General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2316307

    The French

    Locked

    by oz_media ·

    I don’t want to be tagged as pro French NOR do I want to be tagged as anti French.
    In my 34 years, I’ve been to France about 25 or so times, mostly when living in England. I’ve never met a French person that I didn’t like, on the contrary, I’ve found the French people to be very happy and welcoming.

    NOTE: I’ve met MANY French Canadians who I didn’t like, but that’s not the topic.

    Living on the absolute southernmost island in England, it is only 4 hours to France by ferry.

    It is now assumed by SOME, that Brits don’t like the French. Why would the British be seen as people who don’t like the French?

    Is it the same as Americans not liking the French because they wouldn’t fight with American’s in Iraq?

    Secondly, if they didn’t WANT to fight alongside of British or American troops, why would they be disliked?

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #3380762

      What? More French – English wars?

      by maxwell edison ·

      In reply to The French

      Have any other two nations had more conflicts (wars) against each other more than the French and the Brits? The 100 years war was between those two. All those French-Anglo wars. The wars between them in the 18th and 19th centuries. And now the French are very pro EURO (and European Union), while the Brits are cold on the idea.

      In their thousand plus years of history, have there been more years of peace or war?

      With the history of war between those two nations, I guess I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s generally no love lost between them.

      • #3380594

        Intersesting point

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to What? More French – English wars?

        REBUTTAL WITHOUT PREDJUDICE:

        Amazingly enough, I find MOST British people couldn’t give a damn what has happened in the past. Britain has a LOOOOOOOOONG history, if they were to hold grudges against all the enemies, British people would be standing alone.

        I find that British people have become accustomed to other countries having differences to theirs and accept the fact that they are just that; OTHER countries with different people living in them and different people running them.

        France is one of the favorite vacationing spots for Brits and the people are generally kind to each other, with the odd exceptions of course.

        Being American, perhapse you can tell me why so many Americans turned against France and have attempted to boycott wine? (by buying it and pouring it away) That one I know even you don’t think was effective.

        Was it just becasue they wouldn’t go to war in Iraq? Canada got a similar reputation for not joining in but your welcome to pour Canadian beer away.

        What I’m getting at, Max, is that I think there are a lot of people who have biased opinions toward Canadian’s, French or ??? just because everyone else has.

        That’s like me saying that I don’t like East Indians, (because in East Vancouver, East Indians were hated for years).

        Are people jumping on the bandwagon here?
        Do you think that if I asked several Americans WHY they hated the French, perhapse only one or two could actually tell me?

        Lastly, if it was because the French didn’t join the coalition, why choose to dislike France? The country doesn’t make decisions, it’s government does. I am sure there are other reasons, I just haven’t heard of any other than “France is a passive nation full of pussies”.

        • #3380546

          I can’t speak for all Americans

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Intersesting point

          I can only speak for this one. And contrary to what you may believe, there’s really no “bandwagon” on which the “hate the French” folks jump on. (There are plenty of Americans who hate other Americans and love the French.) And, generally speaking, there really is no single bandwagon for anything. Here’s how I’d suggest it is. About 50% of Americans are apathetically disengaged when it comes to matters of national and/or international policy. Sure, Jay Leno can sway their opinion, but generally speaking they don’t know anything about anything, and they really don’t care to know; they don’t vote, and they couldn’t tell you the difference between our two major political parties; they have no idea how things really work, especially the economy and/or the basis for our government, and they are happy just remaining ignorant and well fed. Of the remaining 50%, about 30% each will fall in lockstep behind their political party, and the remaining 40% will swing the political climate one way or the other. So to summarize, we have (give or take) 50% who don’t give (or don’t know) a rat’s ass, 15% are Republicans, 15% are Democrats, and 20% are unaffiliated and/or third-party.

          Many people, by the way, think it’s being enlightened and/or open minded by claiming to be unaffiliated. Personally, even though I’d like to be included in that group (especially since I’m enlightened and open minded), since I’m a realist and I understand that we currently have an entrenched two-party system, and that the party in the majority has control over the committees, the appointments, and the agenda, I’ll admit to being party guy. (But I don’t automatically believe in all things my party stands for. I’m against the death penalty, for example, while my party – and my president – favors it.) Someone who votes for “the person” and not “the party” doesn’t understand that the right person of the wrong party doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell against the wrong person of the right party. I would love to have a Democrat Party versus a Republican Party debate. Not the usual rhetoric, but a more thought provoking discussion concerning the basis on which all political opinions are based – smaller government versus bigger government, personal responsibility versus collectivism, merits of social engineering or not, equality of outcome versus equality of opportunity, the entitlement of one which infringes on the liberties of another, and so on. (Any takers? I’ll take the conservative Republican side. But on a different thread)

          Your other points:

          When it comes to the French, I believe (okay, I’ve heard) that the French are the ones who stereotypically hate Americans. Even before all this recent French flap, it was a well known “fact” that the French generally thought Americans lacked grace and culture, were a bunch of ignorant gun-slinging cowboys, and were unqualified and ill-equipped to be a super power. If anything, the French are generally opposed to anything and everything American, not the other way around. Moreover, France was once a super power, but they are no longer. There has to be some chapped French derriere that they have been relegated to “has been” (and never will be) status.

          You said, “so many” Americans were boycotting French wine by buying it and pouring it out. What do you mean by “so many”? You’ve mentioned this quite a number of times and implied that this was some wide-spread phenomenon. To the contrary, I certainly didn’t buy any French wine just to pour it out, nor do I know anyone who did. I did hear the story about it, but it wasn’t a big thing. My guess is that it was a very isolated and very small group (or groups) of (stupid) people just wanting to make a statement. (What a wasate of good wine.) I would also guess that fewer than 100 people or so participated. Can you shed any light on what really happened and by how many? Whatever it was, it was certainly not “so many” that it was anything of significance at all. It was just one of those cute news stories that really didn’t mean anything, but grew legs nonetheless.

          But wine – that’s another reason the French hate us (U.S.). Our California wine industry is coming (has come) of age, and is gaining respect – and market shares – world wide. First we replace France as a super power, then we give them a run for their grape dollar. (More chapped French derriere.)

          I don’t hate the French. I’ve even met some French people, and I’ve liked them all (especially “her”). Moreover, I still have french toast for breakfast, french fries for lunch, but I’ll have that California merlot with my steak.

        • #3380348

          Eloquent

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to I can’t speak for all Americans

          Nice response Max.

          You wonder why I say “jumping on the bandwagon”.

          A recent accuaintance on mie moved here from Alabama. We were having a few wobbly pops the other night and while flicking channels, I passed channel 7 (Canada’a French Channel {{French Canadian channel that is})and he said “ah, F-ing french make me puke”. I asked him why he hated the French, he said “it’s becuase of all the fluffy, faggy, French stuff. They are total woosses and won’t fight alongside the States”

          It sounds to me like he’s just jumping on the ‘I hate French’ bandwagon without a clue as to why.

          Now this could be just because of his education and where he was raised, poor neighbourhood/ghetto in Alabama but I get this impression everywhere, when talking to Americans. They don’t like the French and don’t really know why. It’s a pet peeve of mine when people can’t make up their own mind, as you well know.

          The “so many Americans”, you’re right, was as it was portayed on the news. We get Canadian, European and LOTS of US news stations here so I just browse to find a middle ground.

          Your explanation of your political stand also makes more sense now, I was just talking about the Death Penalty yesterday. I don’t feel stringly about the DP because the justice system makes too many mistakes and incarcerates the wrong people WAY too often. A guy was recently released after 9 years on death row, the actual killer was inside the same prison with him. He was sentenced to die, I believe, in the mid 80’s. If they HAD killed him in the 80’s, the actual killer may have never been found, and another peron would have wrongfully died.

          People like Canada’s Clifford Olsen (don’t know if that was big US news or not) would be a good candidate for a death sentence, BUT until they can get the courts and laws straight, I wouldn’t want to see them condem people to die, there’s just too many flaws.

          And yes California wines are getting better, have you tried BC wine from the Okanagan? It is becoming very highly esteemed and is rapidly replacing California wines in Western Canada (much cheaper but still not quite Aqua Velva priced but close). If you’re a wine drinker, I say try a BC wine (Mission Hill, Peller Estates) they are becoming world famous these days.

          Thanks for the civil chat,
          OM

        • #3380323

          I am with ya max

          by mallardtooxx ·

          In reply to I can’t speak for all Americans

          “Not the usual rhetoric, but a more thought provoking discussion concerning the basis on which all political opinions are based – smaller government versus bigger government, personal responsibility versus collectivism, merits of social engineering or not, equality of outcome versus equality of opportunity, the entitlement of one which infringes on the liberties of another, and so on. (Any takers? I’ll take the conservative Republican side. But on a different thread)”

          I too am a conservative and would love to debate the issues!!!!

          -duck

        • #3380153

          you’ve got it wrong Max

          by youasked ·

          In reply to I can’t speak for all Americans

          I have lived and work in France for a few years and they don’t hate the Americans. Though, I must admit that many Americans are ungracious and unappreciative and arrogent towards other nations..Especially, when the President is anounced as “The President of the Free World” Like who voted him in? If this isn’t arrogance then I’m not sure what is..listen with the ears of anothers and for others, then possibibly we will have learnt something. If we are hated, let us reflect inward and ask why? But to say “it’s because they are jealous of our way of life” Oh really!!! This does not make sense. Every person loves their own country the best, irregardles.

          Saying that we are the biggest and the best and the most powerful is a lot of ….well!!!..I can’t think of how to say it politly so I wont. But firstly, we are not the biggest..secondly, we are not the best. Thirdly, we are not the best country in the world to live in..Canada is #1 and USA is #6..check it out with the UN stats.

          It’s nice to think that our country is the best..but I haven’t met a person yet who does not feel the same about his or her country. However, the reality is, that our influences comes from many sources and as the saying goes “no man is an island” no matter how hard we try. The arrogance of thinking there is only “WE” in this world, is contrary to the cosmos of things that are. The “WE” that I think of is this..”we are all in this world together” and none of us have been here before and none of us will be here again, so let’s help each other and life will be a lot better for all the “WE’s” in this World, also let us be humble because one day we will all be needing help. As the saying goes “shit” happens.

        • #2743653

          What have I got wrong?

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to you’ve got it wrong Max

          I’m not going to suggest that I’m always right about everything, and I don’t mind “standing corrected” when it’s warranted. I’m always looking to be enlightened, to learn new things, and I’m very open to those who can point out flaws in my thought process and subsequent contentions. But I think you read into my message some things that were not there. For example, you suggested I was wrong when you stated that the French don’t hate Americans. Well, I never said that they did. I did say, however, that they “stereotypically” hate Americans. There’s a big difference. (Stereotype: An idea that many people have about a thing or a group, an idea which may often be untrue or only partially true.)

          What’s interesting about your message, however, is that you went on to do the very same thing I did – that is stereotype Americans as being, “ungracious and unappreciative and arrogant towards other nations”. But at least I qualified my comment as a stereotype while you did not. I’m an American, and I’m not “ungracious and unappreciative and arrogant towards other nations”. You went on to justify your comments by saying, “Especially, when the President is announced as The President of the Free World”. Well who suggested that? Did the president of the United States himself suggest it? When and where did he do that? I suggest to you that you are mistaken, and he did not suggest it. So please, provide some proof the he or anyone in his administration suggested such a thing.

          Some other points. You said, “If we are hated, let us reflect inward and ask why.” With all due respect, I think you have it backwards. If someone “hates” it’s the person that hates who should look inward and ask themselves why. For example, person A hates person B because of the color of person B’s skin. Who should reflect inward, person B? I think not. There will be people and groups of people who hate and will always hate Americans. The hate is in their makeup, not mine. In the case of the Islamist extremists who hate us, perhaps we should reflect inward and ask why, then make the necessary changes to turn their hate into love. All we would have to do is treat our women like slaves, force them to cover from head to toe, and keep them uneducated and oppressed. Perhaps we should change our policy towards Israel and start sending our own suicide bombers into their country to blow up their busses and cafes. Perhaps we should come out with a statement that says that the only good Jew is a dead Jew. Perhaps we should abolish out capitalistic system so everyone lives equally in poverty – except the religious elite, of course. Perhaps we should do those things – and more – just so they don’t hate us.

          You went on to say, “we (America) are not the best country in the world to live in. Canada is #1 and USA is #6. Check it out with the UN stats”. On this point, I have a couple of requests. Please provide a link to the United Nations article that suggests such a thing. I would be very interested in reading it, and I’m sure the UN has a web site with such a document. In addition, please provide the criteria used to make such a determination. I see these sorts of things all the time comparing different U.S. cities or states. Utah or Iowa might be the best state in which to live if you consider one set of criteria (cost of living and the educational system, for example), while New York and California might be the best when considering a different set of criteria. Is Las Vegas, Nevada the best city to live in because of an extremely high employment rate and no state taxes, or is Topeka, Kansas the best because of the quality of life, or perhaps San Diego, California the best because of the nice weather year round? Those kinds of things are very subjective – something the United Nations is not, especially when it comes to matters concerning the United States.

          As far as your wish that, “we are all in this world together…..so let’s help each other”. That sure is a nice pie in the sky way of thinking. But it only works if it’s unanimous. It’s too bad that the people who stole our airplanes and crashed them into our buildings killing our fellow citicens didn’t think that way.

          So please, tell me again what it is I have wrong.

        • #2743593

          In defense

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to What have I got wrong?

          Max, in defense of the last post, you quoted:
          “Some other points. You said, “If we are hated, let us reflect inward and ask why.” With all due respect, I think you have it backwards. If someone “hates” it’s the person that hates who should look inward and ask themselves why. For example, person A hates person B because of the color of person B’s skin. Who should reflect inward, person B? I think not. There will be people and groups of people who hate and will always hate Americans.”

          Of course this is true and I agree fully. I think you’ve taken the comment a little out of context though. I think ‘You asked’ was referring to a general feeling of non-Americans. What I think you don’t realize is that this IS the general feeling towards America and Americans worldwide.

          Patriotism is a fantastic power to sustain ANY country, I thin kin the US, Patriotism is just pushed on the rest of the free world as something America has created as a way to show power, as opposed to a way to show support.

          People KNOW American’s are proud to be American, but when they hear, ALL TO OFTEN, that America is the best, the rest of the free world’s people want to be American, people who don’t like America are just jealous because they want to live there, America has the strongest and most advanced military in the world etc. they just get tired of hearing it and begin to resent America adn Americans in general.

          now, are you implying that this is the fault of the rest of the free world and they should change their opinion or do you think that perhapse this is a sign that Americans need to humble themselves a little and realize that just because they have a LARGE land mass with millions of people, perhapse they aren’t THE BEST IN THE WORLD and that America has and will make many inappropriate decisions just as any other country in the world has and will.

          If I didn’t like my neighbor, I know that doesn’t mean my neighbor has to look inside himeself and find his faults (although it is always good to know how you’re seen and take a personality inventory once in a while).

          If everyone in Port Hardy doesn’t like my neighbour, maybe it’s IS an indication that he is doing something to piss everyone off and he should re-evaluate his stand.

          ‘You asked’ I think was pointing toward the latter, if the rest of the free world sees fault in America and Americans, perhapse it’s a good idea to look inward and try to see why.

          Is it America’s opinion that everyone should accept America and Americans the way they are and if they don’t they will be defamed or attacked by the USA or is it better that America and Americans think about how they can be accepted by others and what they are doing to disallow that.

          Not everyone fels that your attacks are justified, I have yet to see a single shred of evidence to prove you were justified in attacking Iraq. Especially after training and funding the Taliban then supplying arms to Iraq and Iraq.

          Wasn’t this all a result of the need to control WHO and WHERE the oil pipline would be built? http://tinyurl.com/n13q

          WMD my ass. I think that was just a fear that Bush presented to the people of America to justify actions with other motives.

        • #2743579

          My general feeling is this

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to In defense

          Whether America acts or doesn’t act, whether we pay for something or don’t pay, whether we support a cause or not, whether we get involved or remain neutral, whether we go left or right, or up or down, there will be someone, somewhere with their finger on the trigger ready to blast America with criticism for whatever we may or may not do. And since we can’t please all of the people all of the time, we can only fall back on our (hopefully) good judgement, base our actions on a core set of principles, and just let the chips fall where they may.

          Why is that, you might ask? Well, I don’t know and I don’t really care. And since I can’t do anything about it, it’s not worthy of my concern.

          It’s kind of like you as it relates to anything I post. Whatever I say or don’t say, you’ll find fault with something.

          I shouldn’t concern myself with it on an individual basis, and America can’t overly concern itself with it on a global basis.

        • #2743573

          Another Canadian’s opinion

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to In defense

          This, from a Canadian newspaper (circa 1970s)

          America: The Good Neighbor.

          Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator.

          What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record:

          “This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest
          on its remaining debts to the United States.

          When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.

          When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.

          The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans.

          I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal
          the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don’t they fly them?

          Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes?

          Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon-not once, but several times-and safely home again.

          You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking
          Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here.

          When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.

          I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.

          Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those.”

        • #2743556

          It was 1973

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to In defense

          “In the early part of World War Two, “Sinc” incurred the displeasure of Canada’s senior generals and admirals, and was listed as persona non grata as a war correspondent – a ban that was never lifted”

          “Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those”

          >>It was June 5th 1973

          >>CFRB LET’S BE PERSONAL broadcast of June 5, 1973 – a broadcast which echoed around the world and which history will record as one of the most respected tributes from Canada to the people of the United States of America.

          “Gordon Sinclair received many honours and awards from governors of several U.S. states, including being made an honourary citizen of North Carolina.”

          NOTE: This man had received more accreditation for his Journalism by Americans than Canadians. He was also 74 years old at the time of “The Americans” which was written NOT as a tribute to the US but to help increase support for the US Red Cross, has been altered on the internet several times from his original transcript.

          >>>Canadian broadcast journalist Betty Kennedy, who was a friend of Sinclair’s, told Reuter he wrote the radio speech in response to reports that the American Red Cross was on the verge of bankruptcy.

          “He was so incensed by this,” Kennedy said. He wrote the speech in five minutes and immediately read it over the radio.

          “The response from it was absolutely unbelievable,” she recalled. “The thing absolutely snowballed.”

          Kennedy said she believed the transcript resurfaced, which won wide play in the United States at the time (Sept. 11/01) , because it spoke well of the American people.

          “It was so warm-hearted… At a time of terrible trouble…they (Americans) probably need to remember that.”

          So a Canadian reporter that was favored by the US, wrote a quick speech in order to make America look good to others and increase support of the US Red Cross.

          Nice digging Max, but that is like saying, YOU believe that America Won WWII, therefore, ALL American’s feel that way. (which you adamantly disagree to).

          I think this ones getting a little too far off topic. I’ve read and appreciate your input, this is the type of going nowhere nitpicking that creates so many heated discussions here. The facts just get weaker and weaker until taken out of context and completely misrepresented.

        • #2743572

          Pretty one sided conclusion.

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to What have I got wrong?

          “It’s kind of like you as it relates to anything I post. Whatever I say or don’t say, you’ll find fault with something.”

          >>The “so many Americans”, you’re right, was as it was portayed on the news

          >>Your explanation of your political stand also makes more sense now

          >>Thanks for the civil chat,

          “Have you noticed – The question is answered”

          >>Yes I saw that

          “A man walks into a bar… ”

          >>Max …Thanks for all the information, you really seem to know your vinyl

          Doe sthis mean because we don’t see eye to eye on all subjets, especially your mixed political views, that you see us as enemies? Kinda like the countries you support then attack for not adopting the American Way and thinking the same way as you?

        • #2743523

          I never said. . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Pretty one sided conclusion.

          ….that you never found anything right, but rather that you always seem to find something to fault. There’s a big difference. (Okay, the vinyl discussion may be an exception.) But there you go again, looking for something to slam.

          Do I see us as enemies, you ask? Well, you made your initial splash on these threads attacking me, and they’ve pretty much continued up to now. (With the occasional cease-fire.) But do I see you as an enemy? Nope, not really. But I do see you as someone who is rather insignificant when it comes to critiquing or rebutting my opinions. Whereas the rebuttal of others may sway, or even change, my opinion, yours just don’t have the wisdom, the reasoning, or the accuracy behind them to matter a whole lot. Unlike others, I just don’t see your opinions as being well thought-out, consistent, and/or supported by the facts. And even though you’re quite opinionated (not unlike myself) a certain naivete always seems to be apparent. That last sentence of yours, for example, just shows the reckless and exaggerated nature of your rebuttals.

          Nonetheless, I must admit that there’s been a certain amount of enjoyment and/or satisfaction result from a few of these sparing sessions. But the days of really getting into it with you (whatever “it” is), are behind me.

        • #2743508

          You always seem to find something to fault.

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Pretty one sided conclusion.

          “you always seem to find something to fault.”

          Isn’t that exactly what you just did?

          “That last sentence of yours, for example, just shows the reckless and exaggerated nature of your rebuttals”

          Sorry I fogot, it must be a one-way street right?

    • #3380502

      Missing The Point

      by jackofalltech ·

      In reply to The French

      It’s not that they didn’t want to fight, it’s that they engaged in activities to dissuade others from helping us also. It’s the fact that they owe us something like 8 billion dollars from WWII and basically told us to go F**K ourselves.

      Ralph

      P.S. How many Frenchman does it take to defend Paris?
      .
      .
      .
      No one knows, it’s never been done

      • #3380347

        That’s good !

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Missing The Point

        I like it Ralph. Very well said.

        • #3380345

          almost forgot

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to That’s good !

          That’s a strong and relevant point, I haven’t looked into the facts but if what you say is true, I can understand why YOU would have such an opinion. I wonder how many other people would say “the French suck” but couldn’t offer an explanation such as yours.

      • #3380340

        More digs

        by guruofdos ·

        In reply to Missing The Point

        Ralph…thanks for the congrats!

        Just for fun…

        goto http://www.google.com

        In the search box, type FRENCH MILITARY VICTORIES
        then hit the I Feel Lucky button…worth a laugh!

        Mike

        • #3380180

          ROTFLMAO

          by jackofalltech ·

          In reply to More digs

          Oh man, that’s great!

          Ralph

      • #3380165

        history lesson

        by youasked ·

        In reply to Missing The Point

        Well hell! why don’t you send them back the Statue of Liberty?? Have you forgotten that without the French you wouldn’t have a country? ..Who do you think gave you the money and amunitions? and don’t ever forget that you showed up rather late for the party in both WW11 and WW1 and you sure didn’t do it alone..I have lived and worked in four countries around the World..conclusion…we all want the same things for ourselves and our families. There isn’t much different about any of us.. including ignorant people are all the same ignorant !!! ..prejudice and hateful and not wishing or wanting anyone to succeed..in closing our minds and hearts to others, we are doing ourselves a great disservice
        Learn exceptence of others and all the gifts that they bring with them and possibly you just might make a positive difference in this World.

        • #2743644

          The enemy of my enemy is my friend

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to history lesson

          Or so it is in the case of national alliances, especially in time of war. The enemy of my enemy, in the case of the American Revolutionary war, compelled the French to help the colonists who were fighting France’s enemy, the British.

          However, what happened well over two hundred years ago has absolutely no bearing on present day policy. Moreover, I believe we paid the French back a thousand fold. Visit the American graves in Normandy, France and tell me that we didn’t – my mother’s brother’s (the uncle I never knew) is one of them.

        • #2742837

          Normandy

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to The enemy of my enemy is my friend

          I undestand you’ve lost family in Normandy. Are you aware that many people from MANY different countries have lost family in Normandy?

          War is hell, you know that. Your lost uncle’s grave is one of many, from many different countries. Or did America, win WWII unaided, I haven’t read one of your text books lately.

          By the time you guys got to France, the end of the war was pretty much inevitable. Hitler had spread himself too thin and didn’t have the support or resources to claim England as his Luftwaffe was being torn apart. I’m not implying that the US disn’t help the war’s end, but I think it takes an EXREMELY narrow and arrogant or mislead mind to feel that American’s won WWII.

          It was WORLD WAR II, not everyone else is at war and America is going to end it. Don’t flatter yourslef.

          As I read this, I think I’ve got it figured out now. If you have a pitcher that pitches 7 scorelss innings and he is replaced in the top of the 8th, that pitcher may give up 5 hits in the next two innings. He’s still considered the winning pitcher though, right?

        • #2742734

          There you go again

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Normandy

          Rebutting something that was not there. All I did was address this person’s assertion that France helped a fledgling America over 200 years ago, and I replied by illustrating how France has been more than repaid. But of course, you read something into it that was not there and went off on one of your unwarranted and ridiculous tangents.

          You must surely be one of those people who dominates conversations, interrupts people in mid sentence, all just to hear yourself talk. In the case of reading, you must read only every third or fourth word, just chomping at the bit to write your rebuttal. If you just s-l-o-w d-o-w-n and really READ what was written, perhaps you might comprehend what was intended, understand a little better, and learn a little more. (But I won’t hold my breath.)

          And in the case of your baseball question (whatever that has to do with anything), if the second pitcher gave up 5 hits but no runs, the first pitcher would get the win, and the second pitcher would get the save. If the second pitcher gave up runs that resulted in a loss (you just mentioned hits – big difference), the second pitcher would be charged with the loss, and the first pitcher’s efforts would go unrecorded in the win-loss record. But his fine efforts would still count as innings pitched when calculating his earned run average.

        • #2743426

          Well Exxccuussee Me but…

          by jackofalltech ·

          In reply to history lesson

          I was referring to events that occurred in recent history AND continue to this day, not something that happened ONCE a very long time ago.

          So they gave us a statue. Big deal!

          Yeah, we came late to the conflict because we were trying to mind our own business. You didn’t see us trying to convince other countries NOT to help England and France against Germany, did you?

          And yes, for the most part, we did win the war on our own.

          Ralph

        • #2742839

          You asked, you missed something

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to history lesson

          “Learn exceptence of others and all the gifts that they bring with them and possibly you just might make a positive difference in this World. ”

          You should know by now, from reading the discussions.

          This is EXACTLY what America is doing?

          We just have to learn to accept THEM and learn how to make a positive difference in the world!

          They will never accept the realities of their past mistakes. American history books aren’t like others, they have a MUCH different analogy of how history has unfolded. A good friend of mine taught history at UCLA for 10 years, he left becaus ethe books he was teaching his students from were so inaccurate and one sided and the University swore by them. What can you do when your fed BS from birth?

          We just need to learn how to be like American’s then perhapse we wouldn’t all be so jealous of America.

          Start by shooting your neighbour (I’m sure he was gonna step on your land anyhow). Then learn how to control how other countries conduct their business. Finally, get your MCSE, it’s like an American birth certificate. Just don’t be too bummed when you find out everyone else has one and there’s no work.
          Oh, I almost forgot. Don’t fix your OWN country, fix all the others instead.

        • #2742733

          You just don’t give up

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to You asked, you missed something

          You really are making an ass of yourself, you know.

    • #3380326

      The French

      by mallardtooxx ·

      In reply to The French

      To say I hate the French is a strong statement. I do not by nature hate anyone. However I have a strong disdain for what the French have come to represent in the last 2 centuries. It is true without French support the 13 colonies may have remained just that. I am thankful to the French for the help. The statue of liberty is a beautiful memorial to the friendship once shared between France and the USA. I like French fries, even though they are really American, and I have no aversion to French wine. All this being said let me expose on why I dislike the nation of France, not the people of France.
      Ever since the First World War, America has stood by France, rescued her, along with our allies, from the tyranny of evil men. Our repayment, Vietnam, where France bit off more than it could chew under the guise of the UN and then pulled out leaving a vacuum that had to be plugged and lead us down the road to an un-winnable, unsupportable war. I am bitter for this, i am also bitter toward the nation of France for their open and blatant hostility toward American policy. If they disagree that is fine, that is their right, but do not align against us after pledging support. France is shady, they are backstabbing and they are afraid to engage without certain knowledge that they will get something in return. I understand this is the nature of the world but never has there been a selfless act on the part of France on the world stage.
      It is these reasons that I, one American, dislike France.

      -duck

      • #3380316

        This is great !

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to The French

        When I post an open question like this, whether now or before, all I’ve ever expected are personal opinions based on YOUR beliefs and feelings.
        The answers given here have been great! You really have a valid point and state it well.

        Much more interesting than “They Suck” or “They are lucky we don’t kill the French once and for all” (a little harsh but you know what I mean).

        I just wish all TR discussions were as straight up as this. NOW, granted I don’t like references to history to justify current world affairs or feelings toward another race, but your points are legitimate. I wonder how the French would feel if asked the same question about the USA?

        Please don’t speculate, it will detract from the honesty shown here.

      • #3380141

        mistaken

        by youasked ·

        In reply to The French

        Obviously your views are slightly bias..Do you really think that the other nations that you stated where influenced by the French?? that quite naive.. If the other nations strongly felt that France was wrong in their appraisal of the situation they would have gone ahead and backed the USA..It is not possible that the French had different intel and based their decision on what they had?. Britian is in hot water from their supposedly accurate intel and look at what’s happening with their Prime Minister. Also look at what has not been discovered so far ..NOTHING..no weapons of mass destruction found todate. The USA can’t be right and everyone else wrong can it? I truly beleive that if there was some indication that weapons where there and that Sadam was indeed a threat to other nations that there would have been World wide support with the US and that France would certainly not have been able to use any influence what so ever, and France surely would have participate fully if indications where so?. The presure that the US put on Hans Bliss proved to be unwarrented so far hasn’t it? Why is it that there has always to be a scapgoat?? For a people who claim to be “democratic” you sure ignore the wishes of other peoples of other nations when they don’t agree with you. Stop the blame and understand that other peoples have excellent intel and are also responsible nations in this World who are just as concern as you are and will do everything in their power to have a safe and peaceful World. Also never forget that the good old USA is the only nation who so far have used and have stored nuclear weapons of mass destruction. Get a life “hate” is a lethal weapon towards self destruct and let peace begin with you.

        • #2743641

          Who is mistaken?

          by mrbill- ·

          In reply to mistaken

          I wonder to whom you are referring to when you said ?Do you really think that the other nations that you stated where influenced by the French??? duck never mentioned any others just the French. He did miss how the French Gov refused over flight of their country when Reagan struck Libya, and that may have cost the lives of two US Airmen. The French people were not happy with their Gov over that decision. I do not agree with the French Gov for various reasons, but the people are just people like any others and it is theirs. We do need to remember that the French had been hurt badly in both of the major European conflicts in the 20th century. They lost nearly a whole generation of young men in the Great War. Then when Hitler invaded they got whacked pretty bad, actually humiliated more than anything else. Then in SEA they were the first to be defeated by the VC. Is it any wonder they do not want to fight any more?

          The US is not the ONLY country to ?have stored nuclear weapons of mass destruction?. Yes we are the only one who has had to use them in a war we did not want. In retrospect how many lives did those two weapons save? Downfall would have cost millions of lives on both sides and prolonged the war.

        • #2743588

          A little late with your point

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Who is mistaken?

          “He did miss how the French Gov refused over flight of their country when Reagan struck Libya, and that may have cost the lives of two US Airmen.”
          ‘May have cost’, is speculative. The fact that US troops attacked and killed friendly UK troops is NOT. Did a similar FRIENDLY attack not also occur during the war in Iran?

          A few discussions ago, I don’t remember which, I poked at the point that the US always seems to attack friendly targets during war yet they spout about having the highest military training with the best equipment. British soldiers were killed in Iraq when US intelligence and recon was not accurate they attacked a friendly target. This also shows that because Canadians didn’t support the war effort, we contributed the their deaths too.

          Canada’s recon is used by many countries worldwide and is well known as the fastest, most effective and advanced recon around.

          http://tinyurl.com/n17a >read “Which military assets does the US want Canada to bring to a War on Iraq?” and “What lessons can we take from these US preferences?”

          So for you to wine about “…and that may have cost the lives of two US Airmen.” is a little out of line.

          I was told that War is War and people die at war, friendly or not. Which is it, a mistake by the US or just one of those things, like France possible costnig the lives of two airmen?

        • #2743640

          It’s too bad. . . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to mistaken

          …that the other “responsible nations of the world” didn’t do anything about the killing of millions upon millions of people in eastern Europe over the past hundred years (at least). Most recently, where were these “responsible nations” in the 1990s when Bosnia was no more than an ethnic killing field?

        • #2743529

          Bosnia

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to It’s too bad. . . .

          >>”where were these “responsible nations” in the 1990s when Bosnia was no more than an ethnic killing field? ”

          “CONSTITUTION AND CIVIL LIBERTIES In December 1990, the Croatian parliament, or Sabor, passed a democratic constitution which guarantees the civil liberties of all of its citizens and provides for cultural and educational autonomy for the Serbs and other national minorities in Croatia. Under this constitution, Serbs and representatives of smaller minorities are given the right to have their own schools and to use their own language and alphabet as the official language and alphabet of districts where they form a majority.”

          “In May 1992, urged by the United Nations and European community, the Croatian government went even further, passing a law guaranteeing self-government and political autonomy to districts where Serbs make up a majority of the population. Because of these conciliatory measures taken by the Croatian government,”

          “it seems clear that the legitimate goals and concerns of the Serbian minority could have been addressed through negotiation and comprimise, and that there was no need whatsoever for an armed rebellion.”

          “Ignoring the months of fruitless negotiotions
          deliberately sabotoged by the Serbian and federal army leadership, in the final week before the Slovenian and Croatian independence proclamations,
          American Secretary of State James Baker and Under Secretary Lawrence Eagleburger publicly opposed the Croatians’ and Slovenians’ moves towards
          independence. The German government, which had followed event much more closely and carefully, rightly advocate immediate recognition of the
          independence of Croatia and Slovenia and an unambiguous policy against Serbian or “federal” military intervention to prevent the indepence of these republics.”

          “The United States, France, England and Russia failed to intervene in an effective and constructive way to mediate a democratic and peaceful disassociation of former Yugoslav republics from the Yugoslav federation after its viability had been destroyed by a series of arbitray actions of Milosevic’s Serbian government and the Serbian-dominated federal army leadership.
          The United States, France and England – by initially publicly opposing the democratic decision of the Slovenian and Croatian peoples when they declared independence after months of Serbian and Montenegrin sabataged negotiations – gave the “Yugoslav” military an open invitation to intervene militarily to prevent the independence of these republics and to seize territory for Greater Serbia alias Yugoslavvia.

          Great job, I’m glad that, as you say, America was alone on this one again. Eastern Europe, Germany, France and England “responsible nations?” have no part in this at all I see.

        • #2743497

          I thought you wanted facts?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to It’s too bad. . . .

          It seems that whenever I post, you have a rebuttal, which is fine of course. You often say that I have no substance in my posts and that I don’t post facts and just opinions.
          DISCUSSIONS are a generally a series of personal opinions
          DEBATES are usually a controlled interpretation of the facts as seen by different sides.

          That aside.

          When I do post facts, as in the above post, you eloquently sidestep the issue and focus on other opinions I’ve shared instead.

          Any reason, or do you just not like facts that don’t compliment you posts?

        • #2743485

          Okay, I’ll try to answer you

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to I thought you wanted facts?

          Yes, discussions are usually a series of personal opinions. However, it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to have a meaningful discussion with someone if the opinion is without basis in fact. For example, one person’s opinion might be that Santa Claus really uses the door to get in your house, not the chimney. How could a person debate such an assertion since Santa Claus doesn’t exist? (Sorry to burst your bubble.) Sure, that’s an extreme analogy, but I think it illustrates my point. Opinion without some remote basis in fact might be considered opinion, but it’s ignorant opinion.

          As far as the facts you posted about Bosnia, I didn’t sidestep anything. I just didn’t read the stuff you cut and pasted. I’m sure it’s accurate, but I’m not sure what it’s worth. The point I was making when I mentioned Bosnia in the first place is that history has shown that European countries sit idly by and let millions upon millions of their neighbors be killed without doing anything of significance to stop the atrocities. Why does the USA even have ONE soldier there? Let France and Germany clean up the mess, if you ask me. Why does the USA always have to do it?

        • #2743474

          Moving backwards

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Okay, I’ll try to answer you

          I agree that it is not fair that the USA is the only country that sees a crisis and decides to attack in order to restore peace.

          Other countries seem to be more reserved than the US when it comes to fighting other people’s wars. I don’t know if this is a result of them having a longer history of war and are reluctant to start a new one or perhapse it is that the USA is so far away acroos the pond that they don’t see any threat of repercussion.

          I really don’t. Why DOES the USA have soldiers in Bosnia? Why aren’t they cleaning up the mess in Afghanistan instead of Canadian and German troops? Why did they go after Saddam?

          There are a LOT of questions that don’t have valid or relevant answers. This may be why I fron upon all the people who’ve supported Bush’s decisions, he doesn’t make sense, I’m sure you saw him on TV last night with no answers to any questions he was asked. Why support him, I sure as hell wouldn’t.

        • #2743496

          Backup and reread

          by mallardtooxx ·

          In reply to mistaken

          “Obviously your views are slightly bias..Do you really think that the other nations that you stated where influenced by the French??”

          First off I did not mention any other countries but America and France.

          “Get a life “hate” is a lethal weapon towards self destruct and let peace begin with you.”

          Reread the post ma’am I never said I hated France or the French people. As a matter of fact I said: ” To say I hate the French is a strong statement. I do not by nature hate anyone. However I have a strong disdain for what the French have come to represent in the last 2 centuries.”

          And for the record, the reason Chirac and France did not want the war was because France was the #1 trading partner with Iraq against UN sanction. Like I said in my original post I do not like what france has come to represent, and never will you see france move on the world stage in a selfless manner.

          To you I say I have a life, do not hate preach to me. You can ask anyone I am far from a hate mongering American like you want to portray.

          -duck

        • #2743486

          I’ll second that

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Backup and reread

          You have valid points and I agree, you do offer some open minded input and rarely show your political biases, of course you have done but it’s usually not the focus of your posts.

          I’d say (based on your posts) your a somewhat open minded and selfless person.

          Just a couple of pennies, but you have a point.

          OM

    • #3380246

      by voldar ·

      In reply to The French

      I thought a lot before posting here on this subject. I always think that ?to globalize something? ? does not mater what ? shows at least great lack of wisdom. There is no French / American / British dispute, if you ask for my opinion. Always is about one or another ego, one or another ?deep feelings? against or for someone. For the one that posted about the war, and about how French stood up for their rights, I just have to say one word ? read more the history books, and than talk (in fact there are more than ?one? word ? sorry). Everyone in his past history did mistakes ? so, lets not be so ? the supreme know-everything master?. The way he replied to the subject gave me the reason to think that nobody is perfect ? but so little is trying to change that. The best question would be ? WHY is that?
      I have a lot of French friends and also Americans (and not only them), but this means nothing for narrow-minded fellows.
      If someone believes that the white is black, no matter how many people tell him he?s wrong, he will never accept that. You can?t open up his mind; you can?t switch his thoughts 180 degrees just because you want him to see the truth. Because truth is something so volatile – it depends on everyones experience.
      Life taught me something: never try to change someone?s deep beliefs or thoughts; you?ll never succeed. You can advice/tell him he?s wrong, but never expect him to do the way you want/tell him to do. And the simple reason for that is that everyone is a single and unique character.
      The point of my post is that nature sometimes create ?mistakes?, and people are usually the one that are the cause of trouble ? not nations nor anything else. I don?t think fair to judge a child because of his father, so I don?t judge a nation because some of his citizens.
      So – OzMedia – the problem is not the French or anyone else – it is us, every human being. It is up to us to change ourselves first, and when we change, everything changes.
      P.S. I am not French/American/British – just a voice from the eter.

      • #3380231

        Nicely said

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to

        Your post makes a lot of sense in an ideal world. Unfortunately we build bias and prejudice as we grow, nobody is born hating blacks or whites, French or English, it is a learnt trait that is passed down through generations.

        As with WWII, there were many hard feelings that were passed down through generations, it is only in the past 20-30 years that people have started to forget the German/British hatred and now they have become Friends that fight side by side. I’m sure there are many who are still frowned upon by grand parents or great grandparents for their interracial friendships.

        My last girlfriend was African but she was also the daughter of a Muslim priest who was born in Pakistan. She was very Canadian in her ways, her father was very African in his ways but her mother and grandparents were very Pakistani in their ways and beliefs.
        We were considering a life together but this would have been to hard for her family to accept (perhaps not so much her family but the people in her Ismaeli religion).
        Although we are BEST Friends and she has moved to be closer to me, marriage is out of the question (for now)because if the impact on her family.

        It is this kind of prejudice that slows the progression of the people and keeps us in our respective social and economic classes.

        I am confident that this will cease as a way of thinking, only to be replaced by another prejudice. Hopefully our children will not see people for where they came from or what colour and ethnicity they are and ultimately the world will become a better place.

        We have to realize that the world only has just over 2000 years of modern recorded history. before that time, we have merely gathered enough information to speculate past history however, the earth is millions of years old (at least)and I’m sure if we don’t destroy it, it will have many more years to come. Hopefully (not necessarily in my lifetime) we can break these bonds and prejudices to find the billions of world inhabitants living in harmony.

        We must teach our children the destruction of forming prejudice and hope that they will in turn pass this down. One day, prejudice may be a thing to read in the GLOBAL HISTORY BOOK.

        • #3380176

          Clarification

          by jackofalltech ·

          In reply to Nicely said

          I probably should have said this before – I don’t hate the French or anyone else. I am somewhat displeased and VERY disappointed. I just stated some of the reasons why many Americans may feel the way they do.

          Oz, your analogy has some merit but is not perfect. Predjudice is an ‘unreasonable’, a Priori opinion unsupported by reality. It must be taught by others of the same persuasion such as racism. Bias is an opinion created by experience.

          I still remember the first time I saw the movie ‘South Pacific’, I couldn’t understand why Lieutenant Cable couldn’t marry the Polynesian girl nor why the American girl got so upset about the Frenchmans Polynesian children. My wife had to remind me of the mores in the ’40s.

          Ralph

        • #3380166

          I have to say

          by voldar ·

          In reply to Nicely said

          something about this ideal world. I am very aware about the fact that nothing is perfect, and by the way, didn?t you see that if someone is perfect it is also boring in the end?
          You say about the prejudice way of approaching actions/things. This is part of human nature; it is very hard to change that.

          You know what? I appreciate more someone that tries to change himself than someone stacked in his narrow-minded world, someone who?s ?very filled? of himself. And this applies in the IT carrier also.

          Moreover, yes, history gave us many things to think about (hate/rejection/hard-feelings) but it is up to us to change this perspective. What should I say about the countries that for some cheep reasons betrayed their partners? Nothing! That was at the time the best way for them to fulfill their needs and maybe, to protect their territories also. This is why I do not make judgments at the country level. I do not know everything on a subject so that I can judge. What I can do is to have an opinion about one subject or another, but I do not say my opinion is the best.
          In addition, at the end, think about this: France and Germany after 50 years of ?hard-feelings? are now becoming partners. Is it good? Is it bad? I think it is great. Finally, common sense took place of whatever was before. The British and the French built the Euro tunnel, linking the two countries the way it was never before. These are good signs that the world is moving forward and showing me that even it is hard, at the end everyone win.

        • #3380138

          Vlad is right

          by zulj ·

          In reply to Nicely said

          I believe Vladolar?s comments make a lot of sense in the real world. He thinks with an open mind. The single most unique thing anyone has is their mind. It?s a really difficult thing for most people is to realize that everyone else also possesses a unique mind. Not matter how wrong it may seem to you, it seems right to them. You can?t just tell someone to change their mind. The only way forward is to show that you yourself are willing to change your thoughts or beliefs.

          His example of how France and Germany are becoming partners didn?t happen because France convinced Germany to do it or vice versa. It is because both sides changed their thoughts on each other. Albeit took 50 odd years. And in time the people of France and Germany (the ones who still harbor grudges) will follow in their leaders footsteps and change their perceptions on each other.

          You say that we must teach our children about the destruction of prejudice. Well isn?t that exactly what Vlad is saying? We must show our children that we can change our beliefs, admit that we were wrong and live with an open mind before we can expect them to.

    • #3380207

      Anglo-French antagonism

      by guruofdos ·

      In reply to The French

      Has been going on for years. Britain was invaded by the French in 1066 and during the Battle of Hastings, King Harold was killed, allegedly by an arrow in the eye.

      Since then, we have been at war with the French many times. Now they want to integrate all the European Nations to the point where all the European military powers are part of a European Force outside of NATO control, and exclude America from defending Europe. They seem to want to join forces with Germany and Italy and are trying to get Britain on-side.

      Sorry, Frenchies….do you have short memories or what?!! The last person who tried to ‘unite’ Europe into one Federal Superpower was one Adolph Hitler, and look what happened then!!!

      We (Brits) call the French ‘Frogs’, because of their alleged partiality to eating frogs legs. This isn’t all one sided…they refer to the British as ‘Roast Beef’ for the similar reasons!

      The biggest issue is the European Common Agricultural Policy…..Britain financially contributes more per capita than any other nation in Europe to subsidies and the French farmers recieve the largest handouts!

      The French strike or take industrial action as a national pastime. There isn’t a month goes by when either French air traffic controllers or dock workers down tools or the truckers go on strike and blocade the ports. This has a knock-on effect for British commerce, travel and tourism. The French have a large influence on European regulations that Britain feels compelled to apply, yet the French are always the last to put them into force. Meanwhile, Britain pays the cost.

      We go into Iraq…the French have to make a song and dance of it. I agree that the War on Iraq had no moral or legal justification, and no evidence has been found of WMD’s. Geoff Hoon, the British defence Minister is about to lose his job over lying to the people and the press about the Iraq situation. The point is…all permanent members of the UN Security Council should be unanimous when it comes to world military action, yet France changes it’s mind as often as I change my underwear! Why, oh why are they even a permanent member?!!! What contribution have France ever made to global disputes, apart from stirring up dissent in the UN?

      Go to http://www.google.com

      Enter ‘French Military Victories’ in the search box, then hit ‘I feel lucky!’….see what you get!

      • #2743488

        I understand your point …

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Anglo-French antagonism

        That England has a long past history with the French. Very few people I know in England still harbour these negative feelings though. It is actually quite surprising, with your being from Southampton, that you feel this way. I figured you’d Red Funnel there often.

        Your reference to the Battle of Hastings is interesting though. I used to drink at a pub beside my office on W. Hastings St. in Vancouver, the bar was recently bought and renamed to “1066”.

        I mentioned the Battle of Hastings to the owner, and asked if he thought people would put two and two together and remember that 1066 was the Battle of Hastings (the bar was on Hastings, and I thought it was a cool idea for a name).

        He didn’t have a CLUE what I was talking about and said he named it because of the address, which was 1066 West Hastings! DOH!!

        • #2742862

          Some People…

          by guruofdos ·

          In reply to I understand your point …

          Wouldn’t see a ‘smart’ connection if it was written down on paper and explained three times!

          Red Funnel only go from Southampton to the Isle of Wight!

          I do occasionally take a Seacat across to France, but only to fill the car with cheaper diesel and to do a little household shopping. I wouldn’t give a penny for French wine…German, Portuguese and ‘New World’ wines are so much better. I tend to buy weird stuff like laundry liquid, olive oil and household cleaners which seem to be the same price in Euros as they are here in Pounds (saving 30%)!

          I don’t have a problem with French as individuals, and their cheeses are very good and so are their cars (I drive a Peugeot), but as a race ‘collectively’ their politics, attitudes and general demeanour rub me up the wrong way.

          The reason the British will never accept the Euro? It’s because a Pound sterling is worth MORE than a Euro…as it is worth MORE than a US dollar (or almost any dollar) and as a nation we would never trade a currency for one with a ‘lesser value’. I know that 1.5 US dollars, or 1.4 Euros is equivalent to a pound, and that my salary would change from ?50,000 per annum to Eu70,000 per annum (or $75,000 per annum if we adopted the US dollar as some politicians here have mooted!)

          Perhaps if ever a day comes when the Pound is worth less than the Euro or Dollar, we may change…but it has never happened yet and never will!

          So as long as there is a two currency system in Europe (with Pounds here and Euros everywhere else), I’ll still do my shopping in France when the exchange rate is in my favour. I’ll speak to them in their own language, drive their car on their roads and fill it up with their cheaper diesel! Just don’t ask me to toast them with French wine!

        • #2742854

          Agreed

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Some People…

          I know the British don’t want to take a loss on the pound and therefore didn’t adopt the euro, think i mentioned that before. I honestly thought the Red Funnels still went to France from Ryde though?! I usually fly if I’m there (so cheap) with one exception of riding the tour bus through the chunnel, I’ll never do that again though!

          Do they still have the hovercraft to France? Or is it just the Catamaran?

        • #2742851

          Afterthought

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Agreed

          In Vancouver, they tried building SEA Cat’s to go from the Island to the mainland. At HUGE government and taxpayer cost, they ran about a week before being ditched due to the high priced waqterfront home owners complaints. Apparently they were too fast and caused to much agitation in the waters.
          THey have sat in Nanaimo for about two years now at leastm collecting dust. Several other countries, including France have looked at them but don’t see the value in them. It ws a big political stir that ended up in millions lost by our wonderful government. Pull out a map, look at the passage between Horseshoe Bay and Nanaimo. Now you tell me, does this measly little 1.5 hr crossing warrant a fast cat?

          Ithink not, neither did the reest of the city. Our politicians all listen to the people so closely that they do this type of thing all the time.

          No wonder we don’t give politics the time of day here.
          They’re a bunch of liars and hypocrites that hide the facts and BS until the truth is dragged out of them. Anyone want to buy a Fast Cat, never been used, cost 12 million new, will sell for 4!

        • #2742809

          Red Funnel

          by guruofdos ·

          In reply to Agreed

          The old White Funnel used to do Ryde to France, but they were merged into Sealink, who are now in turn part of Stenna.

          As ferries go, they still do Southampton to France, but most of the continental stuff goes from Portsmouth.

          Hoverspeed is indeed alive and well and still doing the Dover-Calais run and Portsmouth to Cherbourg, but the HSF (High Speed Ferry), which is jet-propelled is starting to gain popularity!

          Many of the older hovercraft are now in a museum at what was once HMS Daedalus down at Lee-On-Solent. Incidentally, HMS ‘Dead-Loss’ as us former ‘inmates’ used to know it, has now closed as a naval base and is going to be turned into a reception centre to house asylum seekers. Naturally the locals are rearing up about this but I say it’s a GOOD THING.

          Let’s face it, they will be ‘housed’ behind a guarded fence, will have a curfew after dark, and will be fed, sheltered and educated (pending their appeal) but given no other money. Surely this has to be better for the local populace than 400-odd drunken sailors going out blowing their pay on a Friday night during a ‘run ashore’!

        • #2742766

          Thanks Guru

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Red Funnel

          Have a good weekend with your new arrival.

          Did she come by stork, cabbage patch or Red Funnel?

        • #2741712

          Something to think about.

          by mrbill- ·

          In reply to Some People…

          Watch your logic. If the pound is worth 1.4E today you would be paid 70k Es at current exchange rate. If the rate changes and the Euro goes 1 = 1 then you would be paid 50k Es. You have to watch how ?they? are going to set your salary, when/if UK changes to Euro, based on 1 = 1.4 or 1=1. You could be worth 30% less then you are now.

          If you change now your value will be set at the higher rate, if the pound falls too far you are a pauper. I would not suggest changing now though, was it Sweden who just said no to the Euro? That should deflate it a bit.

          BTW in the mid 80s while we were stationed in West Germany we planned a trip to the UK. My wife saved up a couple hundred $$s for the trip and got an exchange rate of 1=1. The dollar CAN equal a pound if our interest rates go up drastically, amongst many other things.

Viewing 4 reply threads