French. As a Canadian, I just don't understand it.

Would an American please explain the negative feelings towards the French, what brought them about, and why the French seem to be always on the receiving end of so much American scorn and the butt of so many American jokes. Cause with friends like that.......

Yesterday, I watched an American produced television show on the French Foreign Legion and it was very complimentary of it's view of the French armed forces - and man, those guys serving in it were tough! They also seemed to me to be well trained, and absolutely fanatically loyal to France and the French cause. They seemed to be absolutely the last group you'd want to fight against - when the going got really tough. They even entered the corps knowing ahead of time they faced a 10% mortality rate - per tour! The Legion seemed to fight in places where no one else wanted to dare go. Talk about fearless soldiers!

Can some one help me understand?

While I can't and won't try to explain away the scorn, other than the by saying that France is a great power of the day before yesterday and somewhat irrelevant as a great world power today, when speaking of the American Revolution one must keep in mind that France didn't aid the colonies in rebellion out of any great sense of altruism but rather to inflict damage on Britain's military forces in another theater. France was less an ally of the colonies than an emeny of Britain and the fact that French aid assisted the colonies achive victory in their fight for independence was less important to the French than the fact that the British were dealt a blow militarily. France no more supported the rebellion than Great Britain did and only used it as a pretext to attack it's european rival on another front. While any assistance France provided the colonies was greatly appreciated, and may well have tipped the balance in the rebellion, kindly don't confuse an attempt by France to further her own national interests with altruistic support of the colonies in rebellion.

First, the French did not assist us in our war of independence because they loved us. Nor did France give a damn about furthering democracy. At the time France was ruled by an absolute monarch, They did it in order to be a thorn in the side of their most hated enemy, Britain. Britain had cost France their Canadian possessions and the French wanted to get even.

American's contempt is not directed at the French soldiers. They have a long record of bravery. Our contempt is directed at the French leadership both political and military. Do y the words 'Vichy' or 'Petain' mean anything to you.

One of the main criticisms is that France has never been a 'team player'. It thinks of itself first, last, and only. DeGaulle pulls out of NATO for "the glory of France", and DeGaulle. France berates American intervention in Iraq while Frances hands are fouled with Iraqi 'food for oil' crude. While France publicly maligns America for its 'unilateralism' France simultaneously practices its own homegrown version. France protests American interventionism but ignores the 'Rainbow Warrior'?

Simply put French servicemen are as brave and skilled as any. French politicians are as slimy and disgusting as any and bigger hypocrites than most.

"Simply put French servicemen are as brave and skilled as any. French politicians are as slimy and disgusting as any and bigger hypocrites than most. "

Dittos!

"Simply put French servicemen are as brave and skilled as any. French politicians are as slimy and disgusting as any and bigger hypocrites than most. "

I still can't help myself <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Poking fun at the French is good fun, I mean the Maginot line for Pete's sake! They walled off half of the frontier and didn't think the Germans would go around.
We also had to fire on French troops in N. Africa and I don't forget things like that.
Believe it or not I fully intended to join the Foreign Legion when I was in high school, I figgured they were almost as tough as the Marines <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

What does the Foreign Legion have to do with the quality of French soldiers? The officers were French but the soldiers were FOREIGN! DUH!

It didn't, I just mentioned it.

Interesting to me that it is necessary to project back to the late 1700's for the last example of French assistance to the United States. Anyone remember WW I and WW II? Seems there was quite a contribution to the French by some young men from the USA during that time period. The inability of the French government to even acknowledge that fact while reminding us of the Revolutionary war has a lot to do with my scorn for their leadership.

Kinda like a country's politicians that I know about, that allowed the rest of the world to fight a world war for years and years - loosing hundreds of thousands of men - but wouldn't join in to help until IT'S own people were attacked. Don't you hate hypocracy like that? I sure do.

I thought that's how nations were supposed to act, stay out of it until someone attacks you. If Europe could take care of it's own problems then American and Canadian boys wouldn't have to die in France.
No more war for wine!

Yesterday, I watched an American produced television show on the French Foreign Legion and it was very complimentary of it's view of the French armed forces - and man, those guys serving in it were tough! They also seemed to me to be well trained, and absolutely fanatically loyal to France and the French cause. They seemed to be absolutely the last group you'd want to fight against - when the going got really tough. They even entered the corps knowing ahead of time they faced a 10% mortality rate - per tour! The Legion seemed to fight in places where no one else wanted to dare go. Talk about fearless soldiers!


I saw that as well, good program. It even showed two Americans who were willing to serve in the Legion. Times Discovery I believe.

Shreck,

If you truly mean what you said - "I thought that's how nations were supposed to act, stay out of it until someone attacks you."

Then I take it that you would be totally opposed to the present U.S. involvement in Iraq? They never attacked the U.S. of A. - did they?

Thousands of American citizens felt the way that you seem to in the '60s. They're Canadian citizens now. Bye the bye, how many Balkan countries attacked Canada in the '90s?

A point well taken.
Hitler never attacked Canada - but we attacked him, with a huge alliance (not with the US - for quite a while anyways) because it was generally conceded throughout the free world that it was the RIGHT thing to do. Genocide was occurring.
In the case of the baltic countries - genocide was occurring - and the world generally conceeded (the UN vote) that ivolvment was warrented - so we Canada went again.
Then (in Afghanistan) after the attacks on America by Osama bin Laden and his Taliban regime - it was generally conceeded again by the world (and another UN vote) that it was again the right thing to do - so Canada went again.
That's the way I believe it should be, don't wait until your own country is attacked before you join a war - get involved - but -with with world approval - then go in and kick the bastards to kingdom come!
We must be doing something right - lots of people (who aren't Canadians) are travelling throughout the rest of the world wearing Canadian flags to stick on to their luggage to dupe the locals into thinking they're Canadians - LOL!

Thats a great idea! When I go to Alberta, I'll stick Canadian flags on my luggage. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

You said it..."because it was generally conceded throughout the free world that it was the RIGHT thing to do. Genocide was occurring."

Hey shreck,

You don't really believe that - that most of the rest of the world really thought it was the right thing to do.... Cause if they did, one country right now wouldn't be bearing 95% of the costs and bearing 90% of the casualties.

There would have been a REAL coalition - not George Bush's joke of a coalition that he calls "the coalition of the willing". Hell, calling it the "coalition of the coerced" (knowing how many of the former eastern-block countries who paid lip service to "joining the coalition") depend on US aid might have been a better name. Some coalition - have you noticed that 95 of the countries supposedly supporting you guys over there haven't send a single soldier over! Some coalition alright - your country is the only one with any real force over there, is bearing almost all the costs, and is suffering almost all the casualties - ok, America and Britain (although they don't have much of an army over there) they aren't spending very much in comparison to America's contribution.

I do believe this war has tought the hawks a real lesson - and maybe it's just because I'm a born optimist - but I think it'll be a long long long time before the US ever invades another country - at least without a real coalition behind it and not without the general concession by the rest of the free world - that such a war is absolutely unavoidable and that it is truly the last resort.

Meanwhile, I hope your troops all return home safe (your country has already lost 1300 great boys already and you're still counting) and I hope they can all come home soon. Those poor troops are doing the best they can - fighting in a needless and very poorly planned war. Many as you know have bravely fought and are fighting without enough support behind them and without proper armour and vehicles. It's all so sad! I wish every one of those American boys all the best - and pray they find godspeed home.

I hope democracy flourishes in Iraq, and I hope that the fires of Arab and Moslem hatred burns less bright in the coming years - than it did before the invasion, but somehow, I doubt it. I think this war has spawned 10 Moslem's willing to kill westerners for every one that's been killed so far. I fear this needless and ill-planned war has truly made the world a much more dangerous place.

I'm guessing that we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one. I've said enough on this topic. Never mistake my strong dislike of George Bush's policies - with a dislike of Americans in general. I'm well aware that, as a people, you rank as our best friend and closest ally. I love America and I love Americans. We Canadians just see the world a little differently - generally speaking anyways.

I'll give it a rest now and I'll let you have the last word.

It was a good discussion.

BCBrian, it sure was a good one, don't take me too seriously, I don't <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
As last word I won't point to any countries who supported us, I point to the ones who did not and wonder how much politicians in France, Germany, Russia as well as the UN cronies got rich delaying us.

BCBrian,

While I don't know exactly what Shreck meant, I know that the world thought it was a good idea to put restrictions on Saddam Hussein with the expectation that those restrictions would be enforced, by force if necessary. Saddam breached those conditions, repeatedly, and most of the world, especially those who were profiting from Saddam's games with the "Oil for Food" program, were unwilling to back up with their blood and wealth what they had originally declared. With much of the world lacking the will to enforce what they had said was essential for Saddam maintaining his place in the world, the U.S. was forced once again to do the heavy lifting for the rest of the world. NOTHING would have changed if we'd waited another year, two years, or five years before acting.

The U.S. doing the heavy lifting has been a constant theme for the past 200+ years. We asked to be left alone throughout the first 40 years of the 20th century, but the European powers wouldn't allow it, and after our having to decide two world wars we concluded that we had better start taking a more active role in Europe and elsewhere or else we would be fixing European messes every 20 years or so in perpetuity.

How has the U.S. of A done the world's heavy lifting for more than 200 years you may ask, when it wasn't until the 20th century that the U.S. was considered to be a world power? We were the ones who first threw off the yoke of British oppression (yes, with the help of Britain's enemies including the French and the Poles), defeating the British in a manner the French were never able to do on their own, and our resulting republic shined the bright light of representative government as an example of what could be a more just form of government with God's providence.

We were the ones who decided that paying tribute to the Barbary Pirates (Muslim terrorists of an earlier generation) wasn't the way things should be and sent a task force to northern Africa to let them know we weren't going to take it anymore, despite other larger and more powerful countries being too scared to take them on.

We were the ones that issued the proclamation that European powers shouldn't meddle in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere (via the Monroe Doctrine) and enforced it with the end result that after many difficult decades democratically elected government has taken firm root in every country in the Western Hemisphere except Cuba, and we're working on Cuba without apparent help from anybody else.

Fast forward to a European war in the early 20th century that was a stalemate until the Yanks arrived. Yes, the British Commonwealth nations got involved before we did, but we hadn't been part of the British Empire for over 100 years and had no obligation to involve ourselves in a mess that wasn't of our making.

Twenty years later, the massive screw-up that the European powers made in trying to punish Imperial Germany for the Great War came back to bite them in the rear. Who had to decide the matter on the side of freedom vs. the side of tyranny? Again we did.

In the Cold War, who supplied the bulk of the personnel and money in the fight against totalitarian socialist world domination designs? Again, we did.

Now we've always been a little uncomfortable and reluctant in projecting our power, but to those much has been given, much is required, and we've done more than our part through history. That naturally elicits a range of emotions from the rest of the world, ranging from awe and respect to jealousy and bitterness.

History will judge the actions that the U.S. has taken in Iraq, but when there is a representative, democratically elected government in an Arab nation, I believe history will judge favorably. You have the right to have a different opinion, even though such rights seem to be quickly eroding in Canada.

No doubt, Canada is becoming more of a European country than an American (meaning North/South American) country. I understand the need for Canada to assert its independence from its big brother to the south, and that's fine. However, as Canada moves closer to Europe than to the U.S., the understanding gap for Canadians will only grow. The Europeans have never quite understood us, and it's probably better that way because if they understood us I would be concerned that we had become too much like the God-less bunch they have become.

The world still depends on the U.S. to do the heavy lifting regardless of whether the rest of the world has the courage to do the dirty work they set out beforehand, and I expect we'll continue to do the sometimes thankless work of promoting justice, freedom, and democracy throughout the world until the Lord returns. I don't think that we should invade countries when we're not provoked simply because they have a tyrant in charge, but there was more than sufficient reason from the U.N. resolutions for the U.S. to enforce the resolutions by the only means that would make Iraq comply -- by force. The end result is the world is going to be a better place, even if the immediate short-term is difficult.

French Raise Terror Alert


AP and UPI reported that the French government announced yesterday
that it has raised its terror alert level from "run" to "hide."
The only two higher levels in France are "surrender" and "collaborate."

The raise was precipitated by the recent fire which destroyed one of
France's white flag factories, disabling their military.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Anti-American, a teacher, a liberal, and some frenchy-frenchy blood in your pathetic veins. You are a prime example of Sheople that the evil side of the world will silently move in on and take over. You are already taking the first step by allowing your gun rights to be comprimised.But guess what, you got a big guard dog to the south, and you can spout your anti-american views right up until the time we pull your azzes out of whatever mess you might get into.We are the only country in the history of the world that fought wars to only serve others, protect ourselves, or promote peace in the world. We could easily put our bootheels on the necks of any country we want, and take what we want,but we don't. Why?? some would ask?? Because it is not the right thing to do(Christian)George Bush is trying to do the right things, it isn't easy, but someday I hope there will be more peace, and safety for everyone,Canada included. Our hypocracy will save more lives than will ever be lost. Merry fricken Christmas, thanks for pissing me off BCBRIAN.

Re: French support for the USA. During the Civil War, the French were poised to recognize the South. When the Kearsarge sank the Alabama it was in sight of the French coast and a large contingent of cheerleaders for the Alabama was present. Semmes took refuge in France after his tub was unk, France opted out of supproting the Confederacy after that.

I feel pretty bad about how things have turned out in Iraq. IMO the whole bloody region isn't worth 1000 American boys dead. George Bush has also spent all his moral and military capital so that real problems like Nuclear poised countries like Iran and North Korea may be impossible to deal with under his administration.

As for Sadam...what was he going to attack the USA with..a squadron of rabid camels? As for him being a brutal dictator..duh..look around the world. Whay start with Sadam? Also I hate to say it but when dealing with a population with a high percentage of crazy bastards maybe a bit of brutality and fear goes a long way. If you want stability in Iraq now the next leader better be a bastard himself or he won't live long. I am not sure the population is ready for or deserves a democracy. Sort of like Germany after WWI and we know how that turned out.

To my sorrow I think you Americans are going down the wrong road. I hope I am wrong but I don't see where Mr. Bush has advanced your self interests and at a minimum this is what war should do.

To bad Kerry was such a ditz and I am no Liberal Democrat.

Good luck and God Bless.

Takujualuk,

It appears you have the situation figured quite well. Old George even has more than a few convinced that not only is this "heavy lifting" but it's actually a mission from God.

Got's to tell you a story. Back in the early 1980's, I rode my bicycle down the coast of the US one fall. I was curious about the Vietnam War, since I was meeting so many draft dodgers in Canada in the years previous. Whenever I got a chance on my trip, I asked the US boys why they decided to go fight for such a cause. Three answers prevailed:
1. The government made me.
2. It looked like it would be an adventure and life was boring.
3. If I fought, I'd get a loan, an education, etc.

I stopped in at San Francisco for a few days and got to drinking in a bar near the hostel. The regulars were mostly vets, including a great old guy by the name of Sonny who had plenty of old holes in his hide from two tours of duty.

One night, Sonny and I had a few too many while shooting pool as partners, and I related my little survey to him, including reasons 1, 2, and 3. I told him I couldn't help but observe that the government of the US appeared to have its citizens a bit brainwashed, since as far as I could see, they were convinced to go fight communism by methods that mainly smacked of socialist practices, eg: reasons 1 and 3. Sonny gave me a Clint squint and looked quite angry at me. He just stared at me for a minute and then bust out laughing. He laughed hard enough he had a coughing fit and when he looked up he had tears in his eyes. When he caught his breath, his answer was, "Kid, you ain't so stupid." He looked like he was going to cry. He left his pool cue and stumbled out into the night. I rattled off people to go after him but he was gone. Never saw him again but I still remember the look in his eyes vividly.

There will be cowards in every decade. miles

I wish you'd quit sending alll those G... D.... Liberals up here. Send Conservative gun cranks instead.

I'm not trying to be obnoxious (maybe it comes easily), but there sure are a lot of Canadians who would like to tell us how to run our country. I don't see Americans getting so involved in Canadian politics. Now I like Canadians, and I think in general they are a pretty good people.

The French, however, are arrogant (with virtually nothing to be arrogant about) and corrupt. As said above, they were making ton of money off Saddam's regime and that is the reason they opposed our intervention. That and the UN Secretary General's son was running the oil for food program for Iraq and making a fortune off the corrupt diversion of funds. Getting rid of Saddam meant eliminating the gravy train.

Here is a link to an MSNBC article on the "Oil for Food Scandal." I think the French and UN Officials will be implicated, and the reasons for their support of Saddam and opposition to the US action will become evident.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6729467/

Actually California when it comes to issues like gun control, taxation policies, and democracy I wouldn't mind a little more American influence in this poor little country of ours. I guess no one wants to be told what to do by an outsider though and I understand your sentiment.

Believe me I hope I prove to be wrong.

350Mag, go look at a map of the last presidental election in the US. I beg to inform you, you sure got a lousy test area as San Francisco and most of the coastal area is laden with Hippies, and liberals. Just what did you expect those loosers to tell you. I joined the Army during the Veitnam war because I believe in God and Country, and I believed in the spread of freedom. And frankly, we would have succedded in SE Asia had our sorry [email]A@@[/email] liberal media not given the enemy the gift they needed. You should consider yourself lucky Sonny didnt kick your [email]A@@[/email] all the way back to Canada. That's why he walked out the bar........................

BCBrian,
Here's why we Americans hate the Froggies so much. You, being a history teacher, probably know that the NAZI's just walked over France in the Second World War. The United States later in the war came in and basically beat the NAZI's into the ground, never to rise in force again. Today, 60 years later, the French aren't helping us with our war, in fact they are "un-helping" us by telling the rest of the world that our war is pointless.

The French don't care what happens to the US because they've gotten everything they can out of us. What you said about the French helping us in American Revolution is strange. The French and Brittish have been at odds as long as both contries have existed, and this was their way of fighting the Brits with help. That's all. They were being selfish.
About 150 years later the French got walked over by the NAZI's. The US started fighting with the French because we had a common enemy, and because of our love of freedom. Point is, we helped the French because they were being occupied, but when the Froggies helped us it was because they wanted a fellow country to fight the British with.

By the way, What era in History do you teach?

I think the problems we see today are a result of ego more than anything else, but also idealogy I suppose. I've trotted around France on occassion and been subject to the love-hate feelings of the French. They hate having to admit that America pulled their butts out of the fire in WW2. They hate having to admit they're own irrelevance today. They hate having to need our business, our trade, and our influence, while no one seems to need them.

The last time I was there on an Army Reserve tour to Germany (1995), two of our soldiers in our unit were badly beaten up simply because they were Americans and walked into the wrong little pub in a small French town. On that same trip, on a tour of Paris, a friend of mine and my self were yelled at and debased because he took a picture of the Paris Flea market from the sidewalk and told "You Americans don't own everything". No amount of apologies would satisfy the guy and his side-kick. I finally laid into him with the comment that they had liked us a lot when Hitler had them under his thumb. That did not make them happy, believe me, but it did shut them up. It is even more sad when you realize it was they're own fault.

The very thing about America (and by extention, Americans) that they can't stand, our uniqueness and willingness to go it alone, is the very thing that makes us great. The belief in the individual's rights and the freedom to take action on the things we believe enable us, but also make us hated and referred to as arrogant and bullies.

There are some great French people, but they need to get a grip on they're government, and come back to the real world.

As to your comment on America not entering the war until we were attacked, well, as a history buff I would think you would know better than to say that. The times were different then. There was a great sense of isolationalism, but at the same time we supported the efforts by massive amounts of aid. Europe didn't bother to try and stop the threat until it had nearly overwhelmed them. They should have stopped Hitler (and Italy) when they could instead of appeasing him time after time. Many Americans felt, perhaps rightly, that it was something that was none of our business. We didn't want to be the world's police force then any more than we do now. We'd much rather spend all of that money on something else. But if we don't, who will? And if no one does, what would happen then? We have many examples in history of what would happen, and the French haven't helped solve any problem in the world for over 75 years.

I for one am tired of their whining. If they can come up with a better idea, then they should. If not, then they need to get out of the way.

A great American, Abraham Lincoln, once commented when asked about a sermon he had heard. He said (and I'm paraphrasing to the best of my memory) that the preacher spoke well and with vigor, but had failed to ask the listeners to accomplish something great. That is my issue with the French today. They fail to either do or ask the world to do anything that will accomplish something great. Until then they will continue to be the brunt of sad jokes like: "For sale, French rifle. Never fired, only dropped once", and "How many men does it take to defend Paris? No one knows. It's never been done".

To add one thing to the idea that France helped the Continental Army out, besides what has already been said about their motives it is worth noting that they wouldn't help until they were pretty sure we were going to win. Their help was important, but in the end we would have won, and the French knew it. There were a large number of comparisons between the British war in America and the US war in Viet Nam. It was very unpopular back in England....which pleased France to no end.

"George Bush has also spent all his moral and military capital so that real problems like Nuclear poised countries like Iran and North Korea may be impossible to deal with under his administration."

Give that man a cigar. So you propose to wait unti Saddam became a nuclear threat also? Same goes for Iran, it just can't be allowed, they have a track record that can't be ignored.

Another thing I haven't seen mentioned in this thread was back in the eighties when Kadafy was making all of his threats, as well as supporting terroism. Reagan wanted to send him a personal message, and the French fought us on that too. Our pilots had to fly 1100 miles out of their way around French airspace. I don't think anybody can argue that Momar didn't get the message, and changed his ways afterward. Of course if the French had their way he would still be rattleing his saber.

There is some very good writing in this thread. You guys make me proud to say that I'm an American.

To my Canadian brethren, your opinions seem to reflect the differences between those of the breadth of this great land and visiting a foreign country, as you still are.

Hey Mark, you just reminded me of that. The French not letting us fly over their airspace to put Momar in his place. Johnny Carson made a joke about that and said" Americans should remember that this coming vacation season and not fly over French airspace" it got a very loud applause. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

As an aside, the last I knew the French could still own personal firearms, unlioke the Germans, where it is very hard for the average citizen to own a weapon, and England, where handguns are once again ugly. (They sure liked the ones we sent in wwII, though). Does anyone know the French take on the UN's attempt on a world wide gun ban?

[quote]"George Bush has also spent all his moral and military capital so that real problems like Nuclear poised countries like Iran and North Korea may be impossible to deal with under his administration."

Give that man a cigar. So you propose to wait unti Saddam became a nuclear threat also? Same goes for Iran, it just can't be allowed, they have a track record that can't be ignored.


I'll gladly accept your cigar. My point is there are more eminent threats and you have pinned enprmous resources down in a country that seems to have been less of a threat. Sadam was a vicious bastard but one who followed his old fashioned self interest of power wealth and greed. As such he seemed far more predictable than the religious zealots of Iran or that crazed mo-fo in North Korea.

America has also exhausted an enormous amount of moral capital in making a case to the world that proved to be overstated. You floated a soft ball to the America Bashers of the world and they are hitting it out of the park.

Trying to take on Iraq and North Korea now will be exponentially more difficult. They are much closer to nuclear capability than Iraq.

Unlike a lot of my country men I expect and want America to follow the path of it's best interest. I don't think your present course meets this criterian.

I am allowed an opinion because your country is so powerful that every burp and misfire in your white house blows back on me and my family as well. I want you to succeed and be prosperous and safe. I want the same for my family.

I hope I am wrong but your present course seems out of whack with it's stated goals. I do hope the Iraq elections work out and you can wrest a success from this experience.

Takujualuk,

"I am allowed an opinion because your country is so powerful that every burp and misfire in your white house blows back on me and my family as well"


It's a two way street. The Millineum bombers were coming out of Canada and into the U.S. How about keeping your own house in order as well.

Shreck,

To rebut what you just said would be effortless, but can't we stick to a discussion of issues rather than heading into "mine's better than yours" land? This whole Canada / US banter began when a Canuck came on and expressed dismay that the US seems to hate the french so much.

Make the effort. I was responding to being told by someone in another country they have some sort of say in our internal politics and made a snidly, "every fart in our white house" crack while failing to capitalize White House, which is now looking like insult piled upon insult. I simply pointed out that actions by his own state might get me killed. It is indeed a two way street.
The US and Canada share a very open border. If terrorists cross from Canada that will surely change, to the worsening of things for both sides. It's not a pissing contest, it's a war that we did not start <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

Shreck,

I'm kickin my own butt. I should know better. I'm completely aware that the internet and the written discussion forum can often create unnecessary or unintended conflict. We as Canadians and Americans are far more alike than different. We don't always agree with each other, and it's obvious that you and I don't fully agree. That, however, is not really a problem in the big picture.

To all, I apologize. I allowed myself to drift a bit too far in a wind thats been blowin a bit stronger lately. I volunteer to get my ass of this thread and stick to shootin, huntin, and the outdoors, where I suspect most of our hearts lie. Likely, we do our best work there too. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Shreck, you'd be doing me a favour if you were to join me in letting this thread go down the river.

Shreck:

Sorry: White House. No snideness implied. I will also absolutely agree that our Liberal government has a terrible record on taking a strong stand against terrorism and our country has gone way too far down the political correctness road. We fail to stand up to all kinds of crap. IMO we need a little bit more George Bush type resolve. I never have or will vote Liberal but my fellow Canadians do.

Your "internal" affairs however seem to stretch a hell of a long way outside of your borders and I am not sure you are on the right road on this one. No offense just an observation from a friend.

Like I said I hope I am wrong. Just an opinion please don't change the name of Canadian back bacon to freedom bacon on my account.

Greetings All,

First time poster here. I'm active Coast Guard (aviation type) coming on 24 years in March. I have read this thread and felt compelled to respond, which I don't normally do. A few personal opinion talking points.

1. IMO, and as stated by someone else earlier, it's not the French folks that I don't care for, it's the leadership. Same for Canada. Likewise, for the most part I'm sure that is reciprical towards the U.S. I don't have a problem with that. I've been lucky enough to do hunts in Ontario, Quebec and Manitoba. All the folks I've met have been very nice. I've been all through the Caribbean...the USVI's, BVI's and FVI's. All the Brits and French down there have been nice also. I've worked with the Canadian CG before, nice folks there also. However, like all places you will have a segment of people that carry a bitter hatred. We can't change that. No sense getting all worked up over it.
2. I strongly feel the liberal media (pick a country) causes more discontent than the people do. We as consumers of their "product" do not always get the full story or what you are receiving has a bias built into it. I don't have a problem with balanced coverage of a story as long as it is fair, fully factual, and not speculative.
3. No....I don't think Sadam was going to attack the U.S.......directly. We're there WMD's? My gut feeling is there were. I suspect they are now buried in the sand or in Syria. I would also bet we have satellite photos but are sitting tight for the moment. I suspect maybe they or evidence of WMD's will turn up one day. I suppose history will let us know someday. Anyway, as has been documented via the various investigations, we know Sadam was using his money to indirectly funnel resources to support the bad guys. IMO, I believe that was one reason to take him out. The U.N. or it's resolutions just were not having any effect. The world can't sit on it's hands and hope there is not a 9/11 again somewhere else. Again, IMO another long-term objective was to establish some form of a democratic government in the Muslim world over there. Hopefully Iraq will turn out like Afganistan and hold elections.
3. Illegal's crossing the border....what a mess!!! I had two tours in Michigan and two in the caribbean. This is where I part ways with our boss. We have to shut down our southern borders and fast before it is too late. If it offends someone or not politically correct....sorry!! National security trumps everything. Pre-9/11 Canadian borders were not that great either. (I've been there and seen it!!) Since 9/11 it has gotten somewhat better but we still have a probelm in a few areas with some of the Indians smuggling illegals across the borders. This has been documented in the media numerous times.
4. OK, I'll get off the soapbox. Here's something I find humorus. For our Canadian sportsmen and women, in the US there has always been trash talking between the north and south (Yanks and Rebs). Some of it is funny and some is mean spirited. Well, I was surfing a while back and came across the website for the newspaper Nunatsiaq News in Nunavut. I happened to find a talk forum the locals (northerners) and outsiders (southerners) post back and forth on. Alot of talk on local politics, jobs, general discussion, etc. It has some interesting insight though. I see some parallels between the northern Canadians/southern Canadians and the north and south in the U.S. To me that aspect is where I see the humor. The link is below. Some of the topics are funny and some are mean spirited so keep an open mind. To me it's interesting to read what folks in a small, isolated community have to say.

http://www.nunatsiaq.com/phorum/list.php?f=1

Stay safe........John

Coasty: Thanks for the link. I spent 9 years in Nunavut and that is one nasty site!

I too hope the elections go well in Iraq and this turns out to be a success.
Wacky Muslim fundamentalism is a hard nut to crack and they are going to need a tough bastard to seize the reigns.

Shreck, you'd be doing me a favour if you were to join me in letting this thread go down the river.


Me and BCBrian did that once but I've checked back from time to time and I couldn't let that one slide. Heck, nothin like a good argument to make me hungry! PS don't take me too seriously, I sure as hell don't.