How? Because of the Affordable Care Act? That might be as 'left' as you might think. Otherwise I see little 'move to the left' on part of Obama. The only thing you might put in his favor is that he knows when he is beat and will find alternative routes. f.i. Iraq, Afghanistan, though on the negative he will often simply change the tactics, f.i. more drones, no real change on Iran or Cuba
Perhaps it was more about joining 'their group' (i.e. buying into the game). It is all about control. If I want people to work in my interests, I need to get them on my side. I get them on my side by convincing them that it is better for them to be on my side.
When writing the above I was reminded of the 'black lists' of the McCarthy times. If you were not on 'their side' (i.e. communist-haters), you were on the other side and had a lot of problems. So, regardless of what your own opinion was (and contrary to the concepts of an open and free society) you had to tote the line.
Or, that those who make the rules only allow those who join their side to also be allowed to make the rules. Kinda like how f.i. the NSDAP or 'Communist Parties' only would allow those to work/vote that were part of the parties. Remember, the people in power in SST was the military. So they will make military-centric rules.
The provision with 'active service' is only to avoid internal mutinies and overthrows.
Job != Service Unless you were conscripted, you willingly joined and thus have a job. Most people who can get better jobs, do.
Let's not create a spin on something to give you a "warm glowing feeling" and ignore the fact that people in the military are, basically, paid mercenaries of the government.
People seem to have this 'hero-worship' complex (or are socially moulded to have one) that just because their government tells them that their mercenaries are some kind of mini-gun wielding saints, the actually believe it.
No, our governments control the military and will it against us if they have to. The soldiers fight for the government, not for us.
And that seems to fully match Heinlein's concept. The MI-Complex needs war to feed it's coffers, so it seeks conflict. Then leave it up to the spin-doctors to find excuses. Should sound familiar to a lot of people.
Heinlein's SST society does really hit a lot of common ground with war-driven nationalist nations. Be it the post-WW2 US / UK, many IronCurtain of past, the pre-WW2 Fascist nations, and ancient societies like the Roman Empire. If you were to take Heinlein's book, boil down the different points to their core and seriously try to match up the points with certain countries, you just might be very surprised. Perhaps that is why people 'never really got it', because that would mean they'd have to accept to living in a society similar to what Heinlein was describing.
Reminds me of a quote I read somewhere and am to lazy to source: "Journalists print things people do not want to have printed. Everything else is public relations."
Selfreply, but think about the last 3 Doctors and how they would fit into time and character? Look at their clothing, the way they talk and move and all that. # Ninth Doctor: Faulkland War veteran # Tenth Doctor: 80's kind of business person # Eleventh Doctor: 1900's/WW1 School teacher kind of kid that went to War
I also get sideflashes from LifeOnMars/AshesToAshes, (spoilers!) as they had a similar concept!
Perhaps, as will many things in our generation, they might actually start to roll the die.
Anyway, we will not get a Doctor that every 'fan' will like, but I do think the fanbase is open enough to accept any possible reincarnation. Perhaps, if they are so against the reincarnation that they abandon the show, the fanbase is better off without them?
Still, I think that the shows nature does allow more flexibility in their hero's makeup and it should be explored. And if you dare to leave it up to a random generator, perhaps you just might be surprised.
The shows nature also has relieved us from the constraints of what to expect. It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but if you are out for a wild ride, dr who will deliver. And as such, we hope, or rather expect, to be given some crazy story with interesting characters and a plot line no one will guess.
Why not just used the tried and true system of rollin' one up. Good old P'n'P style character creation. 1d2 for Sex (male, female) 1d20 for Race couple of d100 for background/personality/perks and whatnot
Heck you could even throw in some alien stuff in there as well. Be creative ffs!
And then find a competent actor/actress that can play THAT role.
On a side note, what I think would have been REALLY cool is that the Doctors are not just a 'person', but a real person. Someone who in space and time has just died and is reincarnated (perhaps back from a certain point within their lives) into The Doctor. And then the Doctor would not only have to run around being The Doctor, but also his former life surfacing and all the baggage such a thing would come with. If you look at the doctors, they reincarnate with 'finished' personalities and all that stuff... where do these come from?
No, because he is basically only using the age old tactic of forcing the listener onto his side. When he says he is only using it for good, that means if you oppose it, you are a bad person. He says it is legal, if you oppose, you claim he is a criminal. While I did not read the text (I'd prefer to keep my meal inside of me), I bet he went through all of the ploys, his service, against the bad people the kill children, we are honest and decent people serving, blah blah blah. Again, nothing but ploys to get you on HIS side. The goal is to make everyone who opposes him, basically, bad people.
Similar to the problems with surveillance, once the money has been spent, they need to justify the expenditure. So after the initial reasons have not been fulfilled, you expand the justification so your bill still gets paid. See London where the surveillance has been extended from 'fighting terrorism' (which it did not) to hunting people littering.
Yep, one of the reason many in Europe, though they fully support the asylum, would recommend not coming here. If the governments do not directly forward his arse to the US, they will be 'preoccupied' while the CIA picks him up and flies him out. Heck they won't even do it for their OWN citizens that are kidnapped by the CIA.
Hey, the Euros are soooo busy chastizing Syria or Iran or China for their human rights records, we just cannot stop something illegal from happing in our own countries for someone we have sworn to protect.
I think the plan is not to stop the revelations, just to make them 'household'. So instead of it being just another 'conspiracy thing', let it leak, tell the sheep it is for their own good and how Snowden is such a bad person for leaking such information that could hurt them and their country and the people will by it.
I.e. that man(Snowden) bad, government good -> government spying is good and does not really hurt, at least not as bad as the GayCommunistNaziPedophileMuslimTerrorists that want to kill us and redecorate our houses.
Thank you for buying our illegal wiretapping system. Please check your freedom at the door on your way out. (as if you ever had any *snicker*)
I think a comparison with Stalin is faulty. I believe if you should compare, then to ancient Rome as there are a lot more parallels. The only real comparison you might find is that both claimed to have societies (i.e. 'communist/socialist' or 'republic'), but were nothing more then dictatorships that fed the people those carrots.
Using comparisons are always problematic. Both Hitler and Stalin were really bad, but they were not the same in all aspects. So when we say 'like Stalin', we use the blanket statement and the trolls will counter with 'at least we did not kill that many people', as if that was the single the breaking point from achieving EvilBastard Level 11. What does it matter if you killed 1k or 1m innocent people?
Back to 'Freedom': You are free because you have guns? The government has warships and tanks and strategic bombers and drones and do not really care about your puny little gun. What they care about is if that carrot will give you the illusion of freedom or not. Heck they will give you whatever you want as long as you just mind your own damn business. And just in case you get bored, here is a little entertainment we drench with nationalism and militarism. We used to call them gladiators, now they are called athletes.
Absolute freedom does not exist, cannot exist, as for that to be the case, you would have to stand all alone, without anyone to support or watch or defend you. Or what do people think really makes them 'free'? You can vote? Sure, here just happen to be a number of candidates that have passed the business filter. i.e. they need support from businesses to run their campaigns, hence if they business level does not like them, they get no support, i.e. they sold out before you even see them.
You have free speech? Again a carrot that as long as you are not a threat to the government, they do not care. You could even slaughter each other off, as long as the government sees no threat for them, they will not really care. They will get involved if they see that the problems are getting out of hand. f.i. the equal rights movement of the 60s. Then they fix the carrot and everyone is happy and moves on.
Don't get me started on the Iraq war being a prime example of how the Government manipulates and distorts and corrupts to funnel money to the IM-Complex on the backs of taxpayers and peoples lives and property. They know exactly how to play us (the people) to get us to follow their war-carrot.
Disclaimer: I am not an anti-government person. But a corrupt government (and they ALL become that sooner or later) is a corrupt government and should be called out as such.
What I feel people fail to see is that this is not about muslims or christians or whatever, it is about people who hate other people. Plain and simple. You will find these kinds of people everywhere.
Though there is one difference between some of the groups. Some hate you for who or what you are. Some hate you for what 'you' did to 'them'. Some might even be a mixture of both.
The only difference is that in some countries, the crazies don't have that much power. Sadly, we are far to often at fault that the crazies were able to come to power and/or hold that power.
But remember, there were times when that was different and we cannot, in all honesty, be 'confused' how 'people treat others over there'. I mean does anyone think Afghanistan would look like it is today if the Taliban were not in charge (simplification, but go with it for now). Does anyone think that after WW2, after the Nazis were 'removed' (you'd be surprised how few really were removed), the Germans were somehow magically cured? The civil war in the US, while it 'freed' the slaves, did not make them equal, nor did it change the people.
If you live in a country were the crazies have the power, the entire country will be run that way. Not because everyone is crazy, but because if you do not play along, you will be next on the list. Only the fewest of the few have the balls to stand up to them. And no, you are not one of them!
We can find such hate in all countries, in all walks of life and in all people.
Finally, this is not only about hate, it is also about power. Regardless of most intentions, once power has been gained, all the best intentions fly out the window, because they stand in the way of keeping that power. So if we think about what religions or social mindsets do, it is often the crazies that try to hide their hate and vileness by using their religion or their social mindsets as excuses. I mean right-wing dictatorships and left-wing dictatorship are both dictatorships, they just use a different carrot.
Yep FUD at its finest. And Johnny Sixpack will be freaking out and calling for another war. And then 'something will happen and we have to defend ourselves' and voila, they have what they wanted.
@Topic: How can anyone honestly stand there and tell us how bad Saddam was, when they supported him. The same with the Taliban and the Mujaheddin and all the others. All supported by the US and UK.
So to say that he was such a bad person (that hat to be removed by YOU naturally) smells like BS simply invoked to hide your true motives. You supported him to get what you wanted (oil) and you removed him to get what you wanted (more oil). You did not give a shit about what he did back then, so why all the fake compassion all of a sudden? Remind us who did not condemn Saddam for the gas attack on the Kurds? Heck even the invasion of Kuwait did not bother the US initially, as evident by Bush sr's words "local problem to be solved locally", but the the Saudis were afraid and they forced you to change your mind. Enter US propaganda machine.
Bush used the bloodlust created by 9/11 and the blatant propaganda to forward his corporate buddies goals of a hostile takeover of Iraq's oil and have it paid for by the US government.
Not to mention the audacity to claim you are fighting for freedom when it is the LAST thing on your minds. It was clear when the first thing the Bush/Co government did was to help overthrow the democratically elected government of Haiti. Give guns to the rebels so they can overthrow the government, then take them ALL away so no one can rebel again. Guess you need that carrot dangling in front of your noses.
Btw: Anyone not see the paradox of supporting Syrian rebels to overthrow the Syrian government but to help the Mali government squash local rebels.
Your holy government lied to you, as it has before to get you into war, and after the proof was shown to you, you not only IGNORE that you have been lied to, but you STILL believe them. You have learned NOTHING and will repeat it till the end. No you still blindly follow them.
You know what is really frustrating? After all these years there are STILL people out there that are CLUELESS to the facts and we have to keep on writing these damn posts.
People wonder why in the history of man, people so blindly followed leaders that turned out to be bad people and, even after having the truth shown to them, could not be convinced of their wrong doing. So next time the histories of Germany or Russia are mentioned, please add that of the US and UK to it.
Atomic and nuclear is the same. An 'atomic' bomb uses nuclei (fission). You might be thinking of hydrogen bombs, but hey use atomic bombs for the 'spark'.
And yes, both are WMDs. At least that seems to be the justification when one wants to invade a country.
Now with the chemical or biological weapons, I would distinguish between pre 1925 protocol (i.e. before they were banned) and post. Also their usage, i.e. battlefield or civilian.
Up until 1925 there were no rules that said you should not use a weapon that indiscriminately kills everything in it's path. Sadly, as often before, the imagination of those creating the texts were not open enough to imagine just what our evil little minds could come up with.
I also think you are listing a few based on ownership, not USE. Though the ownership alone is already laughable as not only are known aggressive countries in possession and proliferation, it also gives them a perfect defensive potential. I mean compare the amount of wars/conflicts/whateverBSnameyouwanttogive of those WITH WMDs to those without.
We know Russia had a LOT, but I am hard pressed to find out if they ever used any.
Name the countries that HAVE used WMDs, have invaded countries on BS grounds and support(ed) terrorists and dictatorships around the world. Notice anything? Now how is the thug calling the kettle black?
Perhaps it is not a French thing but just a stupid company? Because I do not think Germany and France are that different if you compare labour laws or vacation or whatnot. Heck, I live and work in Germany and most of what you said could apply to a lot of companies here as well. That would probably also apply to many companies in the US/Canada/[your country of choice] as well. IMHO it is a company culture problem.
There are naturally cultural differences that might come into play as well or "communications problems". I can tell many a story about those topics just from the different cultures within Europe and what 'now' and 'done' means to each of them.
Slashdot Mirror
How? Because of the Affordable Care Act? That might be as 'left' as you might think.
Otherwise I see little 'move to the left' on part of Obama. The only thing you might put in his favor is that he knows when he is beat and will find alternative routes. f.i. Iraq, Afghanistan, though on the negative he will often simply change the tactics, f.i. more drones, no real change on Iran or Cuba
Perhaps it was more about joining 'their group' (i.e. buying into the game). It is all about control. If I want people to work in my interests, I need to get them on my side. I get them on my side by convincing them that it is better for them to be on my side.
When writing the above I was reminded of the 'black lists' of the McCarthy times. If you were not on 'their side' (i.e. communist-haters), you were on the other side and had a lot of problems. So, regardless of what your own opinion was (and contrary to the concepts of an open and free society) you had to tote the line.
Or, that those who make the rules only allow those who join their side to also be allowed to make the rules. Kinda like how f.i. the NSDAP or 'Communist Parties' only would allow those to work/vote that were part of the parties.
Remember, the people in power in SST was the military. So they will make military-centric rules.
The provision with 'active service' is only to avoid internal mutinies and overthrows.
Job != Service
Unless you were conscripted, you willingly joined and thus have a job. Most people who can get better jobs, do.
Let's not create a spin on something to give you a "warm glowing feeling" and ignore the fact that people in the military are, basically, paid mercenaries of the government.
People seem to have this 'hero-worship' complex (or are socially moulded to have one) that just because their government tells them that their mercenaries are some kind of mini-gun wielding saints, the actually believe it.
No, our governments control the military and will it against us if they have to. The soldiers fight for the government, not for us.
And that seems to fully match Heinlein's concept. The MI-Complex needs war to feed it's coffers, so it seeks conflict. Then leave it up to the spin-doctors to find excuses.
Should sound familiar to a lot of people.
Heinlein's SST society does really hit a lot of common ground with war-driven nationalist nations. Be it the post-WW2 US / UK, many IronCurtain of past, the pre-WW2 Fascist nations, and ancient societies like the Roman Empire.
If you were to take Heinlein's book, boil down the different points to their core and seriously try to match up the points with certain countries, you just might be very surprised. Perhaps that is why people 'never really got it', because that would mean they'd have to accept to living in a society similar to what Heinlein was describing.
Reminds me of a quote I read somewhere and am to lazy to source:
"Journalists print things people do not want to have printed. Everything else is public relations."
Selfreply, but think about the last 3 Doctors and how they would fit into time and character?
Look at their clothing, the way they talk and move and all that.
# Ninth Doctor: Faulkland War veteran
# Tenth Doctor: 80's kind of business person
# Eleventh Doctor: 1900's/WW1 School teacher kind of kid that went to War
I also get sideflashes from LifeOnMars/AshesToAshes, (spoilers!) as they had a similar concept!
Perhaps, as will many things in our generation, they might actually start to roll the die.
Anyway, we will not get a Doctor that every 'fan' will like, but I do think the fanbase is open enough to accept any possible reincarnation. Perhaps, if they are so against the reincarnation that they abandon the show, the fanbase is better off without them?
Still, I think that the shows nature does allow more flexibility in their hero's makeup and it should be explored. And if you dare to leave it up to a random generator, perhaps you just might be surprised.
The shows nature also has relieved us from the constraints of what to expect. It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but if you are out for a wild ride, dr who will deliver. And as such, we hope, or rather expect, to be given some crazy story with interesting characters and a plot line no one will guess.
IIRC Quantum Leap was him jumping around time, taking over people and changing their lives from within the timeline.
Contrary, my thought was that while he is someone from time, he is no longer in that timeline. I.e. their death put them in the Dr Who respawn cue.
Why not just used the tried and true system of rollin' one up. Good old P'n'P style character creation.
1d2 for Sex (male, female)
1d20 for Race
couple of d100 for background/personality/perks and whatnot
Heck you could even throw in some alien stuff in there as well. Be creative ffs!
And then find a competent actor/actress that can play THAT role.
On a side note, what I think would have been REALLY cool is that the Doctors are not just a 'person', but a real person. Someone who in space and time has just died and is reincarnated (perhaps back from a certain point within their lives) into The Doctor. ... where do these come from?
And then the Doctor would not only have to run around being The Doctor, but also his former life surfacing and all the baggage such a thing would come with.
If you look at the doctors, they reincarnate with 'finished' personalities and all that stuff
> There are NO court orders !
How do you know your secret courts has not rubber stamped such orders?
No, because he is basically only using the age old tactic of forcing the listener onto his side.
When he says he is only using it for good, that means if you oppose it, you are a bad person. He says it is legal, if you oppose, you claim he is a criminal.
While I did not read the text (I'd prefer to keep my meal inside of me), I bet he went through all of the ploys, his service, against the bad people the kill children, we are honest and decent people serving, blah blah blah. Again, nothing but ploys to get you on HIS side.
The goal is to make everyone who opposes him, basically, bad people.
Looks like the only ones on that day trying to 'Server and Protect' was the guy and his dog.
Similar to the problems with surveillance, once the money has been spent, they need to justify the expenditure.
So after the initial reasons have not been fulfilled, you expand the justification so your bill still gets paid. See London where the surveillance has been extended from 'fighting terrorism' (which it did not) to hunting people littering.
Yep, one of the reason many in Europe, though they fully support the asylum, would recommend not coming here.
If the governments do not directly forward his arse to the US, they will be 'preoccupied' while the CIA picks him up and flies him out.
Heck they won't even do it for their OWN citizens that are kidnapped by the CIA.
Hey, the Euros are soooo busy chastizing Syria or Iran or China for their human rights records, we just cannot stop something illegal from happing in our own countries for someone we have sworn to protect.
I think the plan is not to stop the revelations, just to make them 'household'.
So instead of it being just another 'conspiracy thing', let it leak, tell the sheep it is for their own good and how Snowden is such a bad person for leaking such information that could hurt them and their country and the people will by it.
I.e. that man(Snowden) bad, government good -> government spying is good and does not really hurt, at least not as bad as the GayCommunistNaziPedophileMuslimTerrorists that want to kill us and redecorate our houses.
Thank you for buying our illegal wiretapping system. Please check your freedom at the door on your way out. (as if you ever had any *snicker*)
I think a comparison with Stalin is faulty. I believe if you should compare, then to ancient Rome as there are a lot more parallels.
The only real comparison you might find is that both claimed to have societies (i.e. 'communist/socialist' or 'republic'), but were nothing more then dictatorships that fed the people those carrots.
Using comparisons are always problematic. Both Hitler and Stalin were really bad, but they were not the same in all aspects. So when we say 'like Stalin', we use the blanket statement and the trolls will counter with 'at least we did not kill that many people', as if that was the single the breaking point from achieving EvilBastard Level 11. What does it matter if you killed 1k or 1m innocent people?
Back to 'Freedom':
You are free because you have guns? The government has warships and tanks and strategic bombers and drones and do not really care about your puny little gun. What they care about is if that carrot will give you the illusion of freedom or not. Heck they will give you whatever you want as long as you just mind your own damn business.
And just in case you get bored, here is a little entertainment we drench with nationalism and militarism. We used to call them gladiators, now they are called athletes.
Absolute freedom does not exist, cannot exist, as for that to be the case, you would have to stand all alone, without anyone to support or watch or defend you. Or what do people think really makes them 'free'? You can vote? Sure, here just happen to be a number of candidates that have passed the business filter. i.e. they need support from businesses to run their campaigns, hence if they business level does not like them, they get no support, i.e. they sold out before you even see them.
You have free speech? Again a carrot that as long as you are not a threat to the government, they do not care. You could even slaughter each other off, as long as the government sees no threat for them, they will not really care. They will get involved if they see that the problems are getting out of hand. f.i. the equal rights movement of the 60s. Then they fix the carrot and everyone is happy and moves on.
Don't get me started on the Iraq war being a prime example of how the Government manipulates and distorts and corrupts to funnel money to the IM-Complex on the backs of taxpayers and peoples lives and property. They know exactly how to play us (the people) to get us to follow their war-carrot.
Disclaimer: I am not an anti-government person. But a corrupt government (and they ALL become that sooner or later) is a corrupt government and should be called out as such.
What I feel people fail to see is that this is not about muslims or christians or whatever, it is about people who hate other people. Plain and simple.
You will find these kinds of people everywhere.
Though there is one difference between some of the groups.
Some hate you for who or what you are.
Some hate you for what 'you' did to 'them'.
Some might even be a mixture of both.
The only difference is that in some countries, the crazies don't have that much power. Sadly, we are far to often at fault that the crazies were able to come to power and/or hold that power.
But remember, there were times when that was different and we cannot, in all honesty, be 'confused' how 'people treat others over there'.
I mean does anyone think Afghanistan would look like it is today if the Taliban were not in charge (simplification, but go with it for now).
Does anyone think that after WW2, after the Nazis were 'removed' (you'd be surprised how few really were removed), the Germans were somehow magically cured?
The civil war in the US, while it 'freed' the slaves, did not make them equal, nor did it change the people.
If you live in a country were the crazies have the power, the entire country will be run that way. Not because everyone is crazy, but because if you do not play along, you will be next on the list.
Only the fewest of the few have the balls to stand up to them.
And no, you are not one of them!
We can find such hate in all countries, in all walks of life and in all people.
Finally, this is not only about hate, it is also about power. Regardless of most intentions, once power has been gained, all the best intentions fly out the window, because they stand in the way of keeping that power.
So if we think about what religions or social mindsets do, it is often the crazies that try to hide their hate and vileness by using their religion or their social mindsets as excuses. I mean right-wing dictatorships and left-wing dictatorship are both dictatorships, they just use a different carrot.
Yep FUD at its finest. And Johnny Sixpack will be freaking out and calling for another war.
And then 'something will happen and we have to defend ourselves' and voila, they have what they wanted.
But thankfully THAT has never happened before.
@Topic:
How can anyone honestly stand there and tell us how bad Saddam was, when they supported him. The same with the Taliban and the Mujaheddin and all the others. All supported by the US and UK.
So to say that he was such a bad person (that hat to be removed by YOU naturally) smells like BS simply invoked to hide your true motives.
You supported him to get what you wanted (oil) and you removed him to get what you wanted (more oil). You did not give a shit about what he did back then, so why all the fake compassion all of a sudden? Remind us who did not condemn Saddam for the gas attack on the Kurds?
Heck even the invasion of Kuwait did not bother the US initially, as evident by Bush sr's words "local problem to be solved locally", but the the Saudis were afraid and they forced you to change your mind. Enter US propaganda machine.
Bush used the bloodlust created by 9/11 and the blatant propaganda to forward his corporate buddies goals of a hostile takeover of Iraq's oil and have it paid for by the US government.
Not to mention the audacity to claim you are fighting for freedom when it is the LAST thing on your minds. It was clear when the first thing the Bush/Co government did was to help overthrow the democratically elected government of Haiti. Give guns to the rebels so they can overthrow the government, then take them ALL away so no one can rebel again.
Guess you need that carrot dangling in front of your noses.
Btw: Anyone not see the paradox of supporting Syrian rebels to overthrow the Syrian government but to help the Mali government squash local rebels.
Your holy government lied to you, as it has before to get you into war, and after the proof was shown to you, you not only IGNORE that you have been lied to, but you STILL believe them. You have learned NOTHING and will repeat it till the end. No you still blindly follow them.
You know what is really frustrating? After all these years there are STILL people out there that are CLUELESS to the facts and we have to keep on writing these damn posts.
People wonder why in the history of man, people so blindly followed leaders that turned out to be bad people and, even after having the truth shown to them, could not be convinced of their wrong doing.
So next time the histories of Germany or Russia are mentioned, please add that of the US and UK to it.
CEOs, like politicians, usually start out as normal, everyday friendly, well meaning people. It is just the system that corrupts them.
"When You Dance With the Devil, the Devil Don't Change - the Devil Changes You"
Atomic and nuclear is the same. An 'atomic' bomb uses nuclei (fission).
You might be thinking of hydrogen bombs, but hey use atomic bombs for the 'spark'.
And yes, both are WMDs. At least that seems to be the justification when one wants to invade a country.
Now with the chemical or biological weapons, I would distinguish between pre 1925 protocol (i.e. before they were banned) and post. Also their usage, i.e. battlefield or civilian.
Up until 1925 there were no rules that said you should not use a weapon that indiscriminately kills everything in it's path. Sadly, as often before, the imagination of those creating the texts were not open enough to imagine just what our evil little minds could come up with.
I also think you are listing a few based on ownership, not USE. Though the ownership alone is already laughable as not only are known aggressive countries in possession and proliferation, it also gives them a perfect defensive potential. I mean compare the amount of wars/conflicts/whateverBSnameyouwanttogive of those WITH WMDs to those without.
We know Russia had a LOT, but I am hard pressed to find out if they ever used any.
Because you are the current military superpower. It's politics, plain and simple.
Name the countries that HAVE used WMDs, have invaded countries on BS grounds and support(ed) terrorists and dictatorships around the world.
Notice anything?
Now how is the thug calling the kettle black?
Perhaps it is not a French thing but just a stupid company? Because I do not think Germany and France are that different if you compare labour laws or vacation or whatnot. Heck, I live and work in Germany and most of what you said could apply to a lot of companies here as well.
That would probably also apply to many companies in the US/Canada/[your country of choice] as well. IMHO it is a company culture problem.
There are naturally cultural differences that might come into play as well or "communications problems". I can tell many a story about those topics just from the different cultures within Europe and what 'now' and 'done' means to each of them.