|
|
|
|
roark
Feb 10, 2003, 9:48 PM
Post #1 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 96
|
02/04/2003 -
William Grim; Paris -
In a stunning reversal of policy, French President Jacques Chirac announced today that the French government will be supporting the War on Terror after all. Five hundred soldiers from the elite L'Abandonnement du Field d'Honneur Battalion (French Surrender Battalion) of the Legion Etrangere (Foreign Legion) are in the process of shipping out to Iraq where they will assist the elite Iraqi Republican Guards in their inevitable surrender to the overwhelming might of the American Armed Forces.
"Eet ees important to be haughty and insufferable when surrendering," said General Philippe de Peepee, the Commanding Officer of the Surrender Battalion, who has personally surrendered in over 200 battles going back to Dien Bien Phu in 1954. "We French are ze world masters at surrendering, n'est ce pas, not like you arrogant Americans who never surrender. Ha, I spit on your filthy American victories."
President Chirac also announced that his government will be sending 3000 advisors from the elite Force du Collaborateur Francaise (French Collaboration Force) to assist the Iraqis in collaborating with the Americans while pretending to be part of a non-existent resistance movement.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 10, 2003, 11:15 PM
Post #2 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
Perhaps the French military could go to Iraq and advise the republican Guard on how to defend Baghdad.
This would also lead to surrender--as in the original post above. It just might happen faster.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
thrasher
Feb 11, 2003, 4:12 AM
Post #3 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2002
Posts: 603
|
Yeh, it cracks me up when the French act like we should care what they think about us going to war. The Germans too! We kicked the Germans asses and saved the Frenchies asses. BTW, the French are nervous because they are the idiots that gave Iraq their nuclear capabilities. The United States of America rules and if the UN and other countries don't like what we are doing they can try to stop us. If they don't go along with the program, we can just stop funding the UN and stop our foreign aid to Europe-then they will just wither away.
|
|
|
|
|
cerberus
Feb 11, 2003, 4:16 AM
Post #4 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2003
Posts: 102
|
HAHAHAHAHAH Thrasher, you obviously know jack$#!& about America's involvement with Iraq. It was America that provided Iraq with the chemical and biological weapons we are looking for today. Arrogant/igorant ass americans get on my nerves
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Feb 11, 2003, 4:20 AM
Post #5 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
Quote: Yeh, it cracks me up when the French act like we should care what they think about us going to war. The Germans too! We kicked the Germans asses and saved the Frenchies asses.
Now if only the Americans could save themselves from their own education system.
Well, some of y'all seem to have come out unscathed.
|
|
|
|
|
asystole
Feb 11, 2003, 4:25 AM
Post #6 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 35
|
So our education isn't the best. But I do agree that we have always backed the french in a pinch. Alot is becuase they helped us out in the revolution. But I am very dissapointed in the french not backing America but at least they are trying to help end it as quickly as possible. Also notice that they are sending the Forigen Legion in. I belive if they taught the republic how to fight the war would cont longer. Legion is nuts.
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Feb 11, 2003, 4:47 AM
Post #7 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
this thread was funny until the nose picking jingoists chimed in.
|
|
|
|
|
one900johnnyk
Feb 11, 2003, 4:56 AM
Post #8 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Posts: 2381
|
haha for real it was funny to scroll down and see the degeneration...
|
|
|
|
|
thrasher
Feb 11, 2003, 4:58 AM
Post #9 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2002
Posts: 603
|
and what/who is a nose-picking jingoist?
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Feb 11, 2003, 5:01 AM
Post #10 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
you are. look up jingo in the dictionary. this sort of "america kicks ass since gwb told me so" crap makes me embarrassed to be from the usa.
(for all nose picking jingoists, yes i am looking for a job outside of the usa so i will be leaving as soon as possible, no need to use that tired argument)
|
|
|
|
|
thrasher
Feb 11, 2003, 5:08 AM
Post #11 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2002
Posts: 603
|
Dude, lighten up! I was just exagerating a little. Let me know if you find a better country.
|
|
|
|
|
bigbouda
Feb 11, 2003, 4:34 PM
Post #12 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2002
Posts: 130
|
I did
|
|
|
|
|
thrasher
Feb 11, 2003, 5:01 PM
Post #13 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2002
Posts: 603
|
yeh bouda, that is why when anyone needs serious surgery they come down to the states, if you need a doctor you have to wait in line, and why my US dollar is worth about three Canadian dollars...yep, Canada is a lot better. We also have Canada to thank for their lax imigration policies that allowed the hijackers in.
|
|
|
|
|
climbinganne
Feb 11, 2003, 5:41 PM
Post #14 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2002
Posts: 11679
|
|
|
|
|
|
joel_gibbel
Feb 11, 2003, 9:07 PM
Post #15 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2002
Posts: 129
|
Yeah, right on atg. Jingoism sucks. I am so sick of it I could pick up and move to Canada tonight. But alas, I won't. My voice is sorely needed here. There has to be some balance in democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Feb 11, 2003, 9:16 PM
Post #16 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
No offense Joel, but if you think that the US was supposed to be a democracy or that democracy is a good thing, then I think that you should go to Canada.
edit: PS - I am not a jingoist.
[ This Message was edited by: uncle_big_green on 2003-02-11 13:19 ]
|
|
|
|
|
joel_gibbel
Feb 11, 2003, 9:24 PM
Post #17 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2002
Posts: 129
|
Don't sell me short, uncle. I realize we're not a pure democracy, we're a republic (representative democracy). And I think that's a good thing. I'm not too fond of our 2-party system, but it could be worse. What I truly despise is our foreign policy and acceptance of war. I'm also sick of flag-waving patriots who think they are somehow special because they are americans. I also can't stand people who respect bush, it makes no sense to me. Rock on France, stop the war.
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Feb 11, 2003, 10:03 PM
Post #18 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
Fair enough, Joel. I'm still going to have to correct you and say that the US is a Constitutional Republic. By that, I mean that the Constitution has set limits on what the govt. and the "people" can do in terms of making laws. "Representative Democracy" still implies that "the will of the people" is the law of the land. Yes, there are democratic elements in this country like elections of congresspersons, but any action taken by the govt or people of this country are supposed (I use "supposed" on purpose) to occur within the confines of the Constitution. If you think about it, all this is merely a spin-off of the Declaration of Ind. - the "inalienable rights" part. This was the first time that a person's right to their own life was acknowledged by a govt. Anyway, sorry for the discourse.
While I am not a fan of all of US foreign policy, I'm not going to jump into the bash Bush camp. I also think that the chances of the US going to war have lessened. While we're bitching here, don't forget that there are still US troops in Bosnia. I'm pretty sure that action wasn't UN (as if anyone should give a sh#t about the UN) sanctioned.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 11, 2003, 11:19 PM
Post #19 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
Uncle,
This is straying a bit from the original topic of the post, but I want to point out that there exists no democracy anywhere on the planet--by your definition.
All democracies have some sort of representative government. To effect your definition of democratic government would require all decisions of government, no matter how trivial, to be decided by referendum--i.e. direct vote.
This is the only way to assure that every decision is truly "the will of the people." Clearly that is not practical for purposes of logistics.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Feb 12, 2003, 12:20 AM
Post #20 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
"All democracies have some sort of representative government. To effect your definition of democratic government would require all decisions of government, no matter how trivial, to be decided by referendum--i.e. direct vote."
The point I made was that in NO way is the US supposed to be a democracy - not even a representative one.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 12, 2003, 1:07 AM
Post #21 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
uncle_big_green,
I thought we had a misunderstanding based on semantics until....
Quote:
The point I made was that in NO way is the US supposed to be a democracy - not even a representative one.
Now I stand corrected--you are simply flat out wrong.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Feb 12, 2003, 8:20 AM
Post #22 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
Curt, I'm not trying to start a big argument with you, but I would appreciate it if you could prove that I am wrong. Extra points: I'll buy you a beer if you can find the word "democracy" in either the Declaration of Independence or the US Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 12, 2003, 3:58 PM
Post #23 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
UBG,
Unfortunately, I don't think I will be getting the beer--darn it. However, whether the word "democracy" does or does not appear in the Constitution has nothing to do with the Constitution establishing a democratic form of government or not.
As alluded to in your own post above (I suppose in reference to Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution)
"The House of representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second year BY THE PEOPLE OF THE SEVERAL STATES...."
If this does not define a representative democracy, I am not sure what would.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
roark
Feb 12, 2003, 4:23 PM
Post #24 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 96
|
The House of Representatives is one part of one of the three branches of our government.
The legislative branch is made up of the House and the Senate if I remember correctly. The two sides in the same branch is something that came about to give each of the states a proportionate voice in the US government. If it was only the house the less populated states would have become less important because they would send less representatives. On the other hand if just the Senate was the full legislative body then the states with more people would have the same weight as a less populated state and the law would have a more difficult time reflecting the best laws for the nation as a whole. So, it was agreed to have both bodies to give the correct proportion of interests in the legislative body.
The thing about our government is it is all supposed to operate under the constitution, not the will of the people, as the highest law in the land. The will of the people may be reflected by consequence of who is elected to office, but it is the rule of law, not the rule of the masses that has made us what we are.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 12, 2003, 4:27 PM
Post #25 of 26
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
roark,
You are indeed correct, but keep in mind that the laws can be changed by the people. Even the constitution itself can and has been amended (26 times so far) because of the will of the people.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
