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.