Slashdot Mirror


French Military Police Switches to Firefox

Oslo_the_CKC writes to tell us that French Magazine Linux Pratique recently published an interview with General Brachet of the Gendarmie Nationale. In the interview he discusses why they have moved over 100,000 personnel over to Firefox and Thunderbird (70,000 and 45,000 respectively). This follows on last year's switch to OpenOffice.org so it seems like the French Military Police are enjoying the success of open source.

407 comments

  1. In other words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    They gave up with IE.

    1. Re:In other words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'll be back to IE with in days, they'll soon surrender.

    2. Re:In other words by Turbs · · Score: 1

      IE.. I fart in your general direction
      ;)

    3. Re:In other words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they need to keep the damn security up dont they? Thats what they do for a living after all!

  2. French Military Police Surrenders to Firefox by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 2, Funny

    Giant orange lizard seen marching under the Arch de Triumph

    1. Re:French Military Police Surrenders to Firefox by grub · · Score: 1
      --
      Trolling is a art,
    2. Re:French Military Police Surrenders to Firefox by TobyWong · · Score: 2, Funny

      Joke older than dirt and even less funny than Ellen Degeneres spawns multiple instances in french-related slashdot article.

      Film at 11.

      --
      - Toby
    3. Re:French Military Police Surrenders to Firefox by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 3, Funny

      Fire ze fox!

      But I am le tired.

      Okay, take a nap, and then fire ze fox!

      --

      Voltaire once said that the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor roman, nor an empire. Could we say that Firefox was neither Firebird, nor Phoenix, nor....

      --

      Let them eat cookies.

      --

      It was the best of browsers, it was the worst of browsers, it was the age of compliance, it was the age of popups, it was the era of ACID success, it was the era of ACID 2 failure, it was the summer of CSS, it was the winter of <blink>....

      --

      At least they didn't contract Apple to create the iFel Tower -- it would be made of white plastic, be the smallest thing in the city, and charge 99 francs admission to everyone.

  3. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    It's OSS but it's the French!! Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!! I'm torn, really I am.

    1. Re:Is this a good thing or a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now you know how I've been feeling "It's free! But.. it's American! NOoooooo!".

  4. 100,000 Personnel ?? by green+pizza · · Score: 0

    100,000 personnel over to Firefox and Thunderbird (70,000 and 45,000 respectively)

    So of the 100K people, 70K of them are swtiching to Firefox and 45K are switching to Thunderbird...
    ...so nobody will be using both? :)

    1. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by ClamIAm · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um, dude how bad is your math? Assuming that they aren't leaving some with IE+Thunderbird or Firefox+OE, 15,000 will be using both.

    2. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is that (70+45)-100=15 k people will be using both. :-)

    3. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by ahg · · Score: 1

      My first throught exactly. I'm thinking that not much more than 70,000 personnel are being swiched over in total. I think there must be a tremendous overlap... probably nearly all involved are getting Firefox, and perhaps not all personnel have email or some choose to use a web-based interface, so they don't need Thunderbird.

      My $0.02 or should that be Euros...

      --

      --Aaron Greenberg

    4. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100,000 personnel over to Firefox

      Anyone else think it's odd that they have this many people with web access? Shouldn't they be out pounding the pavement and stopping the "youth" from burning cars? On a normal day 50-80 cars are burned. At new year's, there were over 400 cars burned.

    5. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by Strudelkugel · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Wonder if they will have as many problems with Thunderbird as I did. We shall see if they switch back to Outlook or whatever. I use FF as my primary browser, though.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
    6. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by masklinn · · Score: 1

      That's the job of the police, the guys switching there are the [i]military police[/i] guys

      --
      "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
    7. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually french military police is not like the US military police. They are more like military that act like policeman.

    8. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by arendjr · · Score: 1

      100,000 personnel over to Firefox and Thunderbird (70,000 and 45,000 respectively)

      It was just badly phrased in the summary. The department has 100,000 people working for them, which use a total of 70,000 workstations. Of those workstations, all are being converted to Firefox, and 45,000 of them will also get Thunderbird.

    9. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      How bad is your reading comprehension? Nowhere in the articledoes it say that they "have moved 100,000 personnel" to Firefox and Thunderbird. That's a mistake on the Slashdot frontpage.

      The article states that they have over 100,000 personnel and that they have moved 70k to Firefox and 45k to Thunderbird. I'd be willing to bet that there's nearly 100% overlap in those two numbers.

      Even so, this is one of the largest deployments I've read about, so good for them. It's good to see more organizations moving away from the MS hegemony.

    10. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by ClamIAm · · Score: 1
      How bad is your reading comprehension? Nowhere in the articledoes it say that they "have moved 100,000 personnel" to Firefox and Thunderbird. That's a mistake on the Slashdot frontpage.

      How bad is your comment writing? You didn't state that it was a bad blurb in your original post. Your post was only about numbers. Your counter-argument is null and void.

    11. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      You didn't state that it was a bad blurb in your original post.

      I didn't write that post.

    12. Re:100,000 Personnel ?? by ClamIAm · · Score: 1
      I didn't write that post.

      I was replying to that post.

  5. I hope I die soon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would be nice.

    1. Re:I hope I die soon. by kfg · · Score: 1

      You know where to find me, Sunshine.

      KFG

  6. open-source-poster-child dept? by riflemann · · Score: 0

    You mean the "microsoft-french-division-surrenders dept'...

    1. Re:open-source-poster-child dept? by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't this actually be the Freeloaders-And-Leeches department? I mean, the poster child for OS would CONTRIBUTE to the project, either with skill, time, or money.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    2. Re:open-source-poster-child dept? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Us, freeloaders? The same way American users are all valued contributers, I suppose? Loose the hypocrisy, please. If you bothered to find out more about France than a vague position on a map, you'd find out that we do have quite a few OSS coders too. Why do you think the Gendarmerie was the first to use OOo on a large scale in France? Because some of our gendarmes are also active OOo coders, that's why.

      And Americans say _we're_ arrogant? Sheesh. We're not the ones pretending to rule the world.

      Nicolas,
      French OSS coder

  7. Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, now we know who the loser in the browser war will be.

  8. In other news ... by Musteval · · Score: 0

    The military police of the US have just adopted the use of WorldWideWeb.

    --
    Note to mods: I'm probably being sarcastic.
    1. Re:In other news ... by JourneymanMereel · · Score: 1

      Not true. I'm a member of the United States Army Military Police Corp and would like to take this oprotunity to point out that my user ID, while far from impressive, is about 1/4 what yours is!

      Or was that supposed to be a joke or something...

      --
      Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?
    2. Re:In other news ... by Musteval · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that was inddeed supposed to be a jab at the military for not adopting new technology.

      --
      Note to mods: I'm probably being sarcastic.
    3. Re:In other news ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I mean... who started this Intraweb thing anyways!?!?

    4. Re:In other news ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's not the size, it's how you use it!

  9. Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by Pavan_Gupta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Honestly, the reason why firefox is the preffered choice is not only because of it's security, robustness, and general workability, but also because it's so damn customizable. Honestly, I can do anything I want on any operating system, if I have my handy dandy firefox.

    Anyway, check out this kickass firefox extension that allows users anywhere to chat with other users viewing the same website as them. (It'd be cool to see a few slashdot.org people!) =)

    Try the QuickChat extension out .. it's pretty sweet.

    1. Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting concept. It's like a comment forum, only realtime!

    2. Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by silvaran · · Score: 1

      Seems like your server is hosed, so I'll comment here...

      A few people have already mentioned a few of the obvious things like tab integration and chat window-resizing (even make it undockable somehow), but I could see this really taking off if it catches on.

      - Install a protocol handler that will launch the extension automatically (and even pass parameters, such as usernames -- /. could embed the username in something like quickchat://slashdot.org?nick=<nickname>).
      - Website-hosted IRC server (rather than centralizing it on a site referenced in the extension's code). This could even be passed in the URL. So something like quickchat://qc.slashdot.org:1245?domain=slashdot.o rg&nick=<nickname>.

      Otherwise, very very cool.

    3. Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would really like to try out your extension, but I'm not familiar with the encoding of the xpi format nor the limitations imposed on extensions by the main app. For all I know, this could be a *really* nice trojan.

      I'm assuming it's not, but as I can't locate *any* web or forum references to your extension, and your site is light on details (who operates the chat "server"?), I'll have to pass for now.

      Sorry.

    4. Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by paulius_g · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'll be able to host you. I've met you on the chat and I've also added your AIM name.

      Seems that it's fully taken down your Internet connection, so when you'll be back, feel free to talk to me. If you need it, my AIM name is "pauliuslabs"

      Cheers

    5. Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XP Installer. XPI it's just a glorified executable...

    6. Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm.. reminds me a bit of this extension, which just came out as well...

    7. Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you visit his website, you'll notice he explicitely thanks the fellow and acknowledges his hard work.

    8. Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Time by Hosiah · · Score: 1
      (It'd be cool to see a few slashdot.org people!)

      Congratulations, this is the first Slashdot comment that actually made me physically crumple into a tight knot with revulsion, which is now making it difficult to type.

  10. Glad they are using open source, however.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am glad they are using open source. I hope it helps them in the future:
    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/victories.htm l

  11. Another great article about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    at http://www.twofo.co.uk/

    2 pho!

    Yeah, this isn't a troll or anything :P

    Would have been a first post if it wasn't for crappy stolen wireless internet...

  12. More surrender crap?? by etresoft · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Less than a dozen comments so far and the majority are "surrender" jokes. Where are my moderator points when I need them?

    1. Re:More surrender crap?? by general_re · · Score: 2, Funny

      No worries, my friend - I'll mod them all up for you. ;)

      --
      ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
    2. Re:More surrender crap?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Less than a dozen comments so far and the majority are "surrender" jokes. Where are my moderator points when I need them?

      I hear you there.

      And from Americans at that! Seems someone forgot where the Statue of Liberty came from.

      And let's not bring up American military fiascos: Iraq, Afghanistan (losing bin Ladin at Tora Bora,...), Grenada, Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, torture chambers (and not always by proxy), Vietnam, etc. ad nauseum.

      Thinking about it, seems like America has forgotten the meaning of Liberty altogether. Maybe the statue should be in France once more...

    3. Re:More surrender crap?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had the same consternation about the whole thing too.

      But then I surrendered to the urge to make a joke myself. Sacre Bleu!

    4. Re:More surrender crap?? by gabraham · · Score: 4, Funny

      You surrendered your points when you posted a comment.

    5. Re:More surrender crap?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      troll? I thought you were funny general. I think some people are getting too touchy here. Making a joke about being 'racist' (or chauvanist as someone above pointed out) in reply to someone pointing out the chauvenism. And if they didn't get that surely the ;) at the end would give it away.

      Now watch me get modded a troll for posting this.

      Note: Posting as AC because I've modded on this discussion already (guess where you got the +1 funny mod from ;)

    6. Re:More surrender crap?? by general_re · · Score: 1
      I think some people are getting too touchy here.

      Indeed. The extra-funny part is that I really am sitting on some mod points right now, so I actually passed on the chance to moderate this discussion in favor of a throwaway comment, and this is how the CHEESE EATING SURRENDER MONKEYS treat me.

      Hey, if I'm gonna be marked a troll, I might as well do something to earn it :)

      --
      ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
  13. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Another foreign government branch switches to an open source solution. Wow. How about "American corporation XYZ switches N hundred thousand employees to Firefox". That would be news!

    1. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Wow. How about "American corporation XYZ switches..."

      Okay, sort of. I work for a very large XYZ corp and we have FireFox approved as a standard Brower. It's a user option not a requirement though. FF brings to the table a multi-platform friendly HTTP client. An area where IE just doesn't fit the bill.

    2. Re:Wow by devilsadvoc8 · · Score: 1

      Its sad that the OS community is heralding the the switch by a branch of the French Government. France has consistently legislated against foreign competition either through tariffs or labor laws. I don't want to start an off-topic flame war here so I won't list a bunch of examples but France is extremely protectionist and is not a friend of open competition which OpenSource cries for.

      Is it a blow against Microsoft? Yes. Is the French government the ideal ally of OS? No, but I guess my enemy's enemy is my friend applies here.

      --
      B O R I N G
    3. Re:Wow by aconkling · · Score: 1
      How about "American corporation XYZ switches N hundred thousand employees to Firefox". That would be news!
      I guess you missed this morning's news?
    4. Re:Wow by legirons · · Score: 1

      Another foreign government branch switches to an open source solution. Wow. How about "American corporation XYZ switches N hundred thousand employees to Firefox". That would be news!

      Actually, that would be foreign news ;-)

    5. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      France is extremely protectionist

      You mean like the 80% tax on steel imports ?... Uh.. no, this was the US, sorry.

    6. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because you don't care about it, doesn't make it any less of a story.

    7. Re:Wow by MarkKnopfler · · Score: 1

      I work for the Indian wing of a particular American Corporation. We have as a companywide policy, the freedom to choose between Linux or Windows on our laptops. I run RHEL WS 4 on one of my laptops and RHEL WS 3 on another and things work out great for me. I actually use my laptops to do some actual work rather than actually ssh-ing into a remote server.
      The question however is, How engineers actually excercise that choice ? For all that I know, I am the only person in my whole business unit who actually uses linux on the desktop/laptop although all applications that the company uses run seamlessly on Linux also.
      My point is that it is not the corporation who is at fault, it is us engineers. I know for sure that there are a large number of my colleagues who would flounder if somebody asked them to run on linux from tomorrow. It is not ineptitude, it is plain FUD.
      So there are a lot of corporations who I think, would not mind making a switch to linux, but the real problem are the people and not the corporation.

    8. Re:Wow by hrm · · Score: 1

      Well, maybe those colleagues are just more productive using Windows. We have a similar policy here, and I found out that for my job using Windows plus occasional ssh'ing is more convenient than running Linux.

  14. Can we get a better organization to adopt it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the French military isn't the best group to have advocating for you

  15. The whole article by rminsk · · Score: 5, Informative
    In an interview published by French Magazine Linux Pratique (issue #33), Général Brachet, in charge of IT for Gendarmerie Nationale explains why the French Military Police force (more than 100,000 personnel) has chosen to deploy Firefox and Thunderbird to respectively 70,000 and 45,000 seats. Here are a few excerpts:

            Linux Pratique: What are the most important features of Firefox 1.5?

            Général Brachet: These features are independent of the version number. The most important things about Firefox are its compliance with W3C standards and its availability on several platforms (Microsoft, Linux and Mac). When the Gendarmerie will deliver application on-line to homeland security organisations and, in the future, to citizens, it will not request the users to use any particular platform or piece of software from specific vendors. Using Firefox or any other Web-standards-compliant browser will be requested, independently of the platform (...)

           

    Linux Pratique : How many seats are going to be deployed, and how long will it take?

           

    Général Brachet : Starting January 1st, 2006, Firefox will be the browser of choice for the Gendarmerie. (...) This migration will impact every PC connected to the Intranet and the Internet, totalling 70,000 seats, before the end of the year 2006. Most of the Web services will be W3C-compliant by then. (...)

            Linux Pratique : OpenOffice.org (last year), now Firefox, when will you swich to Linux?

            Général Brachet : Thunderbird will be deployed as the only mail client on 45,000 seat in 2006. The idea is to provide every unit with a workstation and have it used daily. Every Gendarme will have four tools at his disposal: a bureautique suite, for writing documents and doing procedural work, a browser to access the Information Systems, a mail client to communicate and an antivirus. Our first goal is to migrate all the upper layers of the workstation to Open Source Software to be independent of the Operating System.(...)

    It's a great pleasure to see this important project being finally revealed to the general public, and to see Gendarmerie Nationale understand the importance of Open Source Software and Web standards. It uses them, and even gives back some code the the community, while telling the world about it. If I had a wish for 2006, it would be to see large users do the same, and tell publicly that they use Open Source projects. For them, it would be a way to give back to these projects something they really need: visibility.

  16. 100,000 personnel by bushidocoder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Am I the only one who is amazed that the French Military Police Force has 100,000 personnel working for it? The United States has approximately 840,000 police total, including military police, state police, county police, and federal law enforcement agencies. France's population is only 60.5 million compared to the US' 296 million. Is the military police force in France used for more than just policing members of the French military?

    1. Re:100,000 personnel by ^Case^ · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm not french, so take this with a grain of salt but: The Gendarmerie in France is used for a whole lot more than policing the military. When you go skiing in France and end up being a bit too noisy in your hotel it's the gendarmerie that shows up, politely asking you to tone it down - being 6 feet tall and 6 feet wide and wearing skimasks in the hotel of course - at least, that's how I remember them ;-)

    2. Re:100,000 personnel by etresoft · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is not the same thing. It is more like our National Guard than our police.

    3. Re:100,000 personnel by program21 · · Score: 5, Informative
      From Wikipedia:
      The total number of military personnel is approximately 300,000. However, 100,000 of these are in the Gendarmerie, and thus a vast majority of these 100,000 are used in everyday law enforcement operation inside France and are not fit for external operations.
      --
      This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
    4. Re:100,000 personnel by kfg · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's the Gendarmerie Nationale. What you would call "The Feds," not what you would call the MPs.

      KFG

    5. Re:100,000 personnel by Shky · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to Wikipedia they do more than police the military. "The policing of countryside areas and of small towns, usually populations under 10000, outside of the jurisdiction of the French National Police."..."Crowd control and other security activities." etc. So, according to Wikipedia at least, they do a lot more.

      --
      CC Licensed Serialized Story and Podcast: Ingenioustries
    6. Re:100,000 personnel by taskforce · · Score: 1
      The French Gendarmerie also acts as a sort of National Guard, although it is involved in some softer policing duties than its US equivalent. (The National Guard)

      From Wikipedia:

      Its missions include:

      The policing of countryside areas and of small towns, usually populations under 10000, outside of the jurisdiction of the French National Police.
      Criminal investigations under judiciary supervision.
      Crowd control and other security activities.
      The security of airports and military installations, as well as all investigations relating to the military, including in foreign interventions.
      Participations in ceremonies involving foreign heads of states or heads of governments.

      --
      My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
    7. Re:100,000 personnel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      No, this is not the military police.

      In France you have two kinds of police
      - The "Police Nationale" (and it's derivatives : anti-gang, anti-drug, financial, etc.) that is the main force, it is civilian and has power over civilans. Classically they act more in the cities.
      - The "Gendarmerie" that is a military body with only civilian authority, that act more in the countryside. It is from the military, but it has no power over the "regular" military forces (like the navy, air force, etc.).
      Of course Police and Gendarmerie overlap and cooperate.

      The people that switched to Firefox is the "Gendarmerie". This is not the MPs as in america.

      Hope that helps

      david, Paris

    8. Re:100,000 personnel by zeuqsav · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As I recall, the Gendarmerie Nationale, or "National Police" are more like a combination of the FBI, ATF, DEA etc etc and the state police forces. I think towns also have their own local police forces. I don't think it's specifically a military police force, but then again in these euro-police states, it's hard to tell.

      The french used to have to a year or two of national service, which could be done either in the armed forces or in the Gendarmerie Nationale. I had a friend who was a physics major who applied to do ballistics for the Gendarmerie Nationale for his service. They finally did away with national service five years or so ago.

    9. Re:100,000 personnel by forgotten_my_nick · · Score: 1

      You mean all the French police are in Iraq? Ba-dum-tish! I'll get my coat.

    10. Re:100,000 personnel by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      Throw into that list Highway Patrol and police detectives - France is weird that way. It's administrated through the armed forced, but operates under civilian control for all its duties. As other people pointed out, Wikipedia is your friend in this confusion.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    11. Re:100,000 personnel by winkydink · · Score: 1

      What we call the "Feds" is the FBI and would be included in the OPs number.

      --

      "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    12. Re:100,000 personnel by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      It's not even close to being the National Guard. Check the Wikipedia links throughout here - they are an actual police force, although their duties are much farther reaching than what we associate with the police here in the US.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    13. Re:100,000 personnel by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1
      Am I the only one who is amazed that the French Military Police Force has 100,000 personnel working for it?

      I believe it is being phased out now, but compulsary military service does cause a bit of bloat in French military/public service. People who are not actually suited to being in the army (ie, most of them) would wind up working in foreign arms of the public service or (shudder) French engineering firms where they would serve as free labour, because they are funded by the government.

    14. Re:100,000 personnel by kfg · · Score: 1

      Yes, I should have said "more like," or just posted a reference as the more perspicacious did. They really have no exact American equivilent. Who woulda thunk that was possible. It's, well, unAmerican.

      Nor are the FBI the only "Feds." So are the SS, the ATF, the EPA and a whole host of alphabet soup with various law enforcment jurisdictions, some of which are nominally under the military.

      KFG

    15. Re:100,000 personnel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personnel != Officers

      You need to include Office staff, dispatchers, Public Relations, Accountants, etc.

    16. Re:100,000 personnel by Alarash · · Score: 1
      The Gendarmerie Nationale is not "Military Police" in the sense "Police that deals with drunken grunts". It's a corp of the French Army, that helps Police forces. French Army has another branch to act as Military Police, which is simply called "Police Militaire".

      As a French myself, I couldn't tell the differences beetween the regular Police Nationale and the Gendarmerie. They both give you fines for speeding, control your alcohol level, or look for fugitives. I think the difference is maybe the Gendarmerie is more reliable. Being military they are maybe more apt to follow orders.

      By the way, the Gendarmerie Nationale is best known for its SWAT unit, the GIGN (Groupe d'Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale, National Gendarmerie Intervention Group).

    17. Re:100,000 personnel by El+Cabri · · Score: 1

      "Military Police" is a very bad translation for Gendarmerie. The Gendarmerie is pretty much just a regular police force. Police in France is almost exclusively a national-level organization, unlike for example in the US where it is locally organized (city, county, state). Police is divided in two categories : the National Police, made of civil servants under the interior ministry, and the Gendarmerie, which is a branch of the military. Both do essentially the same job, wear similar uniforms, and are assigned to different districts, with the Police dealing with urban areas and the Gendarmerie with rural areas.

      Differences are that the Gendarmes almost never work in plain clothes. They occasionaly wear olive green fatigues for field work away from civilian contact. They can be sent overseas as easily as the other military people, which is very convenient for France in providing trained civilian-style law enforcement capabilities in international peace keeping missions.

      Other countries have or have had similar forces : the Gendarmerie in Belgium, the Guardia Civil in Spain, both of which I believe have been "civilianized". The Carabinieri in Italy.

    18. Re:100,000 personnel by Inkieminstrel · · Score: 1

      Check your math. According to your numbers, the US has about twice the police force per capita.

    19. Re:100,000 personnel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And most important the Gendamerie is operationally attached to the Ministry of the Interior instead of the Ministry of Defence..

    20. Re:100,000 personnel by jalet · · Score: 1

      > Is the military police force in France used for more than just policing
      > members of the French military?

      Yes.

      I don't know the details, but you usually find the "gendarmerie nationale" in small towns, while you'll find the "police nationale" in larger cities.

      Their work sometimes overlap, which gives interesting results...

      --
      Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
    21. Re:100,000 personnel by winkydink · · Score: 1

      The EPA has Special Agents?

      --

      "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    22. Re:100,000 personnel by kfg · · Score: 1

      Who can shut your plant down and haul your ass into jail.

      http://www.epa.gov/compliance/about/offices/oceft. html

      "The Criminal Investigation Division (CID) investigates the most significant and egregious violators of environmental laws. CID refers cases that pose significant risks to human health and the environment for criminal prosecutions. CID Special Agents are sworn federal law enforcement officers with full law enforcement authorities. Today, EPA CID has offices located in 16 Area Offices and 25 Resident Offices across the country. CID participates nationwide in over 90 environmental crime task forces with federal, state and local law enforcement partners."

      KFG

    23. Re:100,000 personnel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no compulsory military service in France. All we have to do is spend a single day doing a few basic tests and listening to the army propaganda (it's called la Journée d'Appel et de Préparation à la Défense. A laugh, really....)

    24. Re:100,000 personnel by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Italy too has something similar: Carabinieri (in english "rifle-ers"?). They are a military corp, some of them are deployed in Iraq, but they share law enforcement with the ordinary Police (composed of civil personnel... used to be military until the '60) and the Guardia di Finanza (specialized in financial crime). In the past the Carabinieri were the direct emanation of royal authority and were extensively involved in wresting territorial control of southern Italy in the late '800, following our unification. Together with the Police some have smeared the uniform during the Genova 2001 G8 Summit, unjustifiably beating protesters, killing one, arresting and beating others that were concentrated in the Bolzaneto barracks. Hmm, this is Italy folks, a _cheap_ rerun of Chile/Argentina...

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    25. Re:100,000 personnel by 4D6963 · · Score: 0
      "Is the military police force in France used for more than just policing members of the French military?"

      Well, it's called "military police" because they are police, different than the national police, and they are military, whereas the national police is not military. They do not police members of the French military, they are pretty much another police, and they operate mostly in rural areas whereas the national police operates mostly in cities.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    26. Re:100,000 personnel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Gendarmerie is not the military police, which does exist but is actually much smaller, but a police force that is part of the military. They operate in small towns and rural areas. The National Police (also around 100k agents), made of civil servants is mostly in charge of larger cities and roads.
      Besides those two major forces, there are many municipal police forces, environmental police (forest service et al.), rail police, customs and so on... All in all, France does have quite a few more policemen per capita than the USA.

    27. Re:100,000 personnel by Hosiah · · Score: 1
      The United States has approximately 840,000 police total,

      Nahhh, it CAN'T be that few! I could swear I've been beaten up by more than that during riots alone.

    28. Re:100,000 personnel by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      That's wierd: "not fit for external operations". More wikipedia nonsense. Almost every overseas operation has some (often lots) of Gendarmerie around. They're exactly what you want on any kind of peacekeeping operation.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    29. Re:100,000 personnel by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Well, yes and no.

      Yes the Gendarmerie polices the French countryside.

      But it is also the same thing as the US/UK "Military police". It is the Gendarmerie that investigates crimes by the military, it's the Gendarmerie that shoots the soldiers that refuse to leave the trenches.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    30. Re:100,000 personnel by spacefight · · Score: 1

      If you think it's Wikipedia nonsense, fix it.

    31. Re:100,000 personnel by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Wont.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    32. Re:100,000 personnel by wheany · · Score: 1

      For every mistake you correct, I will add three.

    33. Re:100,000 personnel by WoodieR · · Score: 1

      so they're like the RCMP or the Rangers ...

      --
      Question Authority before IT questions You ...
    34. Re:100,000 personnel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In France there are 2 police forces.

      There is a "National Police" in the big cities, they are civilians.

      The "gendarmerie" is in the countryside, they have the same job, except that :
      - they can use war weapons, and they can shoot if someone flees (policemen can only shoot when attacked).
      - they are military, so they live in army barracks, and a lot of other annoying consequences...

      The "gendarmerie" was created by Napoleon. One of the goal is to avoid any coup : as the police and the "gendarmerie" are totally separated and equal in forces, that would be difficult for each of them to take the power... He created some "gendarmeries" in the whole Europe when he occupied it, and a lot of other european countries keep these "gendarmeries" until now.

    35. Re:100,000 personnel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, note the words 'vast majority'. It is not saying that all of them are not fit for external operations.

      Second, note the multiple possible connotations of fit - It could be saying that the personnel are unfit for operating externally (a domestic-only force), or it could be saying they are not fit for external operations, meaning they are not equipped with the gear typical of external ops.

      Also, note that
      The total number of military personnel is approximately 300,000. However, 100,000 of these are in the Gendarmerie, and thus a vast majority of these 100,000 are used in everyday law enforcement operation inside France and are not fit for external operations.
      and
      Almost every overseas operation has some (often lots) of Gendarmerie around. They're exactly what you want on any kind of peacekeeping operation.
      are not mutually exclusive statements.

      Even if the vast majority in question is as high as 95,000, that still leaves 5,000 Gendarmerie to mix in with the other 200,000 personnel.

  17. Mirrordot to the rescue by sucker_muts · · Score: 3, Informative

    Article slashdotted:

    Mirrordot link!

    --
    Dependency hell? => /bin/there/done/that
  18. Obligatory distasteful WWII jibe by ettlz · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    And about time. I mean, you'd think they would've learned from that business with the Maginot Line that a stateful firewall alone is insufficient.

    1. Re:Obligatory distasteful WWII jibe by Pyrion · · Score: 0, Troll

      The Maginot Line was no analogous firewall. It was more like a sieve.

      --
      "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
  19. Thunderbird's a fine choice... for vagrants... by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1, Funny

    they have moved over 100,000 personnel over to... Thunderbird

    Whoa, France. I know that fancy wines are a little bit on the downside now, but surely you can find something a little fancier than the $2.99 bargain bin at the liquor store and isn't the sole inebriant of choice for Stephen King's hobos.

  20. Whoa! by mister_llah · · Score: 1

    Who wants several thousand copies of MSIE? Only been dropped once! ...

    This just isn't funny if it isn't guns, is it?

    --
    MoM++ - A Classic Expanded - [Master of Magic 1.5]
    http://mompp.sourceforge.net/
  21. Re:Mod me down... by sucker_muts · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but ferreal... who cares?

    The more bricks that start falling out of the Microsoft monopoly will encourage extra bricks to fall and might take the entire wall down after some time. Don't forget street credibility! Every small step in the right direction is a small step in the right direction...

    --
    Dependency hell? => /bin/there/done/that
  22. All the French-bashing aside . . . by mmell · · Score: 4, Insightful
    (and don't get me wrong - I enjoy bashing the French) . . .

    This would seem to be a pretty bold move - think about it. They're using software which wasn't blessed by the winPope at Redmond. Were it any other commercial organization, there would be an acknowledgement that somebody within the organization had to be pretty gutsy to press for a non-Microsoft solution to anything.

    Unless the organization were, say, IBM or Sun or HP, for example. ;^D

    1. Re:All the French-bashing aside . . . by smittyoneeach · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, I like a good Gallic gouging too, but I recently read The Glorious Cause, as well.
      The US has a lot to thank the French for, in the way of underwriting the Revolution (for all their motives were questionable). There were more French at Yorktown than Colonials, and the French fleet was key at Virginia Capes (though later kindling in the West Indies).
      Would that more Yanks had clue #1 about history.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  23. French Gendarmerie by Edzor · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just to clear things up the blog is talking about the French Gendarmerie, the french national police force.
    It does not mean the actual French Military Police as we would think of it; the police force of the miltary.

    the french army only has 136,000~ soldiers!

    1. Re:French Gendarmerie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      talking about the French Gendarmerie, the french national police force.

      No, France has a separate entity called the "Police Nationale", who are police officers. The Gendarmerie are officially part of the military (though they look like police), but it is very common in Europe and elsewhere for the military to regularly take part in law enforcement.

      The US has a prohibition against the military being used for law enforcement (with a few small exceptions), which slowed the US military response in New Orleans. In the US, the National Guard are not officially part of the military, so they aren't restricted by this prohibition, so normally the National Guard are the first to respond.

    2. Re:French Gendarmerie by highwaytohell · · Score: 1

      The French Army officially only has 136,00 soldiers, this does not include the French Foreign Legion, which is maybe about 25% - 35% French, and the rest are foreigners who have joined. They can be called up at any time, and are usually the first sent into battle.

    3. Re:French Gendarmerie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything was going so well until you hit the last paragraph.

      The National Guard is part of the military, but, unless federalized, works for the governor. As such, they don't fall under the Posse Comitatus law. Posse Comitatus did not slow the US military response in New Orleans. Politics slowed it.

    4. Re:French Gendarmerie by owlstead · · Score: 1

      "the french army only has 136,000~ soldiers!"

      AFAIK *they* are not currently at war. What should they fear? An Albanian invasion?

    5. Re:French Gendarmerie by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      There has been a considerable amount of face stomping by French Government representatives in the Ivory Coast in the last few years, however.

      They're not 'at war,' just repressing the citizens of their colonial holdings. There's a difference.

      --
      resigned
    6. Re:French Gendarmerie by gedeco · · Score: 1

      AFAIK a french gendarm has been considered by the french law as a military personal.

      This distinction did exist on the time Napoleon was conquering parts of Europe.

  24. It won't be long before.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It won't be long before they surrender to Microsoft...

  25. Re:Mod me down... by Zugot · · Score: 1

    I don't use firefox as an option to internet explorer. I use it because it works well for what I need it for.

    --
    -- Bryan
  26. Favorite quote by c_fel · · Score: 1, Funny

    Linux Pratique : OpenOffice.org (last year), now Firefox, when will you swich to Linux?

    Général Brachet : Thunderbird will be deployed as the only mail client on 45,000 seat in 2006.

    Fun to know that after all this time, I actually ran Thunderbird OS...

    --
    I hate all sigs, mine included.
    1. Re:Favorite quote by Yokaze · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It's not a quote. At best it is called "taken out of context". Your "quote" suggests that Brachet doesn't know the difference between an OS and a mail client. Reading a bit further, however, clearly shows otherwise.

      A quote would be:

      Général Brachet : Thunderbird will be deployed as the only mail client on 45,000 seat in 2006. [...]

      Note the omission marks. Or more correctly

      Général Brachet : Thunderbird will be deployed as the only mail client on 45,000 seat in 2006. [...] Our first goal is to migrate all the upper layers of the workstation to Open Source Software to be independent of the Operating System.

      --
      "Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
    2. Re:Favorite quote by johansalk · · Score: 1

      Our first goal is to migrate all the upper layers of the workstation to Open Source Software to be independent of the Operating System This is a very, very wise decision.

  27. Thunderbird's drawback by SunPin · · Score: 1

    The reason that less than half are _also_ using Thunderbird probably has to do with the complete absence of personal information management software from the Mozilla Foundation. No, Sunbird doesn't count.

    --
    Laws are for people with no friends.
  28. Re:Why the switch? by tpgp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For Christ's Sake.

    20 comments - the majority of which are 'French surrender' jokes.

    1) Some originality would be nice.
    2) I thought 2006 was the year the American public would wake up to the way they're manipulated (can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?)
    3) Leave the french-hatred to countries that have a reason to hate the french. Like New Zealand or just about anywhere in the South Pacific
    4) Some originality would be nice. Every time there's a French story, its like reading fark.
    5) Please see points 1 and 5.

    --
    My pics.
  29. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a breaking news post! I mean, who knew, The french have a military?

  30. France Pro-Open Source or Not? by PineHall · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This slashdot story says, the French Department of Culture have told Free Software authors: "You will be required to change your licenses." And "You shall stop publishing free software," and warn they are ready "to sue free software authors who will keep on publishing source code" should a bill proposal passes in the Parliament.

    1. Re:France Pro-Open Source or Not? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      This slashdot story says, the French Department of Culture have told Free Software authors: "You will be required to change your licenses." And "You shall stop publishing free software," and warn they are ready "to sue free software authors who will keep on publishing source code" should a bill proposal passes in the Parliament.

      Large organizations tend to not be very coherent. Branches of government seem to live completely in their own little world. Every so often they run into each other, and the results can be quite amusing. Since Firefox can be used to illegally download copyrighted works, someone should report the police dept. to the police (yes, they have internal affairs and such that deal with that) if that bill passes. The resulting hilarity and global ridicule should do the rest.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:France Pro-Open Source or Not? by femto · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but at least authors can use the defence "but Your Honour, this summons was written using my Free software!"

    3. Re:France Pro-Open Source or Not? by SeeSchloss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Read slashdot more often and read the comments please. Comments in this previous story say that this isn't the department of Culture who said it, but the SACEM (the French equivalent to the RIAA). And another, more recent story (I don't care about looking for it) says that this bill proposal has been heavily amended and turned into a legalisation of P2P and reverse-engineering for open source software among others.

    4. Re:France Pro-Open Source or Not? by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      Yes, but slashdot is a universe of many surface untruths and little if any retractions.

      For an example, the story that raised a BIG FURY a few weeks ago about a guy who was hassled by the government for wanting access to a copy of Mao's Red Book?

      It was later documented that the guy made the whole thing up. He publicly retracted his story.

      That didn't prevent there from having been a huge pissing match about 'the terrrrrible guvvment' on slashdot. And submissions linking to a web article documenting that he was a liar have been declined by the slashdot hierarchy. Really, it's not part of the agenda of the land of the idealistic schoolboys (the slashdot editors) to think beyond their ideology.

      I bought into that kind of crap when I was 20, too.

      --
      resigned
    5. Re:France Pro-Open Source or Not? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      submissions linking to a web article documenting that he was a liar have been declined by the slashdot hierarchy.

      Slashback: Little Red Hoax, Firefly, Google
      On December 29th, 2005 with 504 comments

    6. Re:France Pro-Open Source or Not? by aaribaud · · Score: 1

      Have to repeat that again... the amendement did *not* legalize P2P, only downloading would be forgiven. Uploading would remain counterfeiting. Oh, and copying your legally bought (including the right to view) DVD onto a legally bought (including private-copy compensation tax) DVD-R would be illegal too, because you'd bypass a TPM.

      Reverse engineering hasn't been touched by the law project : it is still legal for interoperability purposes. However, if your reverse eng shows that the only way for you to make an OSS DVD reader is to bypass CSS, you're a counterfeiter as well.

      That law is absolutely not in favor of user rights. It is in favor of right owners--well, unless we (French) users finally have our say.

      Oh, and it was SNEP (phonogram editors association) and SNPP (phonogram producers association), not SACEM :) but the statements are truly those pronounced :( .

  31. Re:Let's bash the French by Pyrion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh please. The reason it made the front page is because it's a major switch to Firefox. Doesn't matter who switches, just that some large organization made the switch.

    --
    "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
  32. bureautique suite? by zeuqsav · · Score: 2, Funny

    I like the way they have a specialized "bureautique suite", for generating red tape!

    1. Re:bureautique suite? by xlv · · Score: 1
      I like the way they have a specialized "bureautique suite", for generating red tape!

      As mentioned elsewhere, they switched to OpenOffice a while back. Bureau can be translated as Office but that term has been used in France for at least two decades to mean a software office suite.

  33. More One-liners... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, since we're all going there:

    The Germans started using Linux and it was only a matter of time before that decision influenced the French.

    Maybe it's because the Mozilla Foundation offered them all free tickets to Euro-Disney and a complimentary batch of Freedom Fries.

    Mozilla Firefox just sounds better with a fake french accent than Internet Explorer does.

    Then again "Safari is for Paris" seems catchier.

    It's because firefox doesn't need WINE.

    The French are just exploring various implementations of SOAP.

  34. 70.000 switchers by Life700MB · · Score: 2, Funny


    Woah, I hope they all use my "Spread Firefox" referrer button!


    --
    Superb hosting 2400MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, ssh, $7.95

  35. Good for them by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think all countries should be working on their own information exchange platforms.
    How do you think Dept. of Homeland Security would feel if all of their computers were running on a closed OS manufactured by China?

    It's like outsorcing your whole communication infrastructure to a different country.
    Foreign countres would do well to consider switching all of their government computation to open source OSs, or developing their own. Firefox and OO are a good start though.

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    1. Re:Good for them by MikkoApo · · Score: 1

      I guess Switzerland would keep HTTP to themselves, then, Finland would keep IRC and Linux. Oh and good luck to US of A with Gopher.

  36. Re:Why the switch? by pomo+monster · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    It's a fucking joke. Sensitivity is fast becoming a reactionary trait, anyway.

  37. This after making file sharing legal? by Ruff_ilb · · Score: 3, Funny

    Vive la france!

    --
    http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
  38. Stock prices by this+great+guy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    In a related news, U.S. stocks climbed today as shares of office furniture manufacturers like Chairs Inc. (CHR) rose and investors were optimistic that sells are going to increase in the area around Seatle. Based on the latest available data, CHR ended up 39.54 points, or 4.31 percent, at 1,880.95.

    1. Re:Stock prices by engagebot · · Score: 1

      well, i thought it was funny. don't have mod points though...

      --
      Han shot first.
    2. Re:Stock prices by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Actually the devaluing of application developers would lead to an excess in the supply of (used) chairs, which would cause the sales of new chairs to plumet and prices to fall. That would likely lead to a reduction in the value of the CHR stocks.

      Funny though. ;)

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    3. Re:Stock prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sorry, but I just do not get the joke... Why would chair sales go up after that French switch thingie???

      Could somebody explain this please?

      Thanks much.

    4. Re:Stock prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Steve Balmer (MS's CEO) supposedly threw a chair against the wall in his office after he learned one of his key employee was quitting to work for Google.

      Since this event has become famous, a recurring class of joke has appeared in the Slashdot subculture: each time a bad thing happens to MS (clients migrating to open-source solutions...), jokes implying destruction/replacement of chairs are often posted on Slashdot.

    5. Re:Stock prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow thanks.

      when I read the explanation, I actually laughed. Still giggling a bit.

      I think I am gonna share that joke tomorrow with my peers.

      Thanks for explaining.

      still laughing...

  39. Re:Why the switch? by Dog+Chapman · · Score: 0

    I'm not American you insensitive clod.

    --
    Born on a mountain, Raised in a cave!
  40. Re:Why the switch? by kfg · · Score: 1

    . . .can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?

    Dude, they were still French!

    KFG

  41. Re:Why the switch? by maxume · · Score: 1

    Yeah, so I never called french fries 'freedom fries' or anything stupid like that, but France opposed Iraq II because of oil for food. As far as contempt for France goes, I dislike France just as much as I dislike Texas, Ohio and mopar.

    Mostly, I think it's fun to crack jokes about 'stupid Ohio' and things like that. French people smell bad, Texans are dumb, etc. Also, I drive a Chrysler, goddamn mopar crap.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  42. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Racism is neither a joke nor is it funny. Make the same comments about other nations are you are quickly a racist but for some reason, here on slashdot it is socially acceptable to be racist towards the french... Strange. But to ease your mind I just checked again, and it didn't even tickle me. Nope, it isn't funny.

  43. In Other News: 12 COAL MINERS FOUND ALIVE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Can you believe it? I guess there really are such things as miracles.

    1. Re:In Other News: 12 COAL MINERS FOUND ALIVE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the fuck cares anyway ?

    2. Re:In Other News: 12 COAL MINERS FOUND ALIVE! by PFI_Optix · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      This is why instant news is a bad thing. Updated news: 12 coal miners found dead. 1 survivor. Just in case someone hasn't heard.

      --
      120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
  44. Friend or Foe? by mmalove · · Score: 1

    Someone just smashed french, military, and police together in the same sentence, and claims to be an advocate of firefox?!

    --
    You can get 15 minutes of fame, but you can go down in history for infamy.
  45. Insp. Jacques Clouseau by Skiron · · Score: 2

    OEM dealer 1: As in every browser of this size, there is a flaw.

    Sultan: A flaw?

    Gem dealer 2: The slightest flaw, your excellency.

    Gem dealer 1: If you look deep into the browser source code, you will perceive the tiniest discoloration. The fix resembles an animal.

    Sultan: An animal?

    Gem dealer 1: A little fox.

    Sultan: Yes! A fox. Come here, Monkey Ballmer. A gift to your father from his grateful people. Some day it will be yours. The most fabulous browser in all the world. Come close...

    1. Re:Insp. Jacques Clouseau by howlingmadhowie · · Score: 1

      very nice :)

  46. Re:Why the switch? by Kenshin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's joke, but it's TIRESOME.

    I bet you still go around yelling "I'M RICK JAMES, BITCH!" at friends...

    --

    Does it make you happy you're so strange?

  47. Interesting by rikkards · · Score: 1

    The thing I find interesting is that their MPs are a separate organization from their normal military.

    Oh and good on them for the switch.

    1. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      precisely, it's not their MP (military police), but the (non-military) national police. France has two police types called "Police" and "Gendarmerie", none of which is what you'd expect to be a military police (i.e. part of the army)

    2. Re:Interesting by SeeSchloss · · Score: 1

      Except the Gendarmerie *is* part of the army. They are not under the ministry of Interior, they take part in the 14 July parades, etc. The Police is non-military and is under the ministry of Interior. But the only difference in their job is that the Police is mostly in >10 000 inhabitant cities and the Gendarmerie in the other ones, they do the same things otherwise.

    3. Re:Interesting by rikkards · · Score: 1

      True my point was that you would think that the military would have consistent standards throughout in what is the defacto browser, desktop OS etc.

  48. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    agreed, and here's a great article by the war nerd dispelling the myth of french being militarily incompetent: http://www.exile.ru/2003-October-02/war_nerd.html

  49. It must have been because of AllPeers!!!!!! by cmay · · Score: 1

    Just posted on /. today!!

    Is AllPeers FireFox's P2P "Killer App"?
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/04/134423 7&tid=154

    Cleary the French Police must have seen it and decided to switch!!

  50. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II

    Yes, the french politicians were all making way too much money to allow for the most murderous living dictator to be overthrown! Plenty of justification there.

  51. Re:Mod me down... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fewer people using IE, the fewer sites will code only for IE. If IE's market share slips enough, maybe the moron webmasters will write to standards.

    I'm not holding my breath, though.

    -mcgrew (almost mrc="pertain")

  52. Re:Why the switch? by tpgp · · Score: 1

    It's a fucking joke. Sensitivity is fast becoming a reactionary trait, anyway.


    Did you miss Points 1, 4 & 5?
    1) Some originality would be nice.
    4) Some originality would be nice. Every time there's a French story, its like reading fark.
    5) Please see points 1 and 5.
    Hmmmmn, seems like maybe I realised it was a joke - but wanted a little originality?

    Seems like you're a little sensitive about the fact that you've been making the same goddamn joke for the last four years.
    --
    My pics.
  53. Re:Mod me down... by sucker_muts · · Score: 1

    I use linux as my main desktop since Mandrake 8.2, but use Opera as my browser. But your initial reaction should not have been that negative since this news is a good thing, and people _should_ care about good things!
    The reaction you give now also does not answer any question you/I raised...

    --
    Dependency hell? => /bin/there/done/that
  54. Re:Why the switch? by OK+PC · · Score: 1

    God, I'm such a geek! After reading that, all I thought was that you have a recursive list!

    --
    Did you get that thing I sent ya?
  55. Re:Why the switch? by aaronl · · Score: 3, Informative

    2a) No, and it probably isn't next year, either. Most people that I have conversations with about such things either believe that it's for the best or don't believe me at all. Unless people stop believing things just because Congress said so, or the TV/newspaper/etc said so (or we replace those with something trustworthy), this attitude is not likely to change. People seem to be too lazy to actually verify what they hear.

    2b) Yes, I can remember having contempt for France for as long as I knew their history. My humor about France hasn't changed in at least 20 years (coincidentally, the period over which I've made jokes at France's expense). My opinion of France went down over Iraq II, but not because they opposed it. It was because of the backroom deals that they were brokering with Iraq. I also oppose the US meddling in foreign governments. If it weren't for the treaties and such that France had agreed to, I wouldn't care that they were making deals with Iraq.

    3) You forgot a significant portion of Africa from the list of places with reason to hate France.

    1/4/5) I agree! New France jokes would be very amusing. ;-)

    Seriously, Slashdot is indicitive of the follow-the-leader mentality just as much as Fark, Digg, Kuroshin, or most anywhere else. People like to fit in, they like being modded up, and they're often somewhat afraid of standing out for voicing a different opinion.

    BTW - GP was a joke; lighten up!

  56. Converting the right way by PhysicsPhil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...Our first goal is to migrate all the upper layers of the workstation to Open Source Software to be independent of the Operating System.(...)

    To me, this was the single most interesting line in the entire article. Telling everyone that they must migrate to another operating system in one big step is bound to meet resistance and hassles. Instead they get people familiar with their day-to-day software tools, so that migrating to Linux/OSX/whatever later is largely irrelevant. If people's word processor and email system are still the same, they won't much care what OS is running.

    With this strategy Windows loses its special status and becomes just a commodity, providing only storage and network access. It also becomes replacable on a whim (or close to it).

    1. Re:Converting the right way by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Windows becomes solely the domain of people who enjoy using their computers (games, rich multimedia content, etc.). People with crumby jobs in the governemnt and at particularly bureaucratic corporations sit at 'Linux consoles' and don't even have the root access required to move the icons around on their screen.

      But I'm not sure that is necessarily a good thing for Linux.

      "Mommy, how come the computers at school aren't any fun, like our Macintosh/Windows Computer at home is?"

      --
      resigned
    2. Re:Converting the right way by Cochonou · · Score: 1

      I do not really understand your post. You can also have a crumby job, sit at a 'Windows console' without an administrator account, and not have the right to move icons around too.

  57. Re:Why the switch? by pomo+monster · · Score: 1

    I didn't say I found it funny. Just that making a joke like that doesn't mean you share the political leanings of Pat Buchanan.

  58. Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by IAAP · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Thank you for saying what you did. During the whole "Freedom Fries" French hating horseshit that was happening a couple of years ago just because the French asserted themselves. Very few people remembered that the French fought with us during our Revolutionary War. As a matter of fact, they lost more lives than we did. And this shit about we "rescued them in WWII! We owed them one! How about that!

    I don't get it, just because they refused to send their young men and women into Iraq to fight for basically American politcal interests, folks hated them?! And don't give me this shit about the Iraq war is part of the War on Terror. Show me some evidence that Hussein was in fact harboring terrorists and/or financing them!

    1. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by barnaby · · Score: 2, Insightful



      And without the USA there wouldn't be a France.... twice.

      --
      Barnaby
    2. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by Frastolator · · Score: 1
      And this shit about we "rescued them in WWII! We owed them one! How about that!

      I'm fairly sure we paid them back in WWI.

    3. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by dracphelan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Without the French there wouldn't be a USA!"

      1. That French government went the way of the dodo bird when they executed the monarchy. Plus, even then, they were doing it as a way to sxtick it to the English.
      2. The only times French governements have stepped in to help the USA in war is when they could stick it to England.
      3. Many brave French citizens died resisting the Nazis. Unfortunately, just as many were assisting the Nazis. The rest were just ducking for cover.
      4. We also saved their nation in World War I.
      5. I've despised the French government ever since they pulled out of NATO (for the first time). I've despised Parisians since I was 7. When my family visited the city, attempted to speak French and treated rudely for not speaking French perfectly.

    4. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6. Whenever the french farmers get p*ssed for any reason (normally not getting enough grants for the EU) and they blockade the ports to England, and all of the English trucking companies that ship to Europe go bust as all their goods go bust. And I didn't hear that we got paid back for them yet for both the blockades I remember.

    5. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by natmakarvitch · · Score: 2, Informative

      Here is a different, albeit somewhat documented, point of view: http://www.exile.ru/2003-October-02/war_nerd.html

    6. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a recursive dependance o_O (and apt-get is the only solution)

    7. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by kimvette · · Score: 1

      And vice-versa, if you go a little further back.

      Still funny though! "france surrenders" is one of those jokes that is so lame that it just gets more funny every time someone posts it - what makes it funy is not the joke itself, but that people keep at it and the same flame wars and french military competence debates take place as a result every. damn. time.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    8. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by arendjr · · Score: 1

      Just to your comment about Hussein harboring/financing terrorists, how about the $25,000 grants Saddam offered for Palestinian suicide bombings, or about the shelter Iraque gave to Palestinian terrorists like Abu Abbas? Seems like a clear signal of supporting terrorism to me.

    9. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "2. The only times French governements have stepped in to help the USA in war is when they could stick it to England.

      You think USA came in France during the war to protect the French ?"

      "3. Many brave French citizens died resisting the Nazis. Unfortunately, just as many were assisting the Nazis. The rest were just ducking for cover."

      Stupid...

      "4. We also saved their nation in World War I."

      That's why US army came without weapons...

      "5. I've despised the French government ever since they pulled out of NATO (for the first time)."

      De Gaulle was right. Why France should make part of an organisation which is almost directed by US Army ?

      "I've despised Parisians since I was 7. When my family visited the city, attempted to speak French and treated rudely for not speaking French perfectly."

      There are stupid persons everywhere, but please don't make generalities of your case
      I guess there is also Americans who laugh of French's english accent, it's not for as much I hate every American...

    10. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      He means terrorists who threaten the US. Giving money to Palestinian terrorists is de riguer in the Arab world; by that measure, Saudi Arabia was way more guilty of supporting terrorism than Saddam ever could have been. The real issue is whether Saddam supported terrorists such as al Qaeda, which he did not.

    11. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And don't forget about Viet Nam. Here's a brief Transcript:

      FRANCE: Hey, USA, help!
      USA: OK!
      FRANCE: /sneaks out
      USA: Where'd they go...? /begin major combat
      USA: Crap...damn Frenchies

    12. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by firewrought · · Score: 1
      I've despised Parisians since I was 7. When my family visited the city, attempted to speak French and treated rudely for not speaking French perfectly.

      FYI... I visited Paris in summer 2001 w/o knowing a lick of French. I found Parisians very nice, not at all what the sterotypes led me to expect. This was true across multiple hostels, museums, stores, and sidewalks.

      I don't doubt that you had negative experiences, but you can choose for how hard and how long to hold your grudges... I, for instance, don't look back so fondly on Venetians, but I'm not going to get myopically belligerent towards them over future foreign policy tiffs.

      --
      -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
    13. Re:Without the French there wouldn't be a USA! by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Uh, not exactly:

      France: Hey, could you bomb these commies for us.
      US: No, you fithy imperialist scum.
      France: Eurgh, lose Dien Bien Phu, quit Indochina.
      US: Ooops, the commies are pushing the dominoes over!
      US: Begin major combat. Lose. Quit Viet-Nam.

      A little bit of help back then would have saved you a world of hurt.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
  59. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I thought 2006 was the year the American public would wake up to the way they're manipulated (can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?)
    Yeah, American public...go question authority like you've been told!
  60. Heehee by Ellidi+T · · Score: 0

    The reason for this change is obvious.
    One word.
    Allpeers

    --
    Ellidi
  61. Justified? by jscotta44 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You must be kidding. The French were just trying to protect their under the table oil deals. The Americans catch hell over even the possible implication of doing anything for oil. The French do it and it is suddenly "okay". Give me a break.

  62. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) This is Slashdot - 'nuff said
    2) I've hated France for MANY, MANY years. Ask my family, friends, co-workers, old college roommates, etc... It has nothing to do with their [justified because they were on the take from the oil for food program and had lucrative oil contracts with the Saddam] opposition to Iraq II. There were hundreds of other reasons to hate France before Bush became President, and there will be hundreds of reasons to hate France LONG after he's gone.
    3) Every nation has plenty of reasons to hate France, including the USA.
    4) See your own #1
    5)

  63. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wikipedia says you were raised in Colorado & keep a photo of George Bush on your desk.

    Makes you American enough for me!

  64. calm down, it's called satire by SuperBanana · · Score: 2, Insightful
    20 comments - the majority of which are 'French surrender' jokes. [...]Some originality would be nice. I thought 2006 was the year the American public would wake up to the way they're manipulated (can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?). Leave the french-hatred to countries that have a reason to hate the french.

    Did it occur to you that we're making fun of all the people with an irrational hatred of the French, especially by making such an absurd inferrence?

    If Bill O'Reilly says "Well, isn't that just like the french to surrender", he's manipulating his audience (if you think O'Reilly is saying something like that because he actually believes it, you're assuming he's a simpleton. I see people do the same thing with Bush- assume he's an idiot, not someone playing the fool and manipulating people.) If someone on slashdot jokes "Well, isn't it just like the French to surrender and use Firefox", they're making fun of people like Bill O'Reilly, not picking on the French.

    Then again, complex humor has never been a strong suite on slashdot...

    Oh, and you know what? As long as everyone is laughing, I have zero problems with people cracking jokes about each other. I love teasing my friends from Smith about attending a "finishing school", and they enjoy punching me (they hit like girls, so no worries.) As long as everyone stays laughing, it's a way to celebrate our differences. Or something like that. There are way too many people on this world who take everything so seriously and get offended at the drop of a hat.

    1. Re:calm down, it's called satire by Stanistani · · Score: 1

      I am a dropped chapeau, you insensitive clod!

  65. Re:Why the switch? by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't say racist. I would say realist. I have worked with the french.

    Besides that, chicken shit is chicken shit!

    --

    Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
  66. Re:Why the switch? by c_forq · · Score: 1

    Because we view the French as the same as us. Plus they aren't a race, there are blacks, muslims, anglos, and more that are French.

    --
    Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
  67. Re:Why the switch? by pomo+monster · · Score: 1

    I'm as sick of seeing the same old jokes around here as anyone else with a brain (assuming any of us on Slashdot have brains at all). But I'm referring to your points 2 and 3. It is possible, you know, to poke fun at something without implying your opposition; but then you go on and imply this guy is Dick Cheney in a jester cap based on his one stupid little throwaway comment. Pointless.

  68. I wonder how they will manage upgrades by rduke15 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I had a hell of a time upgrading 15 users from 1.0.3 to 1.5.

    I just didn't find a way to do it reliably and automatically, preserving the few installed extensions and plugins (Flash, QuickTime+ Real Alternative).

    In the end, I had to physically go to each computer and check everything, making sure I also checked everybody's roaming profile.

    I love Firefox for myself (it's my main browser since it was called Phoenix), but next time I deploy it in a company, it will need to have clear instructions on how to do that without a physical install/configuration/plugins and extensions install/etc.

    I don't mind having to write a few Perl scripts to do it, if I can get clear instructions.

    If the French military deployed it to 100000 people, maybe they have documented how they did it? Or maybe they just don't know about the upgrade hell yet?

    After all, initial install was easy using FFdeploy. It's the upgrades that are a problem

    1. Re:I wonder how they will manage upgrades by Cyphertube · · Score: 1

      Aren't upgrades supposed to be automagic now with 1.5?

      --
      Linux - because it doesn't leave that Steve Ballmer aftertaste.
    2. Re:I wonder how they will manage upgrades by rduke15 · · Score: 1

      I don't think it would work for users who don't have admin rights.
      Anyway, 1.0.3 didn't have it, and overwriting the Firefox directory while leaving the user profile unchanged didn't work.

    3. Re:I wonder how they will manage upgrades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I think the term you are not aware of is 'disk imaging' and/or 'netinstall'

      We do this for Macs with netboot for User labs, actually. Any networked machine can get hard disk formatted, and loaded with new OS/apps/settings in minutes. For new G5 gigabit models we can 'install' a new system in 93 seconds (6.3 GB of uncompressed data on the drive, 2.7GB compressed image). An older mac with 100 base-T, gets done in roughly 15-20 minutes. So you CAN roll any upgrade overnight or even over coffee break. Have to be physically present there to press 'N' (and record MAC addy + key-in password) the first time, but after that, the machine can be blanked/reloaded/upgraded remotely, or by a script.

      One problem (advantage, in User Lab case) is that all the user data will be wiped off the disk, but I am sure you could write a script to look for new local documents/bookmarks/etc, and just copy those. Or keep user directories on the server?

      Pretty sure you can do that with non-Macs, but probably more of a pain in the neck. Could cost more than $1000 for OS X server (or 2 weeks of messing around with FreeBSD), too.
      I think there are tools for PCs (Ghost??) that can something similar though.

    4. Re:I wonder how they will manage upgrades by rduke15 · · Score: 1

      I know about disk imaging, and use it a lot for initial installs, or in case of big trouble on a machine.

      But in the case I was talking about, it would have failed exactly as what I did failed: replacing the 1.0.3 Firefox directory with a 1.5 FF dir. doesn't work when the user's 1.0.3 roaming profile is loaded from the server at logon.

      I consider wiping the profile to be an admin. failure: the user looses all bookmarks and settings, for no good reason, except that the admin didn't know how to (or really couldn't) do it otherwise. And since I'm the admin, I don't like such "solutions" which leave a taste of failure.

      But other posts suggest it may be better in the future, and it would be possible to replace the 1.5 dir with a new FF 1.6 dir., and the profile would still work. Hope they are right. We'll see...

      Anyway, now that FF is a great home user browser, it would be really about time that someone takes the task to make it a great (easily manageable, with extensions and plugins) browser for the enterprise.

    5. Re:I wonder how they will manage upgrades by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      My machines (gentoo linux) upgraded fine, and all my settings/bookmarks were updated too...
      It detected my plugins and tried to find updated 1.5-compatible versions, but failed to do so for a couple... These plugins still sit in the list, marked as disabled, and will be updated automatically once compatible versions become available.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    6. Re:I wonder how they will manage upgrades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firefox is open source, right? I am not really up to the task, but a better programmer could write a converter that takes the old profile (after all, format is fully described) and transform it to the newer profile (also described).

      You are right, what 'admins' like me need is a simple CLU that I can call from a script, that will convert the profile for me. Rumor has it that FF will do it automatically since 1.5 (autoconverts an old profile on start), but if not, it would really be great if somebody could work on that.

  69. Well, actually... by radiotyler · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A lot of U.S. Soldiers use Firefox exclusively. Thanks to websites like portableapps I can get Thunderbird and Firefox installed on my flash so I don't have to go through the bother of dealing with out backwards and semi-retarted IA department to get it installed on the machine I use. After showing it off to most of the people I work with and letting them see all of the great plug-ins and extensions that you can add on, plus custom skinning the browser, these guys were sold.

    As to the Army as a whole accpting it, your guess is as good as mine. I only showed the more tech-savvy guys Firefox, some of the dudes around here didn't exactly sign their contract as much as put a bite mark on the dotted line, if you catch my drift. I really don't think that they're the ones that are targeted by Firefox - and that very well could be part of the problem. Most IT/IA soldiers that are outside the Linux / Open Source world see things like Firefox as a waltzing bear. Right or wrong, that's a perception that is going to have to be overcome before this is accepted as a standard, or even as a useable piece of software by those outside "the know".

    --
    hi mom!
  70. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when are the french a friggin' race?

  71. Re:Why the switch? by c_forq · · Score: 1

    The disliking and jokes of the French go a long way back. Jokes about the snobbish Parisianers go back at least 2 decades, and I recall jokes about the French only being able to win wars outside of their own country, and surrendering for a long time. Plus France did have some real shady deals with Iraq.

    --
    Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
  72. Re:Why the switch? by hey! · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I for one welcome our cliché parroting overlords.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  73. Re:Why the switch? by Live_in_Dayton · · Score: 1

    Well, I also yell it at strangers.

  74. Re:Why the switch? by hey! · · Score: 1

    Oddly enough, what we are talking about here is technically not racism but rather chauvanism.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  75. eh? by DrWhizBang · · Score: 1

    French? Military? Success? I'm going to have to stop skimming the articles...

    --
    Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
    1. Re:eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wanker

  76. Re:Why the switch? by legirons · · Score: 1

    BTW - GP was a joke; lighten up!

    Meanwhile, as the Pentagon continues to use Microsoft products, there are unconfirmed reports of torture and rape of civilians at the Redmond headquarters of that company. Not all military jokes are funny, even if they're historically accurate.

  77. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some originality would be nice.

    Yeah, they should make some brave frenchman jokes. Now THAT would be funny.

  78. Re:Why the switch? by charlesnw · · Score: 1

    5) Profit. You forgot the most important step. :)

    --
    Charles Wyble System Engineer
  79. Re:In Other News, Ballmer... by masklinn · · Score: 4, Funny

    In other news, Steve Ballmer has vowed to Fucking Kill(TM) the French military police.

    --
    "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
  80. Does that mean... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 0, Redundant

    we have to call it FreedomFox now?

  81. Redundant? by aconkling · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    This is definitely the best and most creative joke among the comments. While jokes about the French are overrated, why was this the one to be modded down?

  82. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'M RICK JAMES, BITCH!

  83. Re:Why the switch? by BadassJesus · · Score: 1

    I guess they surrendered to the superiority of Firefox.
    Rioters beat their asses so badly they targeted a weaker enemy, an enemy they can beat the M$.

  84. Some overviews of French military history by temojen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seriously kicked the Romans Butts many times as Galacia.

    Did so again under Charlemange.

    Kicked the English's butts under William the conqueror.

    Kicked the English's butts again several times during the 100 years war.

    Supported the rebels during the American Revolution.

    Nearly united europe during the napoleonic wars (then foolishly tried to invade Russia during the winter).

    Held off the german forces in WW I

    When invaded by germany in WW II, held out just long enough for the British Expiditionary force to sail from Dunkirk.

    After WW II the French failed to re-occupy Indochina due to resistance from the formerly US-backed Viet Minh. They pulled out of Indochina in 1954. The US also failed to gain power in Indochina.

    Seriously... It's only from 1940 to 1954 that France's military record is any worse than any other, and when you consider what they were up against (USSR was still operating under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact when France was invaded, and on continental europe only France stood against the Axis), they really were no worse.

    1. Re:Some overviews of French military history by bcrowell · · Score: 2

      Nearly united europe during the napoleonic wars (then foolishly tried to invade Russia during the winter).
      They didn't invade during winter. They invaded during summer, and were having problems initially due to heat and humidity. It's just that the Russians managed to make the invasion drag on until winter, and Napoleon (unwisely, as it turned out) tried to keep pushing on, and was then caught by the cold weather.

    2. Re:Some overviews of French military history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An entertaining overview of French military history:

      http://www.exile.ru/2003-October-02/war_nerd.html

    3. Re:Some overviews of French military history by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 1
      You left out that the German Keiser was crowned, and the German Empire proclaimed in Versailles, and insult the French no doubt had in mind when they had the Treaty of Versailles of 1919 signed there. One could also take the view that the intentional destabilization of the Germans as far back as Napoleon led to later wars with Germany.

      Also, let's not forget "freedom cabbage" when we discuss "freedom fries."

    4. Re:Some overviews of French military history by danila · · Score: 1

      USSR was still operating under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact when France was invaded, and on continental europe only France stood against the Axis

      You may be forgetting Poland. In that Poland refused to allow Soviet support for Czechoslovakia, which meant that France didn't support Czechoslovakia either. Meaning that noone resisted Hitler until it was too late. Only later did Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact become necessary.

      Never forget Poland.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    5. Re:Some overviews of French military history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Seriously kicked the Romans Butts many times as Galacia.

      Those were not French (Franks) but were Gauls. The Franks moved into what is _now_ called France (land of the Franks) after the Romans left, just as Angles, Saxons and Jutes moved into what is now called England (land of the Anglo-Saxons).

      > Kicked the English's butts under William the conqueror.

      William was not French, he was a Norman (Man fron the North), in fact a Viking Dane. The Normans kicked French butts to take over what is now called Normandy and then took over England as had been promised to him as rightful successor to his cousin Edward the Confessor.

    6. Re:Some overviews of French military history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      William was not French, he was a Norman (Man fron the North), in fact a Viking Dane.


      William was born on France, so he was French. His ancestors were Vikings, so what... John Kennedy had Irish ancestors, but nobody calls him "the first Irish president of United States".
  85. Re:Why the switch? by Omega1045 · · Score: 1
    I think point #1 makes the most sense. However, those surrender jokes never do seem to get very old with me.

    Personally, I really started to dislike the French as a whole after a trip to Europe. Spaniards, Enlgishmen, Germans, and Italians were all so much nicer than the French. It seemed like the French looked down their noses at us. The Germans seemed a little distant, but that is just how Germans are. I think many French people really think they are better than Americans, and probably everyone else. My wife had the same impression after a recent trip to Paris.

    It is too bad that we are not closer with the French, considering our past history.

    --

    Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

  86. They named it: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Firefrog

  87. Ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the hell didn't they contact me first? I really could have used the Google bar/FF referrals!

  88. Re:Why the switch? by PFI_Optix · · Score: 1

    I'm of French (Acadian, Cajun) descent. I'm also descended of a freed slave. I joke about both.

    --
    120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
  89. Note to mods by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    don't mod BOTH posts (mine and the one below) redundant at the same time! Now the joke has vanished!

  90. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Your whining is getting pretty fucking old too...

  91. Re:Why the switch? by ajpr · · Score: 1

    3) Leave the french-hatred to countries that have a reason to hate the french. Like New Zealand or just about anywhere in the South Pacific

    The English hate the french the most, we've fought loads of wars, including one that lasted 100 years. So if anyone hates them its us :]

  92. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Soviet Russia, brains have YOU!

  93. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cry more.

    asshat.

  94. Re:In Soviet Russia by PFI_Optix · · Score: 1, Funny

    Nyet. In Soviet Russia, you surrender to the French.

    That'd be a welcome change.

    (I couldn't resist)

    --
    120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
  95. Psst... by eosp · · Score: 0

    It's gendarmerie. Oh never mind...what should I expect from here?

  96. Re:Why the switch? by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...and stupid asshole are you!

    --
    Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

    http://financialpetition.org/
  97. Re:Why the switch? by nine-times · · Score: 1
    1) Some originality would be nice.
    ...
    4) Some originality would be nice. Every time there's a French story, its like reading fark.
    ...
    5) Please see points 1 and 5.

    Meant to be ironic?

    But anyway, yes, people have hated the French for quite a long time. I'm guessing that it started when people hated the French for many of the same reasons people hate Americans now.

  98. Without French Monarchy there would be no USA by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... And this shit about we "rescued them in WWII! We owed them one! How about that! ...

    No, we paid that debt in WWI. "On the 4th of July [1917], the 2nd Battalion, 16th Infantry (2-16), paraded through the streets of Paris to bolster the sagging French spirits. At Lafayette's tomb, one of General John J. Pershing's staff uttered the famous words, "Lafayette, we are here!"
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._1st_Infantry_Div ision

    So, to use *your* phraseology, not mine, they owe us one.

    Also, the French government that supported the US was the monarchy, not the current French government. "Current government" as in system of government, not the currenyly elected representatives. Do you think Lafayette would do business with Sadaam and make war on GreenPeace (literally, sink boat, kill member, rescue French agents/assasins from jail)?

  99. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's about being funny. Ya still walk around saying "Don't have a cow man?"

  100. FireFox by certel · · Score: 2, Funny

    Definitely a good win again for FireFox. Microsoft better be focusing on launching something respectful with IE 7. (Did I say Microsoft and respectful in the same sentence? Damn!)

  101. WTF? Who did I piss off? by mmell · · Score: 5, Funny
    50% insightful, 30% overrated, 20% flamebait.

    I'm guessing that 30% of the moderators work for Microsoft and 20% of them are French.

  102. Re:Why the switch? by hey! · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have no objection to political humor. But unlike other kinds of jokes, I think it's fair game to call political jokes on their accuracy. Nobody ever acts as if they really believe an actual priest, rabbi and minister went into a actual bar (Was the minister Methodist? What were they doing going into a bar?). But they do certainly act as if France was a nation composed entierly of cheese eating surrender monkeys.

    Many people use political humor as a cheap way of advancing an unsupportable opinion. They get the same rhetorical and emotional impact as making a substantive argument -- possibly even more. But if they get called on it, they can always fall back on the craven excuse that it was just a joke. In fact, the stupider and less original the joke, the greater the dudgeon, in my experience. Peole whose humor is intelligent and incisive don't need to get defensive.

    Giving opinions expressed as humor a pass on accuracy is pretty much an invitation for lies, stupidity and moral cowardice to rule the world, which I think none of us really want.

    So, if you make a joke whose premise is that Al Gore thinks he invented the Internet, I think it's fair enough for somebody to challenge the factual accuracy. If I make a joke who's point is that GW Bush is stupid, it's fair enough for you to call me on that as well.

    In short, it's one thing to be unoriginal. It's another think to think and act like a sheep. We all know where the sheeps' master intends them to go, in the end.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  103. History? by mmell · · Score: 1
    You mean there was French guys in history? Like Napoleon and stuff? Wow! ;^D

    That said, I have always been somewhat in awe of two groups - the Allied warriors who fought and won WWII, and the French Free Resistance who daily disregarded personal safety to oppose evil. Granted they were fighting for their own homeland which must have been a marvellous motivating factor, but still . . .

    Summary: not all of the French surrendered, just their government.

    1. Re:History? by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      French resistance, while not terribly effective, was also present in the Franco-Prussian War. See Showalter, who was a bit of a scholarly overload, but most of the damage has healed. ;)
      Of the kingdoms rising from the ashes of the Roman Empire, only that of the Franks had a name surviving to modern times.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  104. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    New France jokes would be very amusing.

    Don't start in on Quebec, we're very protective of our French Candian brothers and sisters.

    Of course, if you're going to start in anyway, you could do well to remember Champlain (IIRC) said of what is now Quebec, "this must be the land God gave to Cain."

    Then there's poutain, poutain opens up a whole new vista of freedom fries related jokes to be relished with cheese and gravy on top. That should get you started :)

  105. Re:Why the switch? by holloway · · Score: 1
    don't have a cow, man.

    Eat my shorts

    I've fallen and I can't get up.

    I'd buy that for a dollar.

    Not the momma!

    WOOOAAHH

    (that last one was Joey from TV's Blossom... what a dreamboat, and jokes age)

  106. Military Police? by melonman · · Score: 1

    The Gendarmerie Nationale isn't military in the UK/US sense. They are the people who investigate murders and give out speeding tickets on national highways. In other words, it's the police force, it just happens to be set up a bit like an army. (By memory, it's responsible to the interior minister, to counterbalance the power of the defence minister in the case of a coup, but I could be imagining that bit..)

    As mascots for bleeding edge Open Source adoption go, we could do better. The best Hollywood portrayal of French policing I have seen is in the Harrison Ford film "Frantic". They have now replaced their manual typewriters with wordprocessors, but to see them use them you wonder why. My favourite experience was taking a tourist to a police station to report a stolen passport. They had a Word template for the report, and someone had saved all the personal details of a rape victim into it, so everyone who reported anything could read all about it.

    Of all the reasons suggested here for why they made the move, I haven't seen the most likely one - cost. Certainly there is a drive to get schools here onto open source to reduce licence costs and/or piracy. And the pupils and staff I know really really hate Open Office.

    --
    Virtually serving coffee
    1. Re:Military Police? by transatlantique78 · · Score: 0
      They are the people who investigate murders and give out speeding tickets on national highways. In other words, it's the police force, it just happens to be set up a bit like an army. (By memory, it's responsible to the interior minister, to counterbalance the power of the defence minister in the case of a coup, but I could be imagining that bit..)

      Not quite, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread.

      They do indeed have the same attributions as the Police Nationale (as you said, crime investigation, highway patrol...) with a different geographical jurisdiction. Mostly. There is some overlap -- in medium-sized cities one could find both ; highway patrol is also covered by the Compagnie Républicaine de Sécurité (CRS, which usually does crowd control), which is part of the Police.

      However, the Gendarmerie is not just set up like an army, it is part of the army, under the ministry of Defence -- whereas the Police (and CRS) is a purely civilian force under the ministry of Interior. The Gendarmerie also serves as MP in the US sense.

      --
      You are finite. Zathras is finite. This... is wrong tool.
  107. French math by frovingslosh · · Score: 2, Interesting
    100,000 personnel over to Firefox and Thunderbird (70,000 and 45,000 respectively)

    You can't just add them that way! The 70K that use Firefox likely account for almost all of the 45k that use Tbird, it's very unlikely that anywhere near 100k personnel are involved if there are only 70k Firefox users.

    Good numbers still for one organization, but an awful flawed statement to have found it's way into a Slashdot front page. How did this get past our meticulous editors?

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  108. Re:Why the switch? by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, France opposed the war in Iraq because of OFF. Lets look at that logic.

    1) How can you claim that it had nothing to do with 75% of the French public opposing the invasion? After all, it's not like leaders in democracies who act contrary to the will of 75% of their populace on major issues tend to have trouble getting reelected.

    2) What is the logic of France risking their trade with the US to make a small fraction of the few billion dollars involved in the Oil For Food program? This trade involves 2,400 French subsidiaries in the US employing 500,000 people with 160B$ turnover, and the converse (US subsidiaries in France, which employ 580,000 people with 135B$ turnover). France owns 143B$ of US stock, a fourfold increase in the past decade. The US owns 55B euros of French stock, doubling over the past decade. In 2003, the US imported 23B euros worth of French goods; France imported 22.4B euros worth from America.

    3) The oil for food program involved roughly 4-5B$ (over its decade long lifespan) in kickbacks to the *Iraqi government*. Most people here are painfully unaware of how it worked, so let me clarify - it occured just the same way that it happens in third world nations all over the world to enrich the pockets of government officials. An unscrupulous company
    offers to sweeten the pot (in this case, to the Iraqi government) by raising their prices artificially. The government selects the contract of the overpriced goods. The company then discretely pays the extra money under the table to the Iraqi government. The company gets the contract, and the kickback-receiving party (the Iraqi government) manages to divert money from protected funds to their pockets.

    Many people confuse kickbacks with the accused payoffs of officials. Some payoffs have been confirmed, and resulted in convictions. Others have been proven to be false, and resulted even in successful libel suits against the accusors. Part of the problems in the list of the accused may be the source - it came from the Iraqi Oil Ministry, which at the time was run by the Iraqi National Congress (not exactly a beacon of truthful information). The payoffs tend to be small - usually a few tens to a few hundred thousand dollars (compared to the billions in kickbacks under OFF, and tens of billions in oil smuggling). The highest ranking French official accused is former interior minister Charles Pasqua and his aide Bernard Guillet. Not only has Pasqua denied all of the charges (and is actively working to clear his name), and not only would the interior minister not be prominant in a decision to go to war, but he hasn't even been in office since 1995. There are two other French former officials under investigation - Jean-Bernard Merimee and Serge Boidevaix - but they likewise had not been in office when the alleged crimes took place.

    --
    "WANTED: Sinking ship seeks rats."
  109. Re:Why the switch? by Spamalope · · Score: 1

    2) I thought 2006 was the year the American public would wake up to the way they're manipulated (can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?)

    Justified? You mean the French Government accepting bribes through the Oil for Food program, and opposing Iraq II so that the bribes would continue and not be discovered?

    I don't think manipulated sheeple ever wake up. Sometimes a better manipulator convinces them that they've been manipulated by the existing guy. The new manipulator has their best interests at heart, of course. It is similar for every countries public.

  110. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid Ohio? Allow me to be the first to say go fuck yourself. I can't help it that you are from the Hippie coast where getting fisted in your ass by another man is your idea of love. Are you just mad that we decide every election? FUCK YOU!

  111. the postman by WreckingCru · · Score: 0

    Ooh Ooh, my postman also changed to Firefox!!
    Can I get a post on /. as well?

    Seriously, can we get over this firefox-mania? It's a *nice* browser, with pros AND CONS compared to IE (I don't need to list the pros, everyone knows them. my biggest problem is how bloated it is - at times it's running at over 400mb in memory).

    The /. herd mentality has got to go.

    (Watch me get 'flame-bait', -1, 0, 'off-topic' mods for this)

    --
    If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants.
  112. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -1 Troll?

    Please MOD PARENT UP. The trollers are the ones with the lame joke. He's got a point.

  113. Re:Why the switch? by IdleTime · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder if people are "Freedom kissing" too?

    --
    If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
  114. Please note though: by weierstrass · · Score: 1

    George Bush is stupid.
    Al Gore did not invent the Internet.

    --
    my password really is 'stinkypants'
    1. Re:Please note though: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fucking moron. Sure, he didn't invent the internet. But neither did he ever say he invented it.

  115. USA rescued the Brits, not the French, in WWII by aurelian · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The French were already down. Also let's not forget that the US only entered the war after they themselves were attacked.

    (Apart from that I agree with the parent post. The anti-France stuff is just another reminder that a lot of high-school kids post to Slashdot.)

    1. Re:USA rescued the Brits, not the French, in WWII by TrevelyanL85A2 · · Score: 1

      we had an undeclared naval war with Germany to bring russia and britain the shit they needed between 1939 and 1941. So we were already involved.

  116. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Uh...Dude. France IS a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys

    Haven't you ever used google images?

  117. Re:Why the switch? by Jrabbit05 · · Score: 1

    I guess or the just couldn't stand not having the fetures.

  118. Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did it occur to any of you that just because Chirac is a bastard doesn't mean that all Frenchmen are ? Granted, he is not the only bastard in that country. Actually I'm considering moving out of France because there are many things annoying me in that country. I'd love to go to the USA. But I won't go there if it's only to get bashed all the time. Hell, I feel that french-bashing is getting a real form of xenophobia.

    Also I don't understand why France was picked to be the target of bashing in the first place. For example, with Iraq, France was far from being the only country opposing the war. In EACH of the european countries, the percentage of people opposed to the war was very high. France, with 90% opposition, was not even the champion (it was Sweden with 92%). Even UK, which participated in the war, had 68% opposition in the poll I read.

    1. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by cnerd2025 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, I'm American and I notice a "French-bashing" population here. However, it more had to do with the fact (or percieved fact) that France was very eager to sell weapons and equipment to Sadaam. Also, many Americans have stated the arrogance they faced in Paris. It is a fairly popular opinion, or at least an opinion of the loudest voices, that the French treat the US with hostility and arrogance, such as France's rigid resistance toward English. I can't exactly blame France for trying to protect its national unity, but English is indeed the language of business, thanks to the French archrival, Britain, and thus the French response, creating new "official" words for American products with English names, absolutely disgusts us. Language for the sake of national unity is one valid goal, but language for the sake of pride is just ridiculous. The US's frustration with France really stems from the fact that the US absolutely saved France's posterior in both World War I and World War II. It is said, "if not for English-speakers, French-speakers would be speaking German." That said, the US also sees room to poke fun at France for its failures in military, being only marginally successful when being led by Joan of Arc and Napoleon Bonaparte. The other American criticism of France is its outspoken criticism of the US going to war, as if the UN Security Council had to absolutely approve the war. In fact, each country is still allowed to act in its own interests; the US asked the UN, and upon denial, struck anyway. Back home, many of us, including myself, believe that WMD should never have been used as a reason for war. The US's interests were indeed the fight against radical islam, but psuedocauses were leaked out of the White House on many occasions, leading Americans and the world to believe that Bush acted for the sake of oil (which is absurd; we could simply invade Venezuela for oil) or other causes . The US really wished to blackmail Saudi Arabia and threaten Libya, Syria, and other nations sponsoring radical islamic terrorism. Everyone honestly thought that Sadaam did indeed have WMD, including the French and the Germans. You mentioned Sweden's opposition, but keep in mind that Sweden is a historically Neutral country since the Viking ages and that they were no outspoken critic, as France and Germany were. Of course, you raise a valid point about Chirac. In Germany, a new ruling coalition is much more in favor of US policy, and Chirac's slide of popularity is indicating a much more US-friendly government in France at the next election. I mentioned that I am not a Bush fan, and I am almost certain that after this term, his party will not get a reelection. Hope I provided some insight into how America feels. I don't really justify the hateful anti-French messages, but I do occasionally poke fun. :-X

    2. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The US really wished to blackmail Saudi Arabia and threaten Libya, Syria, and other nations sponsoring radical islamic terrorism. Everyone honestly thought that Sadaam did indeed have WMD, including the French and the Germans.

      Not everyone thought that Saddam had WMD. Many people in Europe thought exactly the opposite and saw where this whole thing was going.

      Fact: years have gone by and no one ever talked about WMD again. They didn't exist and everyone who believed that Saddam had WMD must admit they were wrong. I know... reality sucks. Tough luck.

      Regarding the blackmail of "nations sponsoring radical islamic terrorism"... there's only one thing to say: Iran resumed their nuclear program and nowdays speaks openly about wiping Israel from the face of the Earth.

      Nice to see the positive effects of the war on Iraq.

      Final word from a a non-American. It's unbelievable how widespread "newspeak". Nowdays you look at/hear the american media and it seems like there is no such thing as "War on Iraq". All you see is this more adequate "War on Terror". Talk about brainwashing... the republicans realy managed to spin the news. I feel sorry for you guys.

    3. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Actually, France was not eager to sell weapons/equipment to Saddam (do /France on http://bushlies.net/pages/9/index.htm). And, in case you forgot, the US sponsored Saddam's government until ~1990 and even the Taliban while the Russians were in Afghanistan. There was no radical Islam in Iraq - Saddam's government, like many dictatorships, tried to quench religious forces to maintain absolute power. France and Germany were not the only countries to oppose the Iraq war, practically every country except the US and Britain did and there were protests worldwide. Try to get some facts right - the reason a lot of people dislike the US is not anything that happened years before most of us was born but rather the fact that many people seem to have no idea about what the country is doing yet it's one of the countries that needs the most direction to do things right due to sheer size and power.

    4. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before you fly off the handle, do you know the meaning of the phrase "fact (or perceived fact)"? Sometimes I wonder if people even bother to read...

    5. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by typical · · Score: 1

      The US's frustration with France really stems from the fact that the US absolutely saved France's posterior in both World War I and World War II.

      If you ignore Britain's rather more substantial contribution to that effort.

      And if you want to look to long-past wars, you might consider the American Revolution, where France rather handily pulled America's bacon out of the fire.

      --
      Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
    6. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I assume you're talking about the Iraq war, and not the pre-1990 Saddam support and Islamic extremism. After the war there have been a lot of excuses about incorrect intelligence as leading to it. Now, we could ask about how the heck the world's best-funded, most advanced intelligence agency could make such wrong assessments that lead so quickly to disastrous and expensive consequences, but we don't have to. It turns out that the facts that there were no WMD in Iraq and that it had no links with terrorism were known to the CIA, before the Iraq war. Read through http://bushlies.net/pages/9/index.htm and take a look at the dates. Recall that the Iraq war started March 19th, 2003. If you want a really quick pointer start with the second item under "Niger Uranium and Reconstituted Nuclear Program". The cool thing is that by just saying that the intelligence was flawed they now got people to believe it.

    7. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by cnerd2025 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Britain could not stop the Germans in either World War. In fact, if the British and the French of the time had accepted Wilson's plan for peace as the Treaty of Versailles, World War II would likely never have happened. Also, the Allies were for a time losing the first World War. The American entrance in retaliation to the German provocation as well as the Zimmerman telegram (admittedly provided by the British secret service) tipped the scales of the war in favor of Allied forces, especially with a revolution and pull-out of Russia. In WWII, Germany nearly obliterated the UK, though America could have definitely learned from the British knowledge base. I don't recall, however, seeing that the British stopped the Germans from invading France in 18 days. The British seemed to buy that argument about the Ardennes forest. Ironically, Blitzkrieg was originally thought of by a French guy (and they were too proud to enact it). I also didn't see the French or the British laying down the law on the Germans after they signed the Treaty of Versailles (the US became very isolationist afterward and did not even ratify the treaty). History has all but proven that Hitler's rise stemmed from punishment of the Germans following World War I. Without the US in either World War, Britain would have put up a strong fight, but there is as good a chance the Central/Axis powers would have been victorious. As for the American Revolution, you are indeed correct. This is no small contribution, but when we returned the favor in World War I and II and then in Vietnam (after which we were deserted by the French) the French government outspokenly criticizes the US so they can sell weapons and equipment to a ruthless dictator? Also keep in mind that early in the US's history, the French provocated war on the US in several instances, such as the XYZ affair. The French simply do not have superb military gift. The British and the Americans combined make up the force to win wars, but Britain needed external man-power and equipment in World War II, especially after the air-raids by the Nazis. Britain contributing "substantially more" is outrageous; only after US involvent in both World Wars, did the Allied powers come out ahead.

    8. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      "you might consider the American Revolution, where France rather handily pulled America's bacon out of the fire."

      And we'd appreciate it a lot more if the precursors to the current french state had not, you know, chopped off the heads of all of the members of the state that provided us naval assistance.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    9. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by boule75 · · Score: 1
      Is it "soft bashing?"

      France was very eager to sell weapons and equipment to Saddam
      As any weapons producer to any oil producer. And until when? As far as we heard, even in the Washington Times, no recent French weapon system was found in Iraq, e.g. nothing had been sold after Iraq War I. Please do not mention this legend about one captured Roland 3 anti-aircraft missile launcher: the sole difference with the Roland 2 lied mainly in the software, it dated back to 1990 and was never produced (remained at prototype...).

      France's rigid resistance toward English.
      You mean you've found a field where Frogs do not surrender? But you are even wrong. You should work in our big enterprises, look at the ads, to just realise that it's plain wrong. The marketting guys and the big brass are fully converted to the "US-English rules the world" cause. And their propaganda machine fills our brains, with trash TV, boys bands and SUVs.

      creating new "official" words for American products with English names, absolutely disgusts us.
      Why? Talk of arrogance... I do concede "mél" was the silliest word crafted by the Académie Française, but the Quebecq "courriel" that was adopted since is very good. And it saves us from "mail", which is simply false but widely used for E-mail.

      the US absolutely saved France's posterior in both World War I and World War II
      Not in WW I, not at all. US help was... helpfull, paid for for most of it, late, minor in terms of military might. It was probably a great morale boost meanwhile, and God knows that matters in times of war.
      WW II. Thanks to the British, the US, the Russians. In that order. At least where the brits our ally from the start, even if their numbers in 1939-40 on French soil was well under what they had agreed. The main issue lied in France itself: stupid military doctrine, poor political elite. And the people wanted to avoid to wage another war with Germany, such were the sufferings of WW I. Many thanks anyhow to the GIs, and especially to Eisenhover.

      marginally successful when being led by Joan of Arc and Napoleon Bonaparte.
      How funny.

      its outspoken criticism of the US going to war, as if the UN Security Council had to absolutely approve the war.
      The UN was created with much US clout to help avoid wars, mind you. Especially greed driven and imperialistic ones. So, what's the issue? Do you contend the UN inspectors have called Saddam's bluff before the security council? Re-read serious accounts please.

      each country is still allowed to act in its own interests
      Not by waging wars. No. Definitely no. That's one thing many people around the world despise very much. Are you allowed to seize your neighbour's house with a gun if it is in yout interest? I doubt it.

      invade Venezuela for oil
      There was a US-sponsored coup there some time ago, remember? It failed.

      fight against radical islam
      As did Saddam in Iraq?

      The US really wished to blackmail Saudi Arabia and threaten Libya
      This I can believe. But why not by using personnal relationship with the Saudis? They are excellent as far as we know! And do you not think that Lybia was already scared? Anyway, threatenning Lybia was probably the best achievment of this conflict. It probably could have been done another way. Reagan did it another way. And there are even persistent assertions in the French military saying that US planes indeed flew over France to do it, even if France publicly ruled it out...

      everyone honestly thought that Sadaam did indeed have WMD, including the French and the Germans.
      Where have you read that except in the US press? Everyone supposed Iraq _could_ possibly have had the idea to set up new programs. Hence the UN inspectors, that steadily came back before the UN security council saying "Saddam does not prove he has no more weapons, but he cooperates better and better, and we have found nothin

      --
      I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
    10. Re:Please reply French-bashing by Chirac-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      being only marginally successful when being led by Joan of Arc and Napoleon Bonaparte.

      Napoleon was "only marginally successful"?! You must be joking!

  119. Re:In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pretty funny actually because Russia was one of the few countries not to surrender to Napoleon.

  120. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get it - if Americans dislike the French so much, why not just return the Statue of Liberty?

  121. Re:Why the switch? by HardCase · · Score: 1

    can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?

    What, are you serious? Contempt for the French has been an ongoing sport for years - just as French contempt for anything non-French has been! You mistake humor (tired, hackneyed and cliched) for hatred.

    And there are probably a million reasons to oppose the Iraq business, but I wonder if the close economic ties that France had with the previous regime in Iraq had anything to do with their opposition.

    -h-

  122. Nothing new here by Alcimedes · · Score: 1

    I've had the same contempt for the French my entire life that I have now. Iraq II had nothing to do with it thank you very much.

  123. Fascinating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What browser are the French rioters using?

  124. Re:In Other News, Ballmer... by ToasterofDOOM · · Score: 1, Funny

    Sorry, really, we surrender! Please don't Fucking Kill(TM) us!!!

    --
    I am Spartacus
  125. Re:Why the switch? by gbobeck · · Score: 2, Informative

    Concerning all of the French surrender comments, I feel obligated to quote the site http://weblog.blogads.com/comments/514_0_1_0_C/

    "World War I cost France 1,357,800 dead, 4,266,000 wounded (of whom 1.5 million were permanently maimed) and 537,000 made prisoner or missing -- exactly 73% of the 8,410,000 men mobilized, according to William Shirer in The Collapse of the Third Republic. Some context: France had 40 million citizens at the start of the war; six in ten men between the ages of eighteen and twenty-eight died or were permanently maimed."

    And further down on that page...

    "But to be fair to the French. I don't believe a national characteristic of "cowardice" exists. Aside from the pathetic surrender and weak resistance during World War II, the French have actually been quite brave in battle. They were brave in Vietnam (French Indochina), brave in World War I, they played a role in the initiation of the Franco-Prussian War, and throughout history they have been willing to fight heroically even when the odds were against them. It is true that they have had little military success in the last 150 years. But this is due to poor military strategy, faulty equipment, and general bungling, it has nothing to do with French cowardice. Of course, I still can't say much for the half hearted defense of France during World War II. But that is more of the exception than the rule."

    --
    Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
  126. Re:Why the switch? by kimvette · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    YM cheese-eating chain-smoking surrender monkeys who never bathe. :D

    Did I leave out any French stereotypes?

    (kidding, only kidding)

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  127. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, well, in Soviet Russia...you surrendered to the French!

  128. Time USA accepts the Armenian Genocide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forget your babling about such unimportant matters as the French. So I'm going to take over this topic and tell you all that you should look into what Turkey did to Armenia during the 1915 genocide and that its about time the USA accept that it happened.

  129. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  130. Re:Why the switch? by d_54321 · · Score: 1

    5) Please see points 1 and 5.

    I think meant "Please see points 1 and 4"

  131. Other ways by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
    Right now, large organisations using open source software are making a contribution.

    It may not be a financial contribution, but it's creating credibility. That's why Microsoft worked hard over Munich. Not because they cared in particular about losing Munich to Linux, but because they feared that a successful Linux implementation would create even more switchers.

  132. Nice by DarkSnake · · Score: 1

    Seems the French at least know good browsers.

  133. Re:Why the switch? by barefootgenius · · Score: 1

    1) Originality, you must be new here.
    2) No, that would mean being wrong.
    3) We/I quite like the French. Even if they did Nuke an atoll and blow up a Greenpeace boat in our waters. Americans should like the French because if they hadn't gone to war with Britain, America would probably never have been around for more than a decade.
    4) Fark = Forces Armées Royales Khmères?
    5) nasty loop that one.

    --
    /. bug #926803 - Why I can post.
  134. Yes, but no, but yes, but no, but yes, but no ... by zlata_the_goat · · Score: 1

    This post should have been modded Funny rather than Insightful. 1) The only time they kicked the Romans butts was in the "Asterix and Obelix" Comics. Just to remind you, old time Gaul was where a certain Julius Caesar made his fame and fortune, thereafter becoming a nice little playground for the Romans for several centuries. 2) By the time Charlemagne appeared on the scene (mid-700s), the Western Roman Empire was long gone (as were the Romans themselves). 3) I think a certain guy with one good eye on a boat and a "Spanish ulcer" also played part in putting paid to Napoleon's territorial ambitions. Still, at least he got to see the Sphinx. 4) Held off the Germans in WW1? And what about the other members of the Alliance- where they mere observers? Just because the French were dumber than the British in wasting the lives of their nationals (despite Hague's best efforts), doesn't mean they held off the Germans on their own. 5) Held out against the Nazis while the BEF escaped? Yes, some French soldiers were there, just like some British soldiers were, but if you have anyone to thank for the miracle of that evacuation, it would be Goering and his ego. In your last line, you say that "on continental Europe, only France stood against the Axis". Absolute tosh! Most countries had resistance networks, just like the French. As a matter of fact, some of them, like the partisans under Tito actually managed to do a decent job of fighting against the Germans. Bleh!

  135. In other news... by DorkusMasterus · · Score: 1

    The entire cast of Friends declared their undying support for Linux.

    Really, sure, it's cool, but does is this really worthy of calling "news?" There are many people using Firefox. It's growing, especially with the new marketing campaign as well as the new version out. It's a great browser. But I saw the headline and really thought "who cares?"

    If there's an "insensitivity" mod, feel free to mod me down for it. :)

  136. Re:Why the switch? by aaronl · · Score: 1

    The quote that I found while searching says:

    1534 Jul 24, Jacques Cartier landed in Canada and claimed it for France. Jacques Cartier while probing for a northern route to Asia visited Labrador and said: "Fit only for wild beasts... This must be the land God gave to Cain." [see May 10]
            (NG, V184, No. 4, 10/1993, p. 4)(MC, 7/24/02)

    1534 May 10, Jacques Cartier reached Newfoundland.
            (CFA, '96, p.46)

    (Credit to http://timelines.ws/)

    And yes, there definitely could be a few jokes about poutain, but you'd have to know some French to really get it. ;-)

  137. MOD PARENT UP by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    Seriously. It's about time someone challenges the propaganda surrounding OFF.

  138. Re:Mod me down... by EnsilZah · · Score: 1

    Also, every tautology is a tautology.

  139. MOD PARENT UP! by The_DoubleU · · Score: 1

    Mozilla Firefox just sounds better with a fake french accent than Internet Explorer does.

    Now that one is so much better then the standard french joke around here, and nice placed in context.
    Go slashdot we can do it!

    --
    What power has law where only money rules.
  140. french opposition to war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, france opposed the war because of the French Military-Industrial complex. Did you miss the fact that the Iraqi airforce (when it existed) was made up French Mirage's? Or that if sanctions ended, it would be french oil companies set to make billions from Iraqi (and Iranian oil)?

    In addition to being a bunch of CESMs, they have just as much corporate influence as the US does. Don't pretend they opposed the war on some hippy peace loving principles. Hussein was practically an ally of theirs.

    1. Re:french opposition to war by boule75 · · Score: 1

      The reasons why Chirac and France as a whole opposed Iraq II war was stated clearly and must be understood at the first degree, and not by dubious second guessing :
      - the UN weapon inspectors had found nothing justifying a second war at the time Bush declared Iraq a clear and current threat.
      - and to quote - and translate it accurately - Chirac : "this region does not need another war".

      He, we, were goddam _right_.

      --
      I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
    2. Re:french opposition to war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, Rummies' chummy Saddam a French ally? I guess we've come full circle now, we must all be on the same side!

  141. Re:Why the switch? by roard · · Score: 1
    Personally, I really started to dislike the French as a whole after a trip to Europe. Spaniards, Enlgishmen, Germans, and Italians were all so much nicer than the French. It seemed like the French looked down their noses at us. The Germans seemed a little distant, but that is just how Germans are. I think many French people really think they are better than Americans, and probably everyone else. My wife had the same impression after a recent trip to Paris.

    You know, don't mix Parisians and the rest of the country -- Parisians have that bad (sometimes justified) reputation as rude and snob people even in France ;-)

    Of course, with the recent tensions between US and France, some stupid people can be ruder than usual -- stupidity is sadly international, as those freedom fries thing proved it.

  142. WWII by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's amazing that the people who whine that we saved France in WWII so conveniently forget that Soviet Russia saved our asses in that same war... If it wasn't for the 20 million Russians who died fighting Hitler, who knows how much more bloody that war would have been for Americans.

    1. Re:WWII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's amazing that the people who whine that we saved France in WWII so conveniently forget that Soviet Russia saved our asses in that same war... If it wasn't for the 20 million Russians who died fighting Hitler, who knows how much more bloody that war would have been for Americans.

      That's why, after 40 years of Cold War, we never changed the name of Russian salad dressing. The French have yet to earn that respect.

    2. Re:WWII by TrevelyanL85A2 · · Score: 1, Troll

      Part of that 20 million also died from the Russian's own hand for political crimes....

    3. Re:WWII by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Hmm, you just can't give these guys some credit can't you? It wasn't the nazis, the Soviet assassins killed all their people during WWII. To do what, blame the nazis? Oh, come on...

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    4. Re:WWII by susano_otter · · Score: 1

      If it wasn't for the fact that Stalin started out AS HITLER'S ALLY, and ONLY SWITCHED SIDES AFTER HITLER BETRAYED HIM, and then spent the rest of the war whining about how England and America weren't risking enough to save his sorry ass, I'd totally take your analysis seriously.

      Stalin was wholly complicit in Hitler's agression against Czechoslovakia, Poland, and France, which means that in a very real way WORLD WAR TWO WAS TO A LARGE EXTENT STALIN'S DOING.

      The way I see it, by the time the war was over, Russia was quits with us. They contributed immensely to the pain and suffering of Europe in that war, and paid for it with immense pain and suffering of their own. If they'd left it at that, I'd call it even and neither give them credit for helping us win a war they'd helped to start against us, nor hold a grudge because they helped start a war against us they then helped us win.

      But they didn't leave it at that, did they? Indeed, the whole purpose of Stalin's treaty with Hitler was to reap vast rewards in Eastern Europe. When Stalin switched sides halfway through the war, it wasn't to help us save the world from totalitarianism. Rather, it was to achieve the very totalitarian goals his ersthwile ally was trying to backstab him over.

      It was opportunistic, disgusting, and totally undeserving of any praise or credit.

      I also don't give medals to bank robbers for cooperating with the authorities just long enough to hork the loot anyway.

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    5. Re:WWII by evilNomad · · Score: 1

      "Stalin was wholly complicit in Hitler's agression against Czechoslovakia, Poland, and France, which means that in a very real way WORLD WAR TWO WAS TO A LARGE EXTENT STALIN'S DOING." And where exactly was the USA when this happend? Oh they too ignored it, therefore, by your logic, the 2nd world war is to a large extent the USA's doing, how about that?

    6. Re:WWII by dhakbar · · Score: 1

      In that day and age, pressuring a nation on the other side of the world militarily wasn't as seemingly trivial as it is today. Stalin was irresponsible in dealing with an emerging problem in his own back yard (Europe). The USA was trying to stay out of the nutty problems the Europeans were creating as long as possible, but the opportunities were too great to keep us out of the war.

    7. Re:WWII by susano_otter · · Score: 1

      Roosevelt did not sign a secret treaty with Hitler, giving him a free hand in Western Europe in exchange for favorable consideration of his plans for expansion in Eastern Europe. Stalin did.

      By the same token, Truman did not exploit the situation at the end of the war to subjugate and oppress the neutral and helpless nations ravaged by the war. Stalin did.

      Where was America? On the other side of the world, minding its own business. Sort of. The President was unconstitutionally supporting Britain against the Nazis, and some private businesses were doing business with the Nazi regime, at least early on in the war.

      Russia, meanwhile, was actively colluding with Nazi Germany to as a convenient springboard their own dreams of world domination.

      America left France and Japan long before the Soviet Union left Czechoslovakia and Poland.

      So much for moral relativism.

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    8. Re:WWII by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, we spent a lot of time and money building a super weapon to take out germany. We called it the Atomic Bomb. Perhaps you've heard of it.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    9. Re:WWII by TrevelyanL85A2 · · Score: 1

      the nazis killed a lot yes, but so did the soviets for soldiers deserting, political opponents, etc.

    10. Re:WWII by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Can you please point to the part of my post that said Russia's actions were not opportunistic? It doesn't make the facts any different. My point was not to praise or give credit to the Russians for anything; rather it was to call attention to how bizarre and hypocritical this whole silly who-saved-who-in-world-war-two debate is.

    11. Re:WWII by dominion · · Score: 1

      Roosevelt did not sign a secret treaty with Hitler, giving him a free hand in Western Europe in exchange for favorable consideration of his plans for expansion in Eastern Europe. Stalin did.

      Stalin was a fucker. But we still owe the Russian people a thank you for winning WW2 for us, whether or not Stalin had to be pushed into it by Hitler breaking their treaty, the greatest sacrifice still came from the Russians.

    12. Re:WWII by susano_otter · · Score: 1

      I think our difference on this issue stems from the fact that I don't see the Russian contribution as a generous sacrifice for the cause of freedom and the overthrow of horrible totalitarian regimes.

      Rather, I see it as a down payment on Stalin's dreams of empire. Those Russians died first and foremost to save their motherland, and secondly to realize their leader's own totalitiarian goals.

      Roosevelt sent Americans to die in that war in order to achieve a free Europe. Stalin sent Russians to die in that war in order to achieve a Europe under joint Nazi and Soviet rule.

      A man looses a rabid dog in his neighbor's yard as part of some bizarre scheme to gain advantage in some proptery boundary dispute. Then, when the dog digs under the fence in his own yard, he sends out his son to deal with it, and the son is killed by the dog. While his son is distracting the dog, the man starts berating his other neighbors for not rushing to help save his family from the dog. Finally, his other neighbors arrive and put the dog down before it can break into more yards and kill more people. Some of the neighbors die, as well.

      Fifty years later, some idiot comes along and says we should thank that man for bravely sacrificihg his son to keep the dog occupied long enough for the neighborhood to put it down.

      This is an allegory, of course. The rabid dog represents Hitler and Nazi Germany. The man who set it loose represents Stalin. The first neighbor represents Western Europe. The other neighbors represent the Allies. And the idiot represents you.

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  143. Re:Why the switch? by dancingmad · · Score: 1

    After all, it's not like leaders in democracies who act contrary to the will of 75% of their populace on major issues tend to have trouble getting reelected.

    Uh, this is the act situation Japanese PM Koizumi found himself in.

    He got re-elected just fine, despite leading Japan into a war 75%+ of its populace didn't want to get into.

    --
    "There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
  144. In other news... by HockeyPuck · · Score: 1

    Inspector Clouseau has replaced the dinosaur as the official FireFox French Police Edition Mascot.

  145. Re:Why the switch? by maxume · · Score: 1

    Not from the coast. From the great state just a bit to the north of flat ol' Ohio. Haha, stupid Ohio.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  146. Re:Why the switch? by secolactico · · Score: 1

    Nitpick: muslim is not a race. Your point is valid, tho.

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+mus lim&btnG=Google+Search

    --
    No sig
  147. Quote from Gendarme Commander by commodoresloat · · Score: 0

    "We find zat ze browser le 'Fire fox' combined with le "open office org" provides ze police with ze web-browsing et productivity tools necessary to put down riots in Muslim neighborhoods in a manner zat is both extensible and, uuhh, how you say? ruthless."

  148. sauce pour l'oie by hey! · · Score: 1

    (1) Cheese eating. When I invite business associates out to dinner here in the US at a typical chain like Chillis, the thing they're sure to remark on is the enormous amount of cheese in the American diet. I correct them and tell them it isn't cheese, it's "Pasteurized Cheese Food Product".

    (2) Surrender monkeying. Not the American way I agree. Declare victory and get the hell out is more like it.

    Conclusion: we're not that different from the French. Just fonder of artificial.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  149. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't worry about it dude, the French hate the Yanks anyway. And I mean hate. Not like the grudging respect we (the English) enjoy. I know. I live in France, and have done for more than a decade now.

    You shouldn't have flattened Caen really, that pissed them off no end.

  150. Ah, no. What really happened: by Nice2Cats · · Score: 1, Informative
    Seriously kicked the Romans Butts many times as Galacia.

    But in the end, lost. Germans slaughtered the Romans in the Teuteburg Forest, kept their independence. The French lost their language -- modern French is mutilated Latin -- and the good things about French cooking were introduced by the Romans.

    Did so again under Charlemange.

    Whose capital was in Aachen, Germany -- the empire was as much German as it was French.

    Kicked the English's butts under William the conqueror.

    Er, no. The Normans kicked English ass, in other words, those parts of France that were of Scandinavien decent. So, the Vikings kicked French ass, and the children of the Vikings invaded England.

    Kicked the English's butts again several times during the 100 years war.

    Now, this one is downright silly. The English owned half of France for most of that war, and the Battle of Poitiers was one of the worst military defeats in history. The French even let the English capture their king! Then, when Joan of Arc comes to rescue them, the French burn her at the stake.

    Supported the rebels during the American Revolution.

    Which, from their point of view, was a really, really stupid move because the American influence on France helped pave the way for the French Revolution.

    You're missing an entry here: Bungled their Revolution, thereby giving democracy a bad reputation in Europe that would remain for more than 100 years.

    Nearly united europe during the napoleonic wars (then foolishly tried to invade Russia during the winter).

    This one is pretty sick -- this is sort of like saying the Nazis nearly united Europe (note: I am not comparing Nazi war crimes to what Napoleon did). Conquest doesn't count as unification. Well, unless you win, of course...but there we are again, right?

    Held off the german forces in WW I

    And afterwards made a point of humiliating Germany so badly that it didn't take much for the Germans to really want to get them. Technically you are right, but still not France's finest hour.

    When invaded by germany in WW II, held out just long enough for the British Expiditionary force to sail from Dunkirk.

    This one, again, is downright silly. Compared to how the Dutch and the Norwegeans fought, the French rolled over and played dead. For every Frenchman in the Resistance, there was one happily supporting the Nazis. The French spent the time before the war telling themselves how great they were instead of paying attention to military advances.

    You forgot: Lost badly against Prussia. Created a slaughter in Algeria. Lost a war in Indochina (but then, who hasn't).

    Now, strangely enough I actually agree with the original poster that French bashing is getting sort of old, and their opposition to the Second Gulf War turned out to be very much the right choice. They said there were no WMD, and they were right, and we were wrong, and now our kids are dying in Iraq for a lie, and their kids aren't. Chalk this one up for the French.

    But that does not mean that we need to pretend that French military history is anything other than a fiasco all the way through. The did good things in literature, had some great scientists, some people even like their food. But great fighters, no. Those were one country further east.

    1. Re:Ah, no. What really happened: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Gauls spoke a Celtic language and didn't even get a centralized government, but because they were defeated by the Romans they are counted as French.

      On the other side, William the Conqueror was born in France, spoke French, etc., but because he kicked some English ass he really is a displaced viking, not French.

      Let's talk about double standards...

    2. Re:Ah, no. What really happened: by leomekenkamp · · Score: 1

      It is kind of sad when one of the most informative (and factual accurate) posts in this thread does not reach +5, and one response even calls on mods to mod it into oblivion.

      You could also have mentioned that William would probably never have won if the English had not just returned from a bloody fight (which they won) before finding themselves in battle again against the Normans. Ah well, at least it left the world with a nice little tapesty :-).

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
    3. Re:Ah, no. What really happened: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know nothing of the French history and the Joan of Arc thing prove it badly.

      Joac of Arc is like Jesus, nothing can prove she is real.

    4. Re:Ah, no. What really happened: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This one, again, is downright silly. Compared to how the Dutch and the Norwegeans fought, the French rolled over and played dead. For every Frenchman in the Resistance, there was one happily supporting the Nazis. The French spent the time before the war telling themselves how great they were instead of paying attention to military advances."

      FUCK YOU. Really, fuck you. How can you say that when you ignore the effect of WW1 on France ? we lost like the majority of our young male population. When we saw a second world war coming when were thinking of what we lived in the first. Our political party before WW2 were against military development, thinking we could build a peaceful Europe. They were wrong.

      No country in Europe, (except Russia) knew something so horrible like what our country saw in WW1. There's reasons the France don't wanted to enter the Second BloodBath.
      WW1 is ugly. See some videos from that time.
      Bah, Hitler himself were a victim from this war.

  151. Re:Why the switch? by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 1
    I'd call it 'social narcissism', but why split hairs?

    Anyway, in response to:

    can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?
    I'd have to say "yes, but for unrelated reasons."
    --
    "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
  152. Re:Why the switch? by maxume · · Score: 1

    1). I'll rephrase. Oil for food was a *major* reason France-the-country opposed the war in Iraq. I'm not sure France-the-people were real worried about the oil.

    2). You really think French opposition to the war would put trade with the U.S. at risk? Trade with right wing nuts maybe, but not the U.S. in general.

    3). I'm not talking about the oil for food scandal, I'm talking about the oil. As long as it got its oil, France was happy to let Iraq go on being what it was.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  153. Re:Why the switch? by gnuyarlathotep · · Score: 1

    No kidding. Just because Charles de Gaulle was a jackass is no reason to insult all French people. Without France's help the US would have never won our Revolutionary War. The French people gave us the Statue of Liberty which is in my opinion the greatest gift from one people in a country to those in another in the history of civilization.
            I hope the world would not blame all of us for W being a jack ass nor think we are all like him. I am an old fashioned conservative and I hate the SOB. Lets not keep blaming our first ally for one jerky leader.

  154. I love it, but can Firefox keep up... by TheBrutalTruth · · Score: 0
    When they start running?

    I know, TROLL me. But I couldn't resist.

    --
    Enlightenment is a pipe dream. So where's the pipe?
  155. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn you and your french facts :) (sarcasm). *I* still appreciate the fact that the US owes it's existance to France (granted, it was to screw the British). And I also appreciate the large conspicuous world famous statue that the people of France gave to the people of the US.

    Plus, I like french fries.

  156. Statue of Liberty returned? by kill_-9 · · Score: 1
    On Thursday January 05 2006, IAAP wrote:
    During the whole "Freedom Fries" French hating horseshit that was happening a couple of years ago just because the French asserted themselves.

    And I was waiting for the Americans to dismantle their Statue of Liberty and send it back to the French.......
  157. Re:Why the switch? by aichpvee · · Score: 1
    2) I thought 2006 was the year the American public would wake up to the way they're manipulated (can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?)

    Yes, there's a long history of cheese eating, surrender monkey jokes in America. You must be new here.

    --
    The Farewell Tour II
  158. Russia would have lost without US ... by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

    If it wasn't for the 20 million Russians who died fighting Hitler, who knows how much more bloody that war would have been for Americans.

    If it were not for the US even more Russians would have died *and* they probably would have lost the war as well. The US and Russia most likely saved each other, it was mutual. Without US supplies and weapons Russia probably would not have prevailed, the Germans may very well have pushed them over the Urals and set up an effective defense of the mountain passes to prevent their return. In turn this would have freed many troops for the western front and the success of an allied invasion of the continent becomes very questionable. Hollywood to the contrary, it seems as though the allied victory in the west was not a sure thing. Alternatively without the US an invasion of the continent becomes highly unlikely and German troops could have been redeployed from the west to the eastern front to face the Russians.

    Victory in Europe was a complicated collaboration between the US, Russia, Britain, etc. Make any significant change and the outcome would probably be terribly different.

  159. Well that's good enough for me. by trailerparkcassanova · · Score: 1

    I think I'll switch to Firefox.

  160. mnb Re:Firefox Extension To Allow Chatting Real Ti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    XPI is a zip file idiot. With standard files inside.

  161. Re:Why the switch? by dwarfking · · Score: 1

    Actually I already had contempt for the French, for a number of reasons.

    1) During the Reagan years they refused to allow our planes from England to overfly France when on the bombing run to Libya. (Oh boy, I know the flames will start now mentioning Reagan)
    2) They have this incessant demand that the French language be above all others. I might be mistaken, but I thought French was supposed to be the official language of the UN.
    3) The fact is the US has bailed their butts out in two world wars and they are still arrogant (not that we aren't, but I have no problem with conceit if you can back it up).
    4) Ever been a tourist in France and tried to speak the language (poorly)? The get rude. At least when I was in Germany and tried speaking German, the waitresses and store clerks might have laughed at my attempts, but they were kind enough to switch to English and help me understand my linguistic mistakes.

    Frankly, the only thing I credit France with was aiding a young United States in it's war of independence against the British. But that was really more a situation of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

  162. it depends on the users by petermgreen · · Score: 1

    for a public lab what you describe would be fine

    for a situation where people are forced to use one setup like it or not it would also work.

    and same for a situation where you can get away with riding roughshod over users setups again fine.

    the issue the gp was asking about was how to upgrade firefox remotely whilst preserving user settings.

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    1. Re:it depends on the users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heh, the response was probably to If the French military deployed it to 100000 people [...] maybe they just don't know about the upgrade hell yet?

      Anyways, netinstall/netrestore would work nicely, because future FF is supposed to be backwards-compatible: old user profiles will work with new FF releases. Since 1.5 came out, all you need to do is back up user profile, wipe the machine, restore the image(with new FireFox and all), then copy the profile back!

      All this is besides the point, however. How many bookmarks/plugins does a police clerk need anyway? Considering all the data is stored centrally on servers, wiping/cleaning/reloading hard disks is the right thing to do. Include all the plugins/default setup on the image before deploying...

      If anything, constant fear of reboot/reimage will teach the [l]users the correct operating procedures: 1) its not YOUR computer, its the ADMIN's/Company's computer, 2)check in all work before you leave 3) keep in touch with your buddies and surf porn/dot on your own time and equipment!

      Another good user education idea is a custom screensaver: kicks in after 10 mins if workstation is unlocked. After 5 more minutes, sends the HR a notice that the user is in violation of security policies...

      Damn, BOFH should take a leaf outta my book, ya'll oughtta know.

      On a personal note, Opera is so much better than FireFox... Not open-source though.

  163. Adsense.. by JLS-UK · · Score: 1

    Do you think the IT guy signed up to adsense for the $1 per install before starting the rollout?

  164. Re:Why the switch? by Richard+Dick+Head · · Score: 1

    ... can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?

    Yes.

    In summer 1998 some French exchange studnets were staying at a friends house. They had funny accents, ate jam sandwiches and smoked alot, but they seemed okay. At the end of the summer, I went along with my friend to send them off, and before they boarded the airplane, one of them shouted "Fuck America!" to the people in the terminal, and his cohorts repeated the sentiment after him. Then, I thought to myself, "That was really....French"

  165. Re:Why the switch? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1
    1) How can you claim that it had nothing to do with 75% of the French public opposing the invasion? After all, it's not like leaders in democracies who act contrary to the will of 75% of their populace on major issues tend to have trouble getting reelected.

    The French citizenry is no more or less suceptible to government manipulation than any other country, including the US. If it is fashionable to 'dislike' the US, so that some may profit, then that is what they will push.

    If, OTOH, it was profitable to 'like' the US, then you would have heard cries of "NATO" "WWII Allies" "We must keep western civilization together!"

    As far as France (and Russia) being major trading partners with Iraq....last I heard, the US doesn't sell Mirage or MiG jets. Or T-72 taanks. Or spare parts for same.

  166. Re:Why the switch? by narkosys · · Score: 1

    actually it's poutine. putain is french for whore.

    N

    --
    seems to have misplaced his .sig
  167. PC competition for "I-Minor" MAC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When Stephen Job announced his "I-Minor" McIntosh last year, it really caught my eye. Wanting to buy or build a small computer for my already cramped breakfast bar, I started pricing out similar hardware. The results startled me. Most of the configurations I found cost more than the humble US$499 of the "I-Minor", often much more. To match price with MAC I had to configure with a much bigger shuttle-style case.

    So here's my question. What computers are currently on the market to compete with this? When my wife asks for the "cute little I-Minor McIntosh with dotMax Tigger OS® that MAC just invented", what PC can I buy instead?

  168. Mod parent into oblivion by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · · Score: 1

    This won't stand. Speaking as one of those descendants of Normans, I am very proud of my French ancestry. As for the rest of your tired, old, tedious, racist rant, here is an apt rebuttal. The attention of the audience is drawn in particular to the terms "ungrateful", and "ignorant", both of which apply fully in their rich buttery goodness to you, you troll.

  169. Re:Why the switch? by gazpa · · Score: 0

    What about Spain? I'm spanish. Our govern helped USA in Irak sending troops, with 75%...no! near 85% of the Spanish public opposing the invasion!!!
    Why we... they send troops? Oil.... no. Inversions.... no. Politically... they lost in the next ellections. WTF! Oh yes! Aznar or in Bush's words, Ansar, now works in USA, under the protection of Bush clan.

    There are no reasons for war!

  170. Not Funny by EnderWiggin99 · · Score: 1

    Less people sitting means invariably more people walking. More people walking means more people need more shoes, more often. Demand goes up, supply goes up. Q&A on the shoes drops as volume increases. Minimum wage stays the same, as poor schmucks trod the streets of metropolitan American cities looking for work to feed their families.

    Shoes become the only business model that makes sense, what with all of the layoffs and such. It remains the only self-sustaining business in America, while everything else dies a slow and outsourced death.

    1. Re:Not Funny by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Agreed, IF outsourcing and open sourcing goes unchecked, it will lead to a situation where supporting software is the only financially sound business decision and developing software is a waste of resources.

      It's one of the reasons why I don't mind working outside of the IT industry. Most of my app dev career has been spent in non-IT companies writing custom apps for different business systems. The environments and benefits are different, but there's a good amount of job security (can out source over seas for apps that require close communication with the users, and can't open source company sensitive processes.)

      So instead of losing my seat and buying shoes, I'll work for the shoe company on shoe tracking software ;)

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  171. Obviously no problems with winmail.dat/TNEF how so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We are close to chucking thunderbird since lots of other sites send outlook express winmail.dat attachments which it cannot read without jumping some odd hoops. Obviously the French do not understand this or they would not be installing thunderbird at all.

    Even though it is a 'dumb non-standard attachment', it is a common 'dumb non-standard attachment' and should be handled. No idea why it isn't.

  172. Sigh. by Nice2Cats · · Score: 1
    Please calm down an actually read what I wrote and what I was writing it as a reply to. The first post was an pro-French rant that was ignoring certain historical truths (such as the Hundred Year's War) that needed correcting because they were simply wrong. It also left out a lot of things like Algeria and Indochina, which is sort of like writing U.S. military history without mentioning Vietnam.

    I am in fact very grateful for the French support for the American Revolution, and the Louisiana Purchase, and a whole host of other things that France did for the United States. This does not change the fact that they were, from a French point of view, unbelievably stupid. Helping the Colonies against the British doomed French monarchy, and giving away the whole center part of the continental USA is was even more short-sighted than the Russians selling Alaska.

    The definition of when the Normandy became French is a bit more tricky than you make it seem. At the time, they were not considered French, and later, they were technically part of England, which was what the Hundred Year's War was all about. The only view that makes sense is looking at what the people thought at the time, not what we think of them being today. For the record, if you have Norman blood, we share ancestors, which makes your (rather offense) claim of rascism a bit silly. For all you know, I might be sitting in Quebec.

    Your link is interesting, but one-sided, too. For example, Joan of Arc was of course as great as they come, but this is not the point. The point is what happened to her once she had been used. The point is also not if the French could have won against the Wehrmacht -- as your text correctly points out and I never disputed, nobody could have, and in the end it took a Russian winter and 20 million dead Soviets. The question here was how hard they tried, which is why I referred to the Netherlands and Norway. Both punched far above their weight. France didn't.

    Oh, and one more thing: Don't take this stuff personally.

  173. Why all the jokes about France surrendering? by Al_Maverick · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I mean, they dont have a brilliant history, but no one has. And I mean no one. Not even the USA. Most of the USA victories were against small Latinamerican or other third world countries, or fighting backed by a coalition AND with their homeland not being bombed day and night, like England, for instance. Indeed, the joke we make here when a war starts is that ITALY surrendered, and Switzerland declared itself neutral, no matter where that war is. Italy has had a much worse record in the last couple hundred of years. And Switzerland, well, that's a clear case of lack of commitment for anything but money.

  174. Re:In Other News, Ballmer... by Cheapy · · Score: 1

    Heck, and he probably could do it too!

    --
    Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
  175. Re:Why the switch? by Rei · · Score: 1

    Incorrect. Japan has never had the level of opposition to troop deployment that most European countries had. Interestingly enough, it largely depends on the wording of the poll - most Japanese disapproved of the war, but supported sending the SDF for humanitarian reasons.

    --
    "WANTED: Sinking ship seeks rats."
  176. Re:Why the switch? by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I seem to recall Americans having contempt for the French [continuously over half a century] before their opposition to the invasion of Iraq, what exactly leads you to believe that we were manipulated into it in any way? I tend to think it's the natural result of them being the only nation with a higher prevalence of ignorant, arrogant jackasses than us. America's supposed to have the highest pretentious idiot population, ya silly French folk, quit showing us up!

    --
    ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
  177. Re:Why the switch? by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

    I hear you except for the second point. What exactly makes you think that US companies would give up profitable business arrangements in France just because we didn't have troops in the same war? Hello, nation designed by businessmen calling, we'd like to leave a message for reality, tell him to call us back when he gets back in.

    --
    ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
  178. Smarmy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "..so it seems like the French Military Police are enjoying the success of open source."

    Something about this bugs me. I know it's subtle, but construing the adoption of open source as riding someone else's wave doesn't encourage more people to join the party.

  179. Re:Why the switch? by aaronl · · Score: 1

    There are reasons for war, but they are usually not good enough reasons. In the case of Iraq, they are not definitely not good enough. Aiding a rebellion/revolution is very different from helping fight in the same. For example, the US has a history in supplying anyone willing to pay; this is acceptable. The US has a history of committing troops to foreign civil wars; this is not acceptable.

    You go to war when the loss of life helps to guarantee the lives of more than you may lose. You go to war when you feel the cause is worthy of loss of life. I disagree with forcing people to fight in a war that they don't believe in. This is why I am incredibly opposed to any form of draft or conscription. There were good reasons for the US Revolution and the US Civil War, for example.

    You don't go to war because you dislike a country, a leader, or a government, and you certainly don't go to war for profit. All of those things are examples of reasons that are not good enough. I am willing to fight for my countrymen and for my freedom, but I'm not willing to put my life on the line for someone in another country that isn't willing to do the same, and I'm certainly not willing to kill for that. Some people are willing, and power to them to be free to exercise that will. Likewise, power to people that object and speak out about others doing that.

    In the case of the Iraqi conflict, part of that is due to terrorism, a large part is due to Hussein double-crossing the US, and another large part is for oil. I'd say that the US government is playing the humanitarian, but seeking profit and revenge. It had justification through the UN resolution on Iraq, for what that's worth, so it was no illegal action, as many purport. I'd hold that it is unconstitutional for the US Federal government to take the action, but it was legal under UN rules, and that's what people tend to talk about.

    There is a lot of corruption, but look for it in the places that it actually lies. If you look at the history the Western world has with Iraq, and with the history that the US has there, in particular, you find all that you need.

  180. Porno sites now supporting Firefox by Animats · · Score: 1
    PlatinumBucks, the micropayment system for porno sites, is now supporting Firefox. "After much webmaster demand, we are pleased to announce that Platinum Bucks is now FireFox compatible! Our team at Platinum Bucks always keep up with growing trends in technology to meet webmaster needs, especially the increased move from Internet Explorer to FireFox and have worked hard to make our program and stats page fully compatible with FireFox."

    Visit Platinum Bucks at booth 1115 at Internext, the trade show for porno sites. Tomorrow through Sunday at the Venetian in Las Vegas.

    It's been conventional wisdom in the porno site business that supporting IE was good enough. The customer base for porno sites is not tech-savvy. Apparently Firefox has now achieved enough market share to change that.

  181. Entity France escaped Unimatrix 1! by Bushido+Hacks · · Score: 1

    Vive le Resistance!
    Finally, France has changed alot since the riots. They seem to be getting their act togeather instead of letting us English-speaking people make fun of them. Seriously, this is a positive thing.

    --
    The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
    1. Re:Entity France escaped Unimatrix 1! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same "violent youth" that were burning cars in the riots are now asking for vote cards they had ignored before. They seem now quite interested in making themselves heard in other ways than with fire and violence. But it did not appear in CNN or Fox News. Or did it ?

      As for letting some "english-people" making fun of us, well... While it is quite boring, it is something most french will politely smile about. I mean: A dimwit tells you you're stupid. Would you believe him?

  182. "Miracle" on Dunkirk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just for your information and education, the
    so called miracle of Dunkirk had nothing to do
    with the French. Check you history books.

    HITLER ORDERED HIS TROOPS TO LET THE BRITS GO!

  183. Get some statistics by Epeeist · · Score: 1

    > Many brave French citizens died resisting the Nazis. Unfortunately, just as many were assisting the Nazis. The rest were just ducking for cover.

    In WWII the French lost 212,000 military personnel and 267,000 civilians. In the whole of the war in Europe the USA lost 131,000 military personnel. In the whole of the ward they lost 11,000 civilians.

    Even in your despisement of the French you ought to use some facts in your argument.

    And as has been said in other posts, it was the USSR that saved Europe. America, as in WW1, was late into the war. It only joined the war when it was attacked. Previously it had been selling dysfunctional destroyers to the allies and extracting territory in payment.

  184. Re:Why the switch? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

    It's not just French. For instance, being Australian, I notice that every time Australia is mentioned in a story, the same convict, crocodile and Simpsons' toilet jokes are rolled out, and duly modded as "insightful" and "funny". And Indians of course get all the "outsourcing" gibes. Then Americans wonder why they're not universally loved. "They hate us because we're free." No, we hate you because you piss on the world. (Regardless, some of my best friends are American....)

  185. Re:Why the switch? by Suriken · · Score: 1

    Damn Frenchies, blowing up my boat.

    --
    My Mommy says smoking kills. Oh, is your Mommy a doctor? No. A scientific researcher of some kind? No. Well then sh
  186. [OT] The 90% of the Spanish public opposing the... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1) How can you claim that it had nothing to do with 75% of the French public opposing the invasion? After all, it's not like leaders in democracies who act contrary to the will of 75% of their populace on major issues tend to have trouble getting reelected.

    Here in Spain 90% of us were against that war of lies but our _ex_ president Aznar thoought we had to go to that oil war in order to get his photo with his beloved Bush.
    That, and the 48 h. of censorship of information about the terrorist attack in Madrid is why he was not reelected, not the attack itself.

  187. Re:Why the switch? by Joey7F · · Score: 2, Funny

    Probably, but they aren't reading these comments ;)

    --Joey

  188. Why do you have so much anger against us ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey mates,
    Couldn't we just being friends speaking frankly, not trying to bash each other all the time ? I'm French and I can tell you we have nothing against USA, we are thankful for your help during history (WW2...) and we would to the same for you if the same would happen to you ! We are just developed countries that are in a competition on a lot of points (economy, political influence, ...) : competition is a good thing for all of us to go ahead.
    For the IrakII we weren't ok with G.Bush point of view and we just told it. Whats wrong with that ? Why rename your fries for that ?
    We are different, let's try to talk and understand each other : we all have to learn from our differencies !
    I'll be happy to invite some of you to drink some beers to try to understand you better, so If you pass near Paris or Strasbourg in France just drop me a mail !

    Cheers,
    Jean-Noël (sorry for the anomymous coward, I have no account on /. !)

    PS : You can thank Ted Stanger as he really help us to better understand you :)

  189. Re:Why the switch? by ThinWhiteDuke · · Score: 1

    According to the French Ambassador in the US, France accounted for only 8% of oil purchases under OFF. The biggest recipient of Iraqi oil under OFF was the US which purchased 44% of OFF oil. Granted, he's not exactly neutral in this, yet I can't find any "official sounding" sources stating otherwise (no, O'Reilly and Coulter don't count)

    Iraq never was a BIG business partner of France. They bought a nuclear plant and some fighter aircrafts in the 80's when they were the West's ally against Iran. That's it. This whole portraying of France as a sinister backer of despots has very little to do with facts and a lot to do with squelching dissenting voices.

    --

    It would be nice to be sure of anything the way some people are of everything.
  190. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. OMG! They didn't surrender to REAGAN! Bastards!
    2. That IS a bit annoying. How long will you put up with people speaking anything but english around you?
    3. No, you haven't bailed anyone's butt out. You decided, after much deliberation, to finally join in both world wars long after French, English, German and Russian soldiers started dying en masse. You have provided much needed assistance to the allies, this is certainly true. The world will get around thanking the US for its dead soldiers once we finish thanking the Russians for theirs.
    4. Yes and I pick up the language as I go, since many french people don't speak english at all. French is, after all, a beautiful language which the French are quite proud of. Ever consider what a french person with no english skills (and no intention of learning) would have to go through on a US trip? English is a world language, true, but dude. You're SO spoiled.

  191. Some perspective by ThinWhiteDuke · · Score: 1

    No, we paid that debt in WWI. "On the 4th of July [1917], the 2nd Battalion, 16th Infantry (2-16), paraded through the streets of Paris to bolster the sagging French spirits.

    Meanwhile, French and British soldiers were being slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands in the trenches. Luckily for the US, Lafayette did a little more than parading through the streets of Yorktown to bolster the sagging American spirit. He and his troops actually fought and won the actual battle.

    Listen, it was nice of the US to join WWI, but let's not blow this out of proportions. Google for WWI casualties. The first result gives the following numbers : France 1,359,000 dead; Britain 658,700 dead; US 58,480 dead. WWI was a blood bath. France lost more soldiers in those 4 years than the US lost in its whole history.

    If you visit France one day, try a little experiment. Choose any random village in the countryside, 500 souls or so. Somewhere, between the town hall and the church, you'll find a monument to the dead of WWI. Now count the names. You'll never find a place with less than 50 dead. And that does not include the wounded. 1,359,000 dead and 4,200,000 wounded out of a total population of maybe 35 millions at the time. Half of all French males between 18 and 50 were a casualty of that bloody war. No family was spared.

    I think friends should not keep a detailed accounting of what they did for each other. Every French is thankful for US support in WWI, it certainly helped and hastened the war's end. But since you're in this "we owe / they owe" mood, I don't think Pershing's late involvement in WWI was as decisive as Lafayette's involvement in the US independance war.

    Last, you seem to regret the time of French monarchy. I, for one, am happy for my American friends that they live under a republic rather than a monarchy.

    And if you allow me a piece of advice. Look for reasons to like other people, not for reasons to hate them, you'll live a happier life.

    --

    It would be nice to be sure of anything the way some people are of everything.
    1. Re:Some perspective by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

      Listen, it was nice of the US to join WWI, but let's not blow this out of proportions. Google for WWI casualties. The first result gives the following numbers : France 1,359,000 dead; Britain 658,700 dead; US 58,480 dead. WWI was a blood bath. France lost more soldiers in those 4 years than the US lost in its whole history.

      Yes, it was a bloodbath and the US ended the stalemate that was producing that bloodbath. The Alliance could not win on it's own. Germany realized the US would tip the scales against them and attempted an offensive to decide the war before too many US troops arrived at the front. It failed and Alliance counter-offensives succeeded, in part due to US efforts.

      With respect to casualties, aren't you leaving out 1,700,000 Russian battlefield casualties? Russia was leaving the war as the US was entering it. If the US had not entered, those Central Powers forces that had inflicted those Russian casualties could have largely been turned against the French and British forces. Without the US the scales could have easily tipped against France and France may very well have suffered even more casualties *and* lost the war. The failure of the German offensive mentioned above has been attributed largely to Germany failing to redploy many troops from the east.

      But since you're in this "we owe / they owe" mood

      Actually that was the GP's mood. Was my "So, to use *your* phraseology, not mine, they owe us one" not clear?

      Last, you seem to regret the time of French monarchy.

      Not at all, I'm just making it clear who it was that helped us. French citizens did not volunteer in large numbers to cross the ocean to defend us. Democratically elected French leaders responsible to the voters did not choose to send their army to defend us. However US citizens and leaders did make such a decision, twice.

  192. Re:Why the switch? by Gorshkov · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    You forgot unshaven pits.

  193. Re:Why the switch? by HansF · · Score: 1

    France did have some real shady deals with Iraq.
    Not true.

    --
    --> Insert Funny Sig Here
  194. Re:Why the switch? by colinleroy · · Score: 1

    1/4/5) I agree! New France jokes would be very amusing. ;-)

    Ok, here's one ( I'm allowed to do french jokes because I'm french :-)

    A white bear, a crocodile and a tiger meet to have a drink. The white bear starts, "So, where are you going on holidays? Me and my wife, we'll go to the North Pole. It's cold, it's icy, and as we have a big fur, we love this place!".
    Mr. Tiger answers, "We're going to Amazonia. My wife and I love the jungle, so we think that's the best place we can go to!".
    And the crocodile answers, "Heh, I have a grande gueule, my wife has a grande gueule, and French people have grandes gueules. So, we're going to France!".

    --
    blah
  195. Re:Why the switch? by toshinden · · Score: 1

    Tiens ? les américains sont comme Bush. Ils sont aussi cons. ^_^

  196. French Military Police are enjoying the success by bl1nkv01d · · Score: 1

    Are they enjoying the switch?

    I'd like to see some comments from the police employees who have been made to switch. I regularly use Firefox and Thunderbird (although I primarily use Konqueror and KMail for business) but I have friends and clients who refuse to switch or have made the switch on a trial basis, only to go back to Outlook+IE later. The main reason being "they don't like it" / "they're not used to it" / "doesn't display this [in]correctly", etc, etc.

    I've no doubt this switch to open source will be a good thing in the long run for the French police and many other organisations, but it interests me how the employees deal with it, do they find it frustrating and so on? If so, does it end up having a negative effect on work flow, etc?

  197. Re:Why the switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know, it's great living abroad, more Americans should try it.

  198. Re:Why the switch? by maggern · · Score: 1

    *sigh* Another debate with a hint of french in it turns into a flamewar about the Iraq-war.
      I don't get it. Now that Bush has admitted that the information that the US based their war on did not hold water, isn't is obvious that the french were right and the bush-administration wrong? (not talking details here, but the whole general direction of the pre- and post- Iraq-war). Kinda feels like the only country the Bush-administration were able to trick was USA. All the others just went along either because they could benefit or because the feared "punishment" or bad relations to the US. All western-Europe countries sure knew Bush lied.

    I think the french-bashing Americans owe an apology to the french for giving them a hard time.

  199. In Other News, in the Paris suburbs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1400 burning chairs have been reported last night. That's 10 times more than in a normal night. Sarkozy has promised to remedy the situation with his pet high-pressure cleaner...

  200. Re:Why the switch? by c_forq · · Score: 1

    http://www.heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217. cfm
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2005/10/11/AR2005101101384.html
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,11882,132 3967,00.html
    I'm not saying other countries weren't involved in the same thing (they were, Russia is notable, there were even Americans caught up in scandal) but France did have some shady deals, and some corruption.

    --
    Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
  201. "Protocol" != "Application" by rodoke3 · · Score: 1

    Next!

    --
    There's nothing like a good gunfight to uplift the spirit--Calvin
  202. "+2 Insightful" : what a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If parent post is moded "+2 Insightful", then I expect my post being moded "+5 Insightful" if I say that the US made war because it would seriously help the american militaro-industrial complex.

    And at least there would be some truth in it.

  203. 6 feet wide? by alienmole · · Score: 1

    6 feet wide? That was an American.

    <ducks>

  204. If you're not using Firefox, you should be by demiz · · Score: 1
    I also love Firefox very very much:

    1. Easieast to use of all browser (as it comes out of box)

    2. Well balanced features - there is much more than in Internet explorer 6. Someone might miss something, but what most people need is in there

    3. Extensions - for guys that miss something there are several hundreds of free add-ons, and often if you get used to them, you can't live without them.

    4. Visual customization - easier and more complete than in other browsers.

    5. Very fast - specially when compared to Internet explorer.

    6. Best solution for annoyances - more proof than any other browser on viruses, pop-ups, worms, etc.

    If you're not using Firefox, you should be.

    --
    Keylogger killed my marriage, but saved my life.

  205. The problem is... by demiz · · Score: 1
    1)It can't support all RSS, like Micorosft RSS. 1.5's interface no change, no suprising skin.

    2)Occasionally when multiple tabs are open the program seems to hang up. Not sure if this is a product of the web pages themselves or a bug.

    --
    Keylogger killed my marriage, but saved my life.