Trust me. The majority of mankind cares less (either way) about the US than about what they're gonna eat today. And for many people that's pretty important.
For a lot of other people however, that care is linked.
Half of my income comes from the U.S.
A lot of other peoples dinners worldwide are dependant on U.S. prosperity too. It's a trade empire.
Originally posted by baff Negative. Economics is about getting rich. Wars are about violent conflict. Many wars are fought for the purpose of getting rich, although not all. Getting rich is not often done for the purpose of war. More money is traditionally made during peace time. The goal of achieving wealth is not conquest.
My friend. War is a business like any other. It serves no goal any longer, it's merely another tool of a company, just like a hostile takeover and a law suit are.
BTW, the global food storages are directly dependant from El Ni
Originally posted by PlanoMM Originally posted by MadAce Originally posted by Zuba 1.what do you mean by 'bring it down now'?
2. the usa intercepted a transmission from a german boat to the 3rd reich about a attack on americas ports. thats why the americans retaliated, they also wanted to help defend britain from the nazis because then britain was a very important ally , not only for the airports for american bombers but for their army before heading to france. the nazis were cut off by the brits when the nazis went after paris then they were killed. the french did a good job in 'holding down the fort'/defending their space.
3. with resistance fighters everywhere helping one another france was lucky to have got the message about this at all, from german resistance fighters.
4. this is the only major conflict to date the french have won along with the brits and americans(canadians, australians, newzealanders, norway, sweden the others that wernt mensioned) all power to them for staying alive.
God you're full of shit. <-----was thinking it, didnt want to be the one to say it. was afraid he would accuse me of copying him again. ok belive your version, all twisted and distored, did i mension that the american versions are comletly bias? you watch ALL history from every channel in the world and tell me again.
as for plano your full of shit and what has this got to do with copying, yet another problem you want to belive i have. other opinions withheld.
Originally posted by Zuba the french did a good job in 'holding down the fort'/defending their space.
ok belive your version, all twisted and distored, did i mension that the american versions are comletly bias? you watch ALL history from every channel in the world and tell me again.
as for plano your full of shit and what has this got to do with copying, yet another problem you want to belive i have. other opinions withheld. Yeah, the French really held down the fort. Oh wait, they surrendered to the Germans in 1940 and allowed the Germans to give them a puppet government. Did your history not tell you about Vichy France?
Originally posted by MadAce It did. And it also told me about the French resistance.
I'm not sure if you're disagreeing with what I was saying or not, but the resistance post-surrender could hardly be defined as "holding down the fort."
Morons. France put up a fight. They did not surrender immediatly after the Germans arrived.
WW2 is prolly the best example of England and France working together. Did you know England sent even cruse boats to Normandy to save over 300k French soliders?
Originally posted by LostGrace Morons. France put up a fight. They did not surrender immediatly after the Germans arrived.
WW2 is prolly the best example of England and France working together. Did you know England sent even cruse boats to Normandy to save over 300k French soliders?
1. Don't call me a moron. 2. I never said France surrendered immediately, I just said they surrendered. I was saying this in response to another poster saying France "held down the fort." By definition, holding down the fort means you have succesfully thwarted an enemy attack, which France didn't do. 3. You might want to see a psychiatrist in the near future. You seem to have a false illusion that you are better than those around you and you never make mistakes. I'm sure there is some sort of prescription that could remedy this, moron.
Originally posted by Zuba very well, im withdrawn as you dont like others to voice there opinion except yours, to damn stcuk up. im finished here on this thread.
bye
Fact: France didn't hold down the fort. Your opinion: France held down the fort.
Fact: Germany started WW2. Your opinion: France started WW2.
When there is a debate to be had, I'd love to hear your opinion. In this case, there isn't.
Originally posted by Zuba very well, im withdrawn as you dont like others to voice there opinion except yours, to damn stcuk up. im finished here on this thread.
Questioner: I know you claim you served in Group. In deference to that, I ask you to consider: Is quoting everything from cartoon characters to comedians really an accurate representation of the French people as opposed to their government?
Why is it people with nothing better to do in their lives always bag on the French and just the French? The Germans refused to fight in OIF. The Italians backed out of OIF, and never won a campaign of any consequence on their own in the Second World War. The Spanish backed out of OIF after caving into a terrorist attack on Madrid and put a socialist government in charge.
No one says the Italians are cowards. No one says the Spanish are cowards. And no one for damn hell says the Germans are cowards. But the French? The French get rolled by the Germans, just like almost everyone else in Europe, and people half a century later give them a hard time for what? The Norwegians put up less of a fight. The Austrians put up less of a fight. So did the Czechs, the Poles, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Hungarians. The Romanians collaborated.
And still, the French get the abuse each and every time. Why? There wouldn't even be a United States without French support during the Revolution. Does anyone actually believe if the French didn't suck up the best and brightest of the redcoats to combat on Continental Europe, that the Revolution would still have won its victories? Anyone care to remember what happened in 1812 when the British applied themselves just a bit more? Think of what would have happened if someone like Wellington was fighting Washington?
Maybe people who bag on Napoleon need to read on Jena, Austerlitz, Wagram, Eylau, and a dozen other engagements where they can look for French cowardice all they want. Maybe they should read on Dien Bien Phu and say the French were cowards there as well. Maybe if people actually read a proper history of the Maquis, they won't be half as stupid with their commentary. "Russians fought with pitchforks and won" ... I'm sure that's how Zhukov took Berlin, with pitchforks. Right.
Oh, and maybe, just maybe, should we ever forget, we sponsored the Baathists for nearly a decade while they were our proxies fighting the Iranians. Only the invasion of Kuwait changed that. Hell, Saddam wouldn't even have risen to eventual power if Americans hadn't taken his bankrupt, failed-assassin self and cleaned him up in Cairo where he was hiding, and given him enough support to make a run for it. So when he was killing dissidents and political opponents during the 70s and 80s, did we say anything? Not a thing. Until he screwed up in 1991, he was our man.
So why the holier-than-thou attitude when our own government abandons POWs in Korea and Vietnam to the Communists and bankrolls tyrants who turn on us year after year? If accusing the French of cowardice makes some Americans feel better, fine, let it be that way. Let that NOT discolor foreign policy, as their security and intelligence services are still allied to us in the War on Terrror.
And let it not ever, ever be a substitute for REAL patriotism. Over 6 million American men answered the call to arms in the Second World War. Over 5 million men had to be TURNED away. After 9/11? We still barely make replacement rates, 200,000 a year.
But no, it's "I'm American because I listen to Toby Keith and drink Budweiser, even though I'm too good to enlist or be commissioned, even though half the stuff in my house is Made in China, and I work too hard to bother volunteering for something like the local fire department or the Red Cross. Instead, I'll bag on the French all day because it makes me feel better."
There are too many people like that today. We face huge threats in Iran and Communist China, and more of the public spends its time bitching at a European democracy and chortling at its own jokes. Something is WRONG there. How about a lot less bitching at the wrong people and a lot more elbow grease for a change?
Questioner: I know you claim you served in Group. In deference to that, I ask you to consider: Is quoting everything from cartoon characters to comedians really an accurate representation of the French people as opposed to their government?
Why is it people with nothing better to do in their lives always bag on the French and just the French? The Germans refused to fight in OIF. The Italians backed out of OIF, and never won a campaign of any consequence on their own in the Second World War. The Spanish backed out of OIF after caving into a terrorist attack on Madrid and put a socialist government in charge.
Comparing OIF to WW2 is utterly stupid. The scale and motives are completely different.
No one says the Italians are cowards. No one says the Spanish are cowards. And no one for damn hell says the Germans are cowards. But the French? The French get rolled by the Germans, just like almost everyone else in Europe, and people half a century later give them a hard time for what? The Norwegians put up less of a fight. The Austrians put up less of a fight. So did the Czechs, the Poles, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Hungarians. The Romanians collaborated. France was a large enough nation to put up a decent fight. Comparing the French defeat to that of the Poles is just an insult to the Poles.
And still, the French get the abuse each and every time. Why? There wouldn't even be a United States without French support during the Revolution. Does anyone actually believe if the French didn't suck up the best and brightest of the redcoats to combat on Continental Europe, that the Revolution would still have won its victories? Anyone care to remember what happened in 1812 when the British applied themselves just a bit more? Think of what would have happened if someone like Wellington was fighting Washington?
Maybe people who bag on Napoleon need to read on Jena, Austerlitz, Wagram, Eylau, and a dozen other engagements where they can look for French cowardice all they want. Maybe they should read on Dien Bien Phu and say the French were cowards there as well. Maybe if people actually read a proper history of the Maquis, they won't be half as stupid with their commentary. "Russians fought with pitchforks and won" ... I'm sure that's how Zhukov took Berlin, with pitchforks. Right.
Napoleon was a decent commander with an ego the size of mine. It doesn't make for a good combination, and that's why Napoleon failed. The fact that he won some battles proves nothing about French bravery.
Oh, and maybe, just maybe, should we ever forget, we sponsored the Baathists for nearly a decade while they were our proxies fighting the Iranians. Only the invasion of Kuwait changed that. Hell, Saddam wouldn't even have risen to eventual power if Americans hadn't taken his bankrupt, failed-assassin self and cleaned him up in Cairo where he was hiding, and given him enough support to make a run for it. So when he was killing dissidents and political opponents during the 70s and 80s, did we say anything? Not a thing. Until he screwed up in 1991, he was our man.
So why the holier-than-thou attitude when our own government abandons POWs in Korea and Vietnam to the Communists and bankrolls tyrants who turn on us year after year? If accusing the French of cowardice makes some Americans feel better, fine, let it be that way. Let that NOT discolor foreign policy, as their security and intelligence services are still allied to us in the War on Terrror.
And let it not ever, ever be a substitute for REAL patriotism. Over 6 million American men answered the call to arms in the Second World War. Over 5 million men had to be TURNED away. After 9/11? We still barely make replacement rates, 200,000 a year. Once again, the OIF/WW2 comparison is ridiculous.
But no, it's "I'm American because I listen to Toby Keith and drink Budweiser, even though I'm too good to enlist or be commissioned, even though half the stuff in my house is Made in China, and I work too hard to bother volunteering for something like the local fire department or the Red Cross. Instead, I'll bag on the French all day because it makes me feel better." So this guy bitches about stereotyping all this time then turns around and does it himself. Bravo.
There are too many people like that today. We face huge threats in Iran and Communist China, and more of the public spends its time bitching at a European democracy and chortling at its own jokes. Something is WRONG there. How about a lot less bitching at the wrong people and a lot more elbow grease for a change?
Originally posted by modjoe86 Originally posted by LostGrace Sorry to bump, all. But I found this awsome quote that I just had to share.
by brainstorm 3 months ago Answer hidden due to its low ratingShow Total rating: 5 7 2Answer hidden due to its low ratingHide Questioner: I know you claim you served in Group. In deference to that, I ask you to consider: Is quoting everything from cartoon characters to comedians really an accurate representation of the French people as opposed to their government?
Why is it people with nothing better to do in their lives always bag on the French and just the French? The Germans refused to fight in OIF. The Italians backed out of OIF, and never won a campaign of any consequence on their own in the Second World War. The Spanish backed out of OIF after caving into a terrorist attack on Madrid and put a socialist government in charge. Comparing OIF to WW2 is utterly stupid. The scale and motives are completely different. No one says the Italians are cowards. No one says the Spanish are cowards. And no one for damn hell says the Germans are cowards. But the French? The French get rolled by the Germans, just like almost everyone else in Europe, and people half a century later give them a hard time for what? The Norwegians put up less of a fight. The Austrians put up less of a fight. So did the Czechs, the Poles, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Hungarians. The Romanians collaborated. France was a large enough nation to put up a decent fight. Comparing the French defeat to that of the Poles is just an insult to the Poles. Double standards.
And still, the French get the abuse each and every time. Why? There wouldn't even be a United States without French support during the Revolution. Does anyone actually believe if the French didn't suck up the best and brightest of the redcoats to combat on Continental Europe, that the Revolution would still have won its victories? Anyone care to remember what happened in 1812 when the British applied themselves just a bit more? Think of what would have happened if someone like Wellington was fighting Washington?
Maybe people who bag on Napoleon need to read on Jena, Austerlitz, Wagram, Eylau, and a dozen other engagements where they can look for French cowardice all they want. Maybe they should read on Dien Bien Phu and say the French were cowards there as well. Maybe if people actually read a proper history of the Maquis, they won't be half as stupid with their commentary. "Russians fought with pitchforks and won" ... I'm sure that's how Zhukov took Berlin, with pitchforks. Right. Napoleon was a decent commander with an ego the size of mine. It doesn't make for a good combination, and that's why Napoleon failed. The fact that he won some battles proves nothing about French bravery. Why not? American victorys show American bravery.
Oh, and maybe, just maybe, should we ever forget, we sponsored the Baathists for nearly a decade while they were our proxies fighting the Iranians. Only the invasion of Kuwait changed that. Hell, Saddam wouldn't even have risen to eventual power if Americans hadn't taken his bankrupt, failed-assassin self and cleaned him up in Cairo where he was hiding, and given him enough support to make a run for it. So when he was killing dissidents and political opponents during the 70s and 80s, did we say anything? Not a thing. Until he screwed up in 1991, he was our man.
So why the holier-than-thou attitude when our own government abandons POWs in Korea and Vietnam to the Communists and bankrolls tyrants who turn on us year after year? If accusing the French of cowardice makes some Americans feel better, fine, let it be that way. Let that NOT discolor foreign policy, as their security and intelligence services are still allied to us in the War on Terrror.
And let it not ever, ever be a substitute for REAL patriotism. Over 6 million American men answered the call to arms in the Second World War. Over 5 million men had to be TURNED away. After 9/11? We still barely make replacement rates, 200,000 a year. Once again, the OIF/WW2 comparison is ridiculous.
But no, it's "I'm American because I listen to Toby Keith and drink Budweiser, even though I'm too good to enlist or be commissioned, even though half the stuff in my house is Made in China, and I work too hard to bother volunteering for something like the local fire department or the Red Cross. Instead, I'll bag on the French all day because it makes me feel better." So this guy bitches about stereotyping all this time then turns around and does it himself. Bravo. So do you and everyone else. It is time some people get a taste of their own medicine.
There are too many people like that today. We face huge threats in Iran and Communist China, and more of the public spends its time bitching at a European democracy and chortling at its own jokes. Something is WRONG there. How about a lot less bitching at the wrong people and a lot more elbow grease for a change?
I just hate their country and their language. The people are great. Except for the beggars at the Paris trainstation, and that crappy pizza restaurant owner. That guy tried to sell me a pizza with some dark-green moss growing on the bottom of it, saying it was just ash from the oven.
Originally posted by MadAce It did. And it also told me about the French resistance.
I'm not sure if you're disagreeing with what I was saying or not, but the resistance post-surrender could hardly be defined as "holding down the fort."
So what about the Alamo?
Does that make the nature of an American cowardice?
I think not.
What about Pearl Harbour? Was this another sign of American weak resolve? And Vietnam?
You won't win every fight. You haven't won every fight. I suggest you learn to judge people as you would have them judge you.
There are 1700 French soldiers risking their lives in Afghanistan right this second. They not only risk their lives and put their populace to great financial expense out of friendship to your people, but they have placed their civilians in the line of terrorist reprisal for no national gain.
Modjoe, your attitude is very, very poor. Shameful in fact. If they had any sense they would just withdraw and leave your overstretched military to clean up it's own ungrateful messes. When I read this kind of stuff, I wish my country would to. Your words make me feel ashamed that my country is associated with yours.
No amount of respect however is going to get me eating that muck they call cuisine.
Why did you revive this thread with such a lame post lostgrace?
The 'hatred for the French' stems from years of ingratitude by either side (US / Fr) for the efforts the other side played during significant wars. It's simple. And it is not merely the USA's fault, the French have been similarly "anti-American." Their media has been vehemently anti-American for years, no different than in the US.
Originally posted by daeandor Why did you revive this thread with such a lame post lostgrace?
The 'hatred for the French' stems from years of ingratitude by either side (US / Fr) for the efforts the other side played during significant wars. It's simple. And it is not merely the USA's fault, the French have been similarly "anti-American." Their media has been vehemently anti-American for years, no different than in the US.
Hating the French is overrated anyway.
Well, I was once told not to make a new post if there was a old one of the same topic.
But I am not gonna get into your stupid blame game. As far as I am concerned you can go suck a ... nevermind. You get the point.
Originally posted by MadAce It did. And it also told me about the French resistance.
I'm not sure if you're disagreeing with what I was saying or not, but the resistance post-surrender could hardly be defined as "holding down the fort."
So what about the Alamo?
Does that make the nature of an American cowardice?
I think not.
The French surrendered under much more favorable circumstances than that of the Alamo. That is once again a baseless comparison.
What about Pearl Harbour? Was this another sign of American weak resolve? And Vietnam?
Pearl Harbor was a failed military attack by the Japanese, and it took the Americans by surprise. I'm not sure where a cowardice, or lack thereof, even comes into play here. Vietnam was a paranoid battle against communism that failed miserably. We lost....bad. Bravery has nothing to do with the defeat, poor strategy does. And on top of that, in Vietnam we weren't defending home soil, so bravery is a very subjective and situational measure.
You won't win every fight. You haven't won every fight. I suggest you learn to judge people as you would have them judge you.
I judge everyone equally. Americans lose a lot, I'm not arguing that. But the to compare the Alamo to the French surrender is laughable. We fought to the last man, knowing we would lose. The French had the resources to hold out for a good time longer, but decided to quit when it looked like they would prbably lose. I'd say the Americans were the braver of the two.
There are 1700 French soldiers risking their lives in Afghanistan right this second. They not only risk their lives and put their populace to great financial expense out of friendship to your people, but they have placed their civilians in the line of terrorist reprisal for no national gain.
And that is admirable, and I don't believe I ever said that all Fench were cowards. They just tend to do cowardly things more often than others.
Modjoe, your attitude is very, very poor. Shameful in fact. If they had any sense they would just withdraw and leave your overstretched military to clean up it's own ungrateful messes. When I read this kind of stuff, I wish my country would to. Your words make me feel ashamed that my country is associated with yours.
I love you too. I respect your opinion, I wish I could say the same about you.
No amount of respect however is going to get me eating that muck they call cuisine.
The French do cowardly things? Hello dumbasses, their Government surrendered to Germany in WW2, and was replaced by a compliant bunch known as the Vichy Govt. The real (as internationally accepted at the time) government went into exile, headed by de Gaulle.
The French people throughout WW2 maintained their pluck and weathered the German occupation admirably. Naturally, there were collaborationists, like the Milice, who kissed the arses of the Germans and aided and abetted them, but the majority of the French citizenry remained peacefully non-cooperative and bided their time.
So, calling the French a bunch of cowards shows the pure and utter ignorance of people who learn history from watching South Park or reading cereal boxes.
Comments
For a lot of other people however, that care is linked.
Half of my income comes from the U.S.
A lot of other peoples dinners worldwide are dependant on U.S. prosperity too. It's a trade empire.
My friend. War is a business like any other. It serves no goal any longer, it's merely another tool of a company, just like a hostile takeover and a law suit are.
BTW, the global food storages are directly dependant from El Ni
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
<-----was thinking it, didnt want to be the one to say it. was afraid he would accuse me of copying him again.
ok belive your version, all twisted and distored, did i mension that the american versions are comletly bias? you watch ALL history from every channel in the world and tell me again.
as for plano your full of shit and what has this got to do with copying, yet another problem you want to belive i have. other opinions withheld.
ok belive your version, all twisted and distored, did i mension that the american versions are comletly bias? you watch ALL history from every channel in the world and tell me again.
as for plano your full of shit and what has this got to do with copying, yet another problem you want to belive i have. other opinions withheld.
Yeah, the French really held down the fort. Oh wait, they surrendered to the Germans in 1940 and allowed the Germans to give them a puppet government. Did your history not tell you about Vichy France?
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
I just thought I'd mention the resistance since noone else did...
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
WW2 is prolly the best example of England and France working together. Did you know England sent even cruse boats to Normandy to save over 300k French soliders?
bye
2. I never said France surrendered immediately, I just said they surrendered. I was saying this in response to another poster saying France "held down the fort." By definition, holding down the fort means you have succesfully thwarted an enemy attack, which France didn't do.
3. You might want to see a psychiatrist in the near future. You seem to have a false illusion that you are better than those around you and you never make mistakes. I'm sure there is some sort of prescription that could remedy this, moron.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
Your opinion: France held down the fort.
Fact: Germany started WW2.
Your opinion: France started WW2.
When there is a debate to be had, I'd love to hear your opinion. In this case, there isn't.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
Sorry to bump, all. But I found this awsome quote that I just had to share.
Questioner: I know you claim you served in Group. In deference to that, I ask you to consider: Is quoting everything from cartoon characters to comedians really an accurate representation of the French people as opposed to their government?
Why is it people with nothing better to do in their lives always bag on the French and just the French? The Germans refused to fight in OIF. The Italians backed out of OIF, and never won a campaign of any consequence on their own in the Second World War. The Spanish backed out of OIF after caving into a terrorist attack on Madrid and put a socialist government in charge.
No one says the Italians are cowards. No one says the Spanish are cowards. And no one for damn hell says the Germans are cowards. But the French? The French get rolled by the Germans, just like almost everyone else in Europe, and people half a century later give them a hard time for what? The Norwegians put up less of a fight. The Austrians put up less of a fight. So did the Czechs, the Poles, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Hungarians. The Romanians collaborated.
And still, the French get the abuse each and every time. Why? There wouldn't even be a United States without French support during the Revolution. Does anyone actually believe if the French didn't suck up the best and brightest of the redcoats to combat on Continental Europe, that the Revolution would still have won its victories? Anyone care to remember what happened in 1812 when the British applied themselves just a bit more? Think of what would have happened if someone like Wellington was fighting Washington?
Maybe people who bag on Napoleon need to read on Jena, Austerlitz, Wagram, Eylau, and a dozen other engagements where they can look for French cowardice all they want. Maybe they should read on Dien Bien Phu and say the French were cowards there as well. Maybe if people actually read a proper history of the Maquis, they won't be half as stupid with their commentary. "Russians fought with pitchforks and won" ... I'm sure that's how Zhukov took Berlin, with pitchforks. Right.
Oh, and maybe, just maybe, should we ever forget, we sponsored the Baathists for nearly a decade while they were our proxies fighting the Iranians. Only the invasion of Kuwait changed that. Hell, Saddam wouldn't even have risen to eventual power if Americans hadn't taken his bankrupt, failed-assassin self and cleaned him up in Cairo where he was hiding, and given him enough support to make a run for it. So when he was killing dissidents and political opponents during the 70s and 80s, did we say anything? Not a thing. Until he screwed up in 1991, he was our man.
So why the holier-than-thou attitude when our own government abandons POWs in Korea and Vietnam to the Communists and bankrolls tyrants who turn on us year after year? If accusing the French of cowardice makes some Americans feel better, fine, let it be that way. Let that NOT discolor foreign policy, as their security and intelligence services are still allied to us in the War on Terrror.
And let it not ever, ever be a substitute for REAL patriotism. Over 6 million American men answered the call to arms in the Second World War. Over 5 million men had to be TURNED away. After 9/11? We still barely make replacement rates, 200,000 a year.
But no, it's "I'm American because I listen to Toby Keith and drink Budweiser, even though I'm too good to enlist or be commissioned, even though half the stuff in my house is Made in China, and I work too hard to bother volunteering for something like the local fire department or the Red Cross. Instead, I'll bag on the French all day because it makes me feel better."
There are too many people like that today. We face huge threats in Iran and Communist China, and more of the public spends its time bitching at a European democracy and chortling at its own jokes. Something is WRONG there. How about a lot less bitching at the wrong people and a lot more elbow grease for a change?
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
I love the French!
I just hate their country and their language. The people are great. Except for the beggars at the Paris trainstation, and that crappy pizza restaurant owner. That guy tried to sell me a pizza with some dark-green moss growing on the bottom of it, saying it was just ash from the oven.
So what about the Alamo?
Does that make the nature of an American cowardice?
I think not.
What about Pearl Harbour? Was this another sign of American weak resolve? And Vietnam?
You won't win every fight. You haven't won every fight. I suggest you learn to judge people as you would have them judge you.
There are 1700 French soldiers risking their lives in Afghanistan right this second. They not only risk their lives and put their populace to great financial expense out of friendship to your people, but they have placed their civilians in the line of terrorist reprisal for no national gain.
Modjoe, your attitude is very, very poor. Shameful in fact. If they had any sense they would just withdraw and leave your overstretched military to clean up it's own ungrateful messes. When I read this kind of stuff, I wish my country would to. Your words make me feel ashamed that my country is associated with yours.
No amount of respect however is going to get me eating that muck they call cuisine.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
and
their snipers place a higher price on life.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
The 'hatred for the French' stems from years of ingratitude by either side (US / Fr) for the efforts the other side played during significant wars. It's simple. And it is not merely the USA's fault, the French have been similarly "anti-American." Their media has been vehemently anti-American for years, no different than in the US.
Hating the French is overrated anyway.
But I am not gonna get into your stupid blame game. As far as I am concerned you can go suck a ... nevermind. You get the point.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
The French do cowardly things? Hello dumbasses, their Government surrendered to Germany in WW2, and was replaced by a compliant bunch known as the Vichy Govt. The real (as internationally accepted at the time) government went into exile, headed by de Gaulle.
The French people throughout WW2 maintained their pluck and weathered the German occupation admirably. Naturally, there were collaborationists, like the Milice, who kissed the arses of the Germans and aided and abetted them, but the majority of the French citizenry remained peacefully non-cooperative and bided their time.
So, calling the French a bunch of cowards shows the pure and utter ignorance of people who learn history from watching South Park or reading cereal boxes.