Should We Say "Told You So"?

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Yup, sarcasm can be difficult to see over the internet...

Heh, I didn't have the heart to tell some people in this thread that Slayer's comment was made in jest...

[Guest MikeSC]

The French are such pussies,they'll probably concede.

All the French hate makes me laugh. There would be no United States of America if they hadn't helped us win the Revolutionary War. There would be no statue of liberty. They've never done anything to deserve the hate they're getting. Besides, doesn't the guy you support *say* he believes in "compassionate" conservatism?

They then turned on us RIGHT AFTERWARDS, trying to prevent us from getting the land we won.

 

And, of course, the French can thank us for bailing out their economy in the 50's and saving them from Hitler in the 40's.

 

Oh, and that whole "preventing Soviet expansion" thing was pretty nice o' us.

 

"Never done anything to deserve the hate they've received"? You might want to research the US/French relationship since the 60's. They've decided that being an impediment to the US is the best way for them to have some power --- and have done so quite nicely.

Didn't our current President's father and his predecessor have that same loving relationship at one time?

Actually, no. Not even close.

And isn't our current President putting Saddam's party back in government?

He's allowing Iraq to govern itself.

-=Mike

[Kinetic 0]

As long as we're on the subject, I'd like to hear some of the more hawkish figures in here lay out any sort of a practical game plan for how we're supposed to wind up the Iraq Diversion portion of the war on terrorism in any way that could possibly be considered an overall success.

 

On another note, I'd like to point out how utterly ridiculous the notion of diffusing an insurgency by destroying an incredibly important religious shrine is. That's like dealing with a violent Catholic uprising by destroying the Vatican.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Don't forget that France also produced the worst dictator in history prior to Hitler and not only allowed him free reign once, but welcomed him back with open arms after he got beat the first time.

[Highland 0]

But in all fairness, Napoleon did a lot of good things for France. He was just an egotistical prick towards the rest of the world.

[NoCalMike 0]

maybe the French should say I told you so, to us, considering how abominable the post-war occupation has been going.

[Guest GreatOne]

Yeah, and then we tell them.......

 

'Ok you want some of this, our troops could use some time off'

 

(mysterious running)

 

'Now what the hell were they trying to say?'..................

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

But in all fairness, Napoleon did a lot of good things for France. He was just an egotistical prick towards the rest of the world.

Some, but in all fairness the ecomony was in the shitter for most of the First Empire. France was much better off in the far less popular Second Empire under Napoleon III. After the Franco-Prussian War (and the disasterous Communist takeover of Paris the next year), France never recovered its prestige, even to this day.

[Guest MikeSC]

As long as we're on the subject, I'd like to hear some of the more hawkish figures in here lay out any sort of a practical game plan for how we're supposed to wind up the Iraq Diversion portion of the war on terrorism in any way that could possibly be considered an overall success.

It's simply going to take time.

 

If it makes you feel any better, the NY Times thought the occupation of Germany was a total disaster in 1946.

On another note, I'd like to point out how utterly ridiculous the notion of diffusing an insurgency by destroying an incredibly important religious shrine is.  That's like dealing with a violent Catholic uprising by destroying the Vatican.

If Catholics were launching military forces from the Vatican, then the Vatican can go down in flames.

 

If a shrine is important, you don't desecrate it.

maybe the French should say I told you so, to us, considering how abominable the post-war occupation has been going.

Missed that whole election coming up, eh?

 

Don't worry --- if the polls are correct, Chirac et al won't be in office to see it, either.

-=Mike

[Dr. Tom 0]

As long as we're on the subject, I'd like to hear some of the more hawkish figures in here lay out any sort of a practical game plan for how we're supposed to wind up the Iraq Diversion portion of the war on terrorism in any way that could possibly be considered an overall success. 

Napalm pits.

 

Round up all the terrorists, terrorist sympathizers, and Saddam loyalists,. Make them dig a huge ditch. Then break their arms and legs and throw them all in, all but one. Add Napalm and light. The one who didn't get tossed into the Napalm pit gets to tell everyone else what happens when terrorists attack America, its citizens, and its soldiers.

 

Marshmallows and hot dogs optional for US and coalition soldiers.