Why didn't France at least fight? Germany waltzed into Paris without a bullet being fired.
I think France's history as a cowardly nation which then turns around and trys to act relevant on the world stage is what makes people laugh.
France does not belong as a permanent nation in the Security Council. Germany or Japan belongs there before them. Hopefully this will be rectified soon.
Can these companies be held liable under the RICOH act? In essensce, what they are doing is extorting the people of these states? They are demanding huge sums of money in order to provide broadband service.
What scumbags.
Of course, under this administration, they feel empowered to do this. Under Bush and Powell Jr., the people do not own the airwaves or the fiberoptics. Under Bush, the people are owned.
No, but it's probably where De Gaulle planned to run to when he decided that fighting for France from a safe distance was preferrable than actually fighting the Germans.
You can disagree all you want. That doesnt' change the fact that you are wrong.
One American life was worth more than 100 million Japanese lives at the time of the conclusion of WW2. Truman made the right call and the world has been better for it ever since.
Let me guess. You would have served in the armed services during WW2, but not now. Right?
Suuuuuuuure.
You really need to stop watching old war movies. War is really not that romantic. Ask anyone who's been involved in one. If you think war was just a way to define one's self, the manly thing to do, sure,some people felt that way. Ask them how they felt once they made it out.
USA trained Hitler? I missed that one in history class.
Oh, you were talking about Iraq. The Iraq that France tried to help build a nuclear reactor. A nuclear reactor for a nation with unlimited oil reserves. Thank God Israel took that reactor out (hopefully along with a few French "advisers").
The same Iraq that Germany presently sells vast armaments and was recently chastized by the U.N. for having several hundred companies doing illegal business with Iraq.
I must apply to an EUian university. I love their version of history. It's so different.
If France had stood up to Germany when it mattered, France would be respected today. Unfortunately, France's cowardice is the only thing that is remembered about France today.
Don't forget Old Europe's handling of Palestine and India/Pakistan. Because Britain and France carved out these capricious boundaries and then fled the scene like rats fleeing a sinking ship, the rest of the world is currently in the situation we're in now.
Once again, Old EUian failed diplomacy become's America's burden.
Britain and France appeased and placated Hitler from '36 - '39. Three years went by as they watched Germany remilitarize. Three years went by as they actually sold Czechoslovakia down the river to Germany...all in the name of peace (I'm sure the Czech's had a different view of things).
Britain and France may have cared. But they didn't do anything about it when they had a chance and when it would have mattered. Their inaction brought on the world's most destructive war in history.
Let's hope future inaction on Old Europe's part doesn't doom humanity again.
Thanks for proving my point that what 90% of Norwegians believe is in any way relevant to the reality of the Iraq situation. 90% of people are always opposed to war, even if their own nation is indirectly threatened.
There are times when you have to look beyond the poll numbers and do what is right. Unfortunately, in Old Europe, there are no Churchills. There sure are a lot of Chamberlains though.
Actually, I think he was illustrating that war (or violence) is sometimes necessary in the greater scheme. His comment was extremely funny because it hilights the porous nature of the Old EUian policy of regarding Iraq.
It is ironic that once again Old Europe is hellbent on appeasing dictators. I guess some Old EUian policies never die.
Who said that the only intent of the bomb was to destroy military targets?
Obviously the bomb was intended to kill lots of people and to instill fear in the Japanese people, much like the Dressden fire bombings were intended to break the German spirit.
It's too bad that the Japanese rulers didn't surrender in the face of this destruction.
If one American life would have been lost during an invasion of Japan, that would have been one life too many.
America warned Japan and Japan thought America was bluffing. When you call someone's bluff you have to live with the the consequences.
I consider Truman to be a hero for having the courage to drop those bombs. American blood is too precious to waste. If 80% of the world has a problem with it, maybe they can put together a U.N. resolution to reprimand us.
Really, all I can do now, is quote some big lebowsky because I'm too irrate at your mother theresa point of view. "Smokey, this is not Nam, there are rules".
I'll quote some more Lebowski, which is probably a paraphrase of something Roosevelt spoke on Dec 7, 1941:
"This aggression shall not stand"
If Japan didn't want to get destroyed, they should never have woken the sleeping giant. They got what they deserved. They've learned their lesson since then which has served the world well.
I'm sorry. When you're at war, your primary concern is to mitigate the losses of your own people.
If the U.S. had to invade Japan to force it to capitulate, that would have been the wrong decision because tens of thousands of Americans would have died.
No. Japan had ample time and warning to surrender. It chose not to only until it realized that it by not doing so, Japan would cease to exist.
No,no,no....Americans were against getting involved in Europe's fight. Americans rightly felt that containing Hitler's aggression was Britain and France's responsibility. Unfortunately, Britain and France (especially France) shirked their duties to the rest of Europe.
If Britain and France didn't give a damn about the rest of Europe, why should the Americans have cared back then?
Slashdot Mirror
Why didn't France at least fight? Germany waltzed into Paris without a bullet being fired.
I think France's history as a cowardly nation which then turns around and trys to act relevant on the world stage is what makes people laugh.
France does not belong as a permanent nation in the Security Council. Germany or Japan belongs there before them. Hopefully this will be rectified soon.
Can these companies be held liable under the RICOH act? In essensce, what they are doing is extorting the people of these states? They are demanding huge sums of money in order to provide broadband service.
What scumbags.
Of course, under this administration, they feel empowered to do this. Under Bush and Powell Jr., the people do not own the airwaves or the fiberoptics. Under Bush, the people are owned.
France was supposed to be a nation of courageous people.
:(
Unfortunately, they banned immigration.
"Bon jour, you cheese eating, surrender monkeys"
I propose that we do nothing.
:)
"Bon jour, you cheese eating, surrender monkeys"
No, but it's probably where De Gaulle planned to run to when he decided that fighting for France from a safe distance was preferrable than actually fighting the Germans.
:)
"Bon Jour, you cheese eating surrender monkeys"
I prefer to say it to De Gaulle. He was in London when France fell. And he's France's greatest male military commander.
:)
and then claim it was an EUian innovation first? You know how those French like to revise history.
:)
"Bon jour, you cheese eating, surrender monkeys"
exactement, monsieur!
:)
Excuse me. I think there's a french guy surrending at my door.
Then I guess it won't contain the word "victory", since that word doesn't exist in the French language.
:)
EUians hate to have America take the lead on everything so I imagine France will try to create an EUian consortium to do their own version.
:)
"Bonjour, you cheese eating, surrender monkeys"
Japan only surrendered after the 2nd bomb was dropped. Unfortunately for the peoples of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
If your history book suggests otherwise, you may be a communist.
You can disagree all you want. That doesnt' change the fact that you are wrong.
One American life was worth more than 100 million Japanese lives at the time of the conclusion of WW2. Truman made the right call and the world has been better for it ever since.
Let me guess. You would have served in the armed services during WW2, but not now. Right?
Suuuuuuuure.
You really need to stop watching old war movies. War is really not that romantic. Ask anyone who's been involved in one. If you think war was just a way to define one's self, the manly thing to do, sure,some people felt that way. Ask them how they felt once they made it out.
USA trained Hitler? I missed that one in history class.
Oh, you were talking about Iraq. The Iraq that France tried to help build a nuclear reactor. A nuclear reactor for a nation with unlimited oil reserves. Thank God Israel took that reactor out (hopefully along with a few French "advisers").
The same Iraq that Germany presently sells vast armaments and was recently chastized by the U.N. for having several hundred companies doing illegal business with Iraq.
I must apply to an EUian university. I love their version of history. It's so different.
If France had stood up to Germany when it mattered, France would be respected today. Unfortunately, France's cowardice is the only thing that is remembered about France today.
Don't forget Old Europe's handling of Palestine and India/Pakistan. Because Britain and France carved out these capricious boundaries and then fled the scene like rats fleeing a sinking ship, the rest of the world is currently in the situation we're in now.
Once again, Old EUian failed diplomacy become's America's burden.
Britain and France appeased and placated Hitler from '36 - '39. Three years went by as they watched Germany remilitarize. Three years went by as they actually sold Czechoslovakia down the river to Germany...all in the name of peace (I'm sure the Czech's had a different view of things).
Britain and France may have cared. But they didn't do anything about it when they had a chance and when it would have mattered. Their inaction brought on the world's most destructive war in history.
Let's hope future inaction on Old Europe's part doesn't doom humanity again.
Thanks for proving my point that what 90% of Norwegians believe is in any way relevant to the reality of the Iraq situation. 90% of people are always opposed to war, even if their own nation is indirectly threatened.
There are times when you have to look beyond the poll numbers and do what is right. Unfortunately, in Old Europe, there are no Churchills. There sure are a lot of Chamberlains though.
That's quite sad.
Actually, I think he was illustrating that war (or violence) is sometimes necessary in the greater scheme. His comment was extremely funny because it hilights the porous nature of the Old EUian policy of regarding Iraq.
It is ironic that once again Old Europe is hellbent on appeasing dictators. I guess some Old EUian policies never die.
Yes, if only the French had such a fighting spirit. Perhaps WW2 wouldn't have gotten so far.
Who said that the only intent of the bomb was to destroy military targets?
Obviously the bomb was intended to kill lots of people and to instill fear in the Japanese people, much like the Dressden fire bombings were intended to break the German spirit.
It's too bad that the Japanese rulers didn't surrender in the face of this destruction.
If one American life would have been lost during an invasion of Japan, that would have been one life too many.
America warned Japan and Japan thought America was bluffing. When you call someone's bluff you have to live with the the consequences.
I consider Truman to be a hero for having the courage to drop those bombs. American blood is too precious to waste. If 80% of the world has a problem with it, maybe they can put together a U.N. resolution to reprimand us.
Really, all I can do now, is quote some big lebowsky because I'm too irrate at your mother theresa point of view. "Smokey, this is not Nam, there are rules".
I'll quote some more Lebowski, which is probably a paraphrase of something Roosevelt spoke on Dec 7, 1941:
"This aggression shall not stand"
If Japan didn't want to get destroyed, they should never have woken the sleeping giant. They got what they deserved. They've learned their lesson since then which has served the world well.
Far fewer casualties for whom? Japan?
I'm sorry. When you're at war, your primary concern is to mitigate the losses of your own people.
If the U.S. had to invade Japan to force it to capitulate, that would have been the wrong decision because tens of thousands of Americans would have died.
No. Japan had ample time and warning to surrender. It chose not to only until it realized that it by not doing so, Japan would cease to exist.
No,no,no....Americans were against getting involved in Europe's fight. Americans rightly felt that containing Hitler's aggression was Britain and France's responsibility. Unfortunately, Britain and France (especially France) shirked their duties to the rest of Europe.
If Britain and France didn't give a damn about the rest of Europe, why should the Americans have cared back then?