Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

And where are all those tunnel-visioned instantaneous Francophiles in this country who not long ago were so angry with the French who had sense enough to oppose the senseless, wasteful, deadly military invasion of Iraq?

 

<<<<US Congress opts for "freedom fries"

 

 

French fries in the House of Representatives' cafeterias will now be known as "freedom fries" as part of a Republican protest at France's opposition to a war on Iraq.>>>>

 

Republican representative Bob Ney*, whose committee is in charge of the eateries, said the action was "a small but symbolic effort to show the strong displeasure of many on Capitol Hill with the actions of our so-called ally, France".

 

French toast from now on will be known as "freedom toast".

 

The move - following the lead of a North Carolina restaurant - reflects the anti-French sentiment among some lawmakers who feel President Jacques Chirac is betraying the US by opposing its policy on disarming Iraq.>>>

http://www.utexas.edu/courses/...les/freedomfries.htm

 

* Convicted, sent to prison for BRIBERY.

Last edited by Contendah
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

Since the US is a major source of funding for anti-terror activities, we've hardly let the world down.  Why waste the money on sending another one or two people to join the 3million locals?  I notice all the "leaders" shown are Democrats.  Why didn't this rag show some Republicans that "let the world down"?

 

Why does every discussion on this board have to degenerate into partisan politics? This was about showing solidarity and demonstrating leadership. Some 40 other world leaders managed to do it. Our "leadership" was conspicuously absent. Rep/Dem has nothing to this. Go to Ft Benning and take a look at the "Follow Me" statue. It's about LEADERSHIP and that is  non partisan.

 

Last edited by JJ

Compilation of sources.

 

It was a mistake – a missed opportunity to remind France and other allies that the United States is committed to a war against terrorism waged by two U.S. president and thousands of U.S. troops since 9/11. The White House even admits the U.S. delegation wasn't high-ranking enough.

But this was no disgrace. No embarrassment. No snub.

 

 

 The United States has some 66,000 military personnel deployed in Europe. More than 6,800 U.S. service members have died in post-9/11 operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. treasury finance intelligence and military operations across the globe, making the United States the most stalwart enemy of terrorists.

 

Why should the President of the United States have to join a march to prove to the world the US fight on terrorism?

Just because a couple of days ago he declared that he would "stand with France" doesn't mean that he should actually have to, you know, stand in France. Especially on the weekend.

Besides, Obama's presence at the rally would have been disruptive. The apparatus that follows the U.S. president is isolating and the attending "limelight" nature were a direct counter to the vibe that organizers achieved in the streets of Paris.

 

So, next in line would have been V.P. Biden.

Having the Vice President show up would have been a demonstration of Americas commitment.

 

But really, the European Leaders breathed a sigh of relief when "Uncle Joe" didn't show.

Now THAT was a move I credit the President for. Can you imagine some of the interesting, or even worse, just dumb, blurbs ?

Besides, Joe doesn't know where France is.

 

Kerry?

Riding elephants on his India trip, I guess.

 

Not that the United States was entirely unrepresented. Attorney General Eric "Isn't He Gone Yet?" Holder was already in Paris mounting an investigation into whether the terrorists had been read their rights and offered legal counsel before being shot by the over-armed and quite possibly racist French police.  Holder did not, however, actually bother to attend the anti-terror march owing to a pressing brunch engagement at the Folies Bergère.

 

 

 

 

 

Originally Posted by Gun-Runner:

Compilation of sources.

 

It was a mistake – a missed opportunity to remind France and other allies that the United States is committed to a war against terrorism waged by two U.S. president and thousands of U.S. troops since 9/11. The White House even admits the U.S. delegation wasn't high-ranking enough.

But this was no disgrace. No embarrassment. No snub.

 

 

 The United States has some 66,000 military personnel deployed in Europe. More than 6,800 U.S. service members have died in post-9/11 operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. treasury finance intelligence and military operations across the globe, making the United States the most stalwart enemy of terrorists.

 

Why should the President of the United States have to join a march to prove to the world the US fight on terrorism?

Just because a couple of days ago he declared that he would "stand with France" doesn't mean that he should actually have to, you know, stand in France. Especially on the weekend.

Besides, Obama's presence at the rally would have been disruptive. The apparatus that follows the U.S. president is isolating and the attending "limelight" nature were a direct counter to the vibe that organizers achieved in the streets of Paris.

 

So, next in line would have been V.P. Biden.

Having the Vice President show up would have been a demonstration of Americas commitment.

 

But really, the European Leaders breathed a sigh of relief when "Uncle Joe" didn't show.

Now THAT was a move I credit the President for. Can you imagine some of the interesting, or even worse, just dumb, blurbs ?

Besides, Joe doesn't know where France is.

 

Kerry?

Riding elephants on his India trip, I guess.

 

Not that the United States was entirely unrepresented. Attorney General Eric "Isn't He Gone Yet?" Holder was already in Paris mounting an investigation into whether the terrorists had been read their rights and offered legal counsel before being shot by the over-armed and quite possibly racist French police.  Holder did not, however, actually bother to attend the anti-terror march owing to a pressing brunch engagement at the Folies Bergère.

 __________________________________________________

Reportedly, Holder watched the parade from a cafe and was ordered NOT to attend.

 

 

 

 

 

The left will accept any answer he gives for not showing up at this world event. He was performing abortions and could not leave, he was giving out marijuana to those in need, he was drafting executive orders to allow illegals to vote in the next election, he and Al Sharpton were discussing racist Americans and how they could deal with it once he was out of office, he was signing up for Obamacare and could not log onto the website, he was figuring out how to prosecute the next General who disagreed with him or spoke out of turn, and finally he was planning next years tax payer vacation as taxes were going up and he would have a lot more money to spend,

I was watching the football game and typing at the same time and realize now that what I typed didn't make sense. LOL

 

Basically, I was trying to say that no matter what President Obama does he is going to be criticized by the Right. If he had went, they would be outraged. He didn't go....they are not surprisingly OUTRAGED!

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

I was watching the football game and typing at the same time and realize now that what I typed didn't make sense. LOL

 

Basically, I was trying to say that no matter what President Obama does he is going to be criticized by the Right. If he had went, they would be outraged. He didn't go....they are not surprisingly OUTRAGED!

___________________________________________

He's catching hell from the MSM, as well, not just conservatives. For once, the EU nations seem to realize they have a major problem in their midst after ignoring it for decades.  The US showing up would have sent a message -- too bad.

Originally Posted by JJ:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

Since the US is a major source of funding for anti-terror activities, we've hardly let the world down.  Why waste the money on sending another one or two people to join the 3million locals?  I notice all the "leaders" shown are Democrats.  Why didn't this rag show some Republicans that "let the world down"?

 

Why does every discussion on this board have to degenerate into partisan politics? This was about showing solidarity and demonstrating leadership. Some 40 other world leaders managed to do it. Our "leadership" was conspicuously absent. Rep/Dem has nothing to this. Go to Ft Benning and take a look at the "Follow Me" statue. It's about LEADERSHIP and that is  non partisan.

 

_________________

This started out partisan.  That is why I was questioning the bias of the rag that ran this "story".  Why only Democrats pictured?  Why not both?  Were there in fact Republican "leaders" there? 

 

How does going to a gathering of locals show "leadership"?

Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

I was watching the football game and typing at the same time and realize now that what I typed didn't make sense. LOL

 

Basically, I was trying to say that no matter what President Obama does he is going to be criticized by the Right. If he had went, they would be outraged. He didn't go....they are not surprisingly OUTRAGED!

___________________________________________

He's catching hell from the MSM, as well, not just conservatives. For once, the EU nations seem to realize they have a major problem in their midst after ignoring it for decades.  The US showing up would have sent a message -- too bad.

_________________

Help me out, what message would it send?

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

I was watching the football game and typing at the same time and realize now that what I typed didn't make sense. LOL

 

Basically, I was trying to say that no matter what President Obama does he is going to be criticized by the Right. If he had went, they would be outraged. He didn't go....they are not surprisingly OUTRAGED!

___________________________________________

He's catching hell from the MSM, as well, not just conservatives. For once, the EU nations seem to realize they have a major problem in their midst after ignoring it for decades.  The US showing up would have sent a message -- too bad.

_________________

Help me out, what message would it send?

____________________________________________-

The EU and the French, in particular, have ignored the problem within their midst.  Like Truman with NATO, US support might go a long way.

Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

I was watching the football game and typing at the same time and realize now that what I typed didn't make sense. LOL

 

Basically, I was trying to say that no matter what President Obama does he is going to be criticized by the Right. If he had went, they would be outraged. He didn't go....they are not surprisingly OUTRAGED!

___________________________________________

He's catching hell from the MSM, as well, not just conservatives. For once, the EU nations seem to realize they have a major problem in their midst after ignoring it for decades.  The US showing up would have sent a message -- too bad.

_________________

Help me out, what message would it send?

____________________________________________-

The EU and the French, in particular, have ignored the problem within their midst.  Like Truman with NATO, US support might go a long way.

__________________

So, showing up to a rally is somehow going to send the message that they have a "problem within their midst"?   Even the French aren't so stupid that they don't know that now.  Are you saying that the US hasn't been supporting anti-terrorism programs in the last decade? 

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

I was watching the football game and typing at the same time and realize now that what I typed didn't make sense. LOL

 

Basically, I was trying to say that no matter what President Obama does he is going to be criticized by the Right. If he had went, they would be outraged. He didn't go....they are not surprisingly OUTRAGED!

___________________________________________

He's catching hell from the MSM, as well, not just conservatives. For once, the EU nations seem to realize they have a major problem in their midst after ignoring it for decades.  The US showing up would have sent a message -- too bad.

_________________

Help me out, what message would it send?

____________________________________________-

The EU and the French, in particular, have ignored the problem within their midst.  Like Truman with NATO, US support might go a long way.

__________________

So, showing up to a rally is somehow going to send the message that they have a "problem within their midst"?   Even the French aren't so stupid that they don't know that now.  Are you saying that the US hasn't been supporting anti-terrorism programs in the last decade? 

 

 

Symbolism.

It sometimes goes a long way.

 

It was a world event.

So what if it does any good our not.

 

No, this is an administration that has no clue as to handle world affairs.

No one even thought about the message it would generate?

 

No-show by any top US officials could be construed in several ways.

To the average Frenchman, it could be seen as a slap in the face.

I'm sure there a more than a few smirking Mufti and Mullah's, gearing up the next lesson to the ignorant followers, and pointing out that the US did NOT attend.

 

As to right wing outrage for the trip? I don't think many wingers would have objected to a little fuel being used to "symbolize" our commitment.

However, numerous trips to fundraising events, Spanish Vacations, Hawaii vacations, etc. are entirely different matters.

 

Like obama gives a flip about fighting terrorism! Pretty bad when RUSSIA warns your government and you still take them in, put them on assistance, they blow up the marathon, and the killer's stupid (converted) wife and killer's kid are on the government dole. The terrorist sister threatens to blow up other people and instead of having her *** tossed back to Russia with her thieving parents, who did get the heck out of dodge before mamma went to jail, she's barely given a slap on the wrist and allowed to stay here, on the taxpayers dime!!! Oh yes, obama is really tough on terrorism. Killing them with kindness eh??? Maybe france didn't want his *** there, maybe they're like others and wonder where his loyalty lies.

Last edited by Bestworking
Originally Posted by Gun-Runner:

 

Symbolism.

It sometimes goes a long way.

 

_______________
Yeah, the French really go in for symbolism.  So the message is "we support you"?  I'm curious if you are at all knowledgeable of the history of Franco-American relations?   Support is a two-way street.  Do you believe the French have provided us with the same support we have provided them? 
As to the "average Frenchman", have you ever traveled in and around France? 
I have no dog in the political side of whatever is going on here.  I'm just trying to get past the bias and rhetoric.
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by Gun-Runner:

 

Symbolism.

It sometimes goes a long way.

 

_______________
Yeah, the French really go in for symbolism.  So the message is "we support you"?  I'm curious if you are at all knowledgeable of the history of Franco-American relations?   Support is a two-way street.  Do you believe the French have provided us with the same support we have provided them? 
As to the "average Frenchman", have you ever traveled in and around France? 
I have no dog in the political side of whatever is going on here.  I'm just trying to get past the bias and rhetoric.

 

 

You are curious?

Am I at the least, "Knowledgeable", about Franco-American relations?

 

Yes, Sir/Ma'am I am.

 

As an ardent follower of World history, especially military, I think I have a pretty good  overview of 

French/American involvement.

 

From France's First contact, with what would be,eventually, the US of A.

they were supportive.

 

 

Yeah, they were willing to put anything in place that would thwart the English.

They helped us become a Nation.

 

Move forward to the 20th Century.

 

France lost over 1,397,800 Military persons in WW1. NOT counting civilians.

An entire generation.

Since then, they have been a little slow at joining...War.

 

Imagine the US losing a million PLUS at any War.

 

So, the French may be finally waking up to the Islam Threat.

 

Maybe, NOW, they realize they have to get serious about what they have let happen in their country.

 

At least, at this time, some "Official" gesture, from our Government, would have been appropriate.?

 

Originally Posted by Gun-Runner:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by Gun-Runner:

 

Symbolism.

It sometimes goes a long way.

 

_______________
Yeah, the French really go in for symbolism.  So the message is "we support you"?  I'm curious if you are at all knowledgeable of the history of Franco-American relations?   Support is a two-way street.  Do you believe the French have provided us with the same support we have provided them? 
As to the "average Frenchman", have you ever traveled in and around France? 
I have no dog in the political side of whatever is going on here.  I'm just trying to get past the bias and rhetoric.

 

 

You are curious?

Am I at the least, "Knowledgeable", about Franco-American relations?

 

Yes, Sir/Ma'am I am.

 

As an ardent follower of World history, especially military, I think I have a pretty good  overview of 

French/American involvement.

 

From France's First contact, with what would be,eventually, the US of A.

they were supportive.

 

 

Yeah, they were willing to put anything in place that would thwart the English.

They helped us become a Nation.

 

Move forward to the 20th Century.

 

France lost over 1,397,800 Military persons in WW1. NOT counting civilians.

An entire generation.

Since then, they have been a little slow at joining...War.

 

Imagine the US losing a million PLUS at any War.

 

So, the French may be finally waking up to the Islam Threat.

 

Maybe, NOW, they realize they have to get serious about what they have let happen in their country.

 

At least, at this time, some "Official" gesture, from our Government, would have been appropriate.?

 

_________________

They joined us in the Revolution as revenge against Britain.  Let's not forget the French and Indian War, hardly supportive of the colonies.  I think our bailing them out in both WWI and WWII easily makes us even.  Without the US, France would be either the German's or Russian's playground and wine supplier.

 

I'm thinking that at this point it was an adequate gesture that we didn't resort to " we told you so".

 

Have you ever been to France?  I have, and I guarantee you the average Frenchman doesn't give a rats ass about the US or its people.

Last edited by CrustyMac
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by Gun-Runner:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by Gun-Runner:

 

Symbolism.

It sometimes goes a long way.

 

_______________
Yeah, the French really go in for symbolism.  So the message is "we support you"?  I'm curious if you are at all knowledgeable of the history of Franco-American relations?   Support is a two-way street.  Do you believe the French have provided us with the same support we have provided them? 
As to the "average Frenchman", have you ever traveled in and around France? 
I have no dog in the political side of whatever is going on here.  I'm just trying to get past the bias and rhetoric.

 

 

You are curious?

Am I at the least, "Knowledgeable", about Franco-American relations?

 

Yes, Sir/Ma'am I am.

 

As an ardent follower of World history, especially military, I think I have a pretty good  overview of 

French/American involvement.

 

From France's First contact, with what would be,eventually, the US of A.

they were supportive.

 

 

Yeah, they were willing to put anything in place that would thwart the English.

They helped us become a Nation.

 

Move forward to the 20th Century.

 

France lost over 1,397,800 Military persons in WW1. NOT counting civilians.

An entire generation.

Since then, they have been a little slow at joining...War.

 

Imagine the US losing a million PLUS at any War.

 

So, the French may be finally waking up to the Islam Threat.

 

Maybe, NOW, they realize they have to get serious about what they have let happen in their country.

 

At least, at this time, some "Official" gesture, from our Government, would have been appropriate.?

 

_________________

They joined us in the Revolution as revenge against Britain.  Let's not forget the French and Indian War, hardly supportive of the colonies.  I think our bailing them out in both WWI and WWII easily makes us even.  Without the US, France would be either the German's or Russian's playground and wine supplier.

 

I'm thinking that at this point it was an adequate gesture that we didn't resort to " we told you so".

 

 

How, would the US being represented by a high official, been a "we told you so" moment?

Add Reply


Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×