The French at War

[Giz]

Extremely funny ... I'll think about it next time I drive past the monuments between Saint-André de Corcy and l'Arbresle, around Lyon, where a few dozen French patriots were shot by German troops between 1942 and 1944 ... probably for their "lack of efficency" in delivering Jews ...

Oooh, I was wondering where the few dozen French patriots had got to. They must have sprained their ankles and had to sit out 1940.

 

[Flo]

Oooh, I was wondering where the few dozen French patriots had got to. They must have sprained their ankles and had to sit out 1940.

Funnnier and funnier ...

 

[Shaun from Scotland]

Funnnier and funnier ...

Ignore it Flo. There has been a a real nasty undercurrent of xenophobia on this forum recently, and not just from Jedi Knight. Don't take them seriously.

 

[Segnosaur]

and here's an answer from a "cheese eating surrender monkey" http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,11882,894533,00.html

That was funny.

I like the way the author used a visit to Berkeley (that bastion of balanced thought) as a measure of how people view the upcoming conflict with Iraq. (Sarcasm intended...)

The problems that I myself have with france are twofold:
- Their importance is overestimated, both by themselves and the world at large. They are on the UN security council, even though there are other countries which are much more influential in the world.
- They (as a nation) act hypocritically. Yes, every nation does it; its just that because they overestimate their importance, they end up looking the worse for it.

Remember, France is the country that:
- Tested nuclear weapons in the Pacific ocean, long after all other countries agreed to stop testing there.
- Had the president (de Galle) proclaim "Vive le Quebec Libre", thus encouraging Nationalism in Quebec (which is one of the major problems we have here). This, despite Canada played a big role in World War 2.
- Speaking of World War 2, remember, half the country sided with the Germans. Then, when the country was liberated, they made it seem like it was the French Resistance (probably over rated) and army which beat back the Germans. (Hey, I remember seeing a documentary where they said the American army had to stop before entering Paris, because they wanted the French army to be the first ones in
- They pulled out of NATO in the cold war (when we needed to show a strong defence against the Soviet block). Of course, they're back in it now that the real danger has passed (but they're doing their best to ruin it)
- Has an economy crippled by socialist policies, but wants to export that same socialism to the rest of europe
- Remember, France helped establish many of the borders in the world during its colonial period (and its those same borders which are the cause of a lot of fighting)

(Edited for grammar)

 

[Segnosaur]

Ignore it Flo. There has been a a real nasty undercurrent of xenophobia on this forum recently, and not just from Jedi Knight. Don't take them seriously.

Its not xenophobia.... its just the french we are picking on. (Heck, Scotland and the UK aren't bashed.)

 

[headscratcher4]

Flo:

We kid, because we love....

Actually, sincere apologies. As I noted at the top of the thread, I was passing along the French at War for "amusement" sake.

I hopefully am not overly xenophobic -- at least no more than the average Frenchman, German, Brit, etc. I do find the humor in these (as I do in charachterizations of American Cowboys and Renegade CIA Agents, and Stero-typical Southern Klan members). And, you have to admit, there is a long history of making fun of the French from an overly pious anglo-phone community (the Brits are masters, the US is merely periodic players in the game).

Anyway, I apologize. I actually do have a very good sense of not only French history but the cost of WWII to the French, and the real sacrifice by many, many brave individuals to fight the Nazis and Facsim. No one who has seen the footage of DeGaul standing amid the firing of snipers in Paris in 1944 can have anything but admiration.

Nor do I think the Fench position in all of this Iraq business is completely wrong or ill-warneted -- I do think it is designed to serve a nationallistic purpose and thus not any more noble or moral than the US position (i.e. in some ways war or lack of war is about "oil" and if the US war is about Oil, than, to me at least, so too is the French peace...). France, Germany and the US always try to do, or try to explain their actions, in moral terms while often taking very short-sighted decisions (it is the nature of the beast).

In the end, I say Vive La France. Indeed, in the end I say that France and the US have more in common than they care to admit to (values-wise), and perhaps that is why the humor is amusing.

Just think for a moment of how a similiar list for the US might look:

1918 -- got in on the winning side of WWI, just in time to claim victory.

Vietnam -- saw that the French had blown-it, but not spectacularly enough for it to really be a major F*ck-up and agreed to take the situation over to ensure major F*ck-up.

Gulf-war -- defeated horrible dictator in quick, desicive war along with allies, but f*cked up the peace by letting him off the hook...

Somalia -- Learning lesson from Vietnam... figured that the time was right for a "f*ck up" in the Horn of Africa...

You, as I know, the list could be long and elaborate....and very funny.

 

[Michael Redman]

anyone want to buy some realestate?

You own? Bastard. Yes I want. Can you find a couple of lawyers some jobs in town as well?

 

[ZeeGerman]

My Respect Headscratcher!
That was one funny post and a sensible apology. I laughed so loud, my office mates turned their heads.
As a German, I'm so used to my country being the target of stupid jokes that I don't get pissed anymore. Most Germans (me included) aren't the patriotic types. With the French, patriotism is a somewhat different issue. It's not the flag waving style like the american but it's still serious and the French are as easily hurt when comes to their country as are the americans. - I'm wildly generalizing here, I know. - So, over the day, I perceived that this thread became more and more tasteless.
Maybe it's time to leave the shin kicking to the politicians, and get back to the real issue... what was it ... wait... i know, little guy, funny mustache...


Anyway, as the Brits say: "Don't mention the war"

Zee

 

[Jon_in_london]

Well they did fight hard at Verdun in 1916 didn't they?

Kindly remove your facts from my bigotry.

Thanks.

But Seriously.

Charles de Gaulle:

"Vive le Quebec, Vive le Quebec Libre"

and:

"Non"

Can any French person explain to me what purpose these comments had other to deliberately antogonise, humiliate and cause economic and political harm to my people?

 

[Segnosaur]

Charles de Gaulle:

"Vive le Quebec, Vive le Quebec Libre"

Canada, in 1967, was a relatively happy place. There were some nationalists around, but for the most part Quebec a happy member of confederation.

Enter de Gaulle, who made a speech in which he uddered the above words (Long Live Free Quebec). All of a sudden, thousands of Quebecois who would not have cared started thinking of themselves as a separate people. This helped enourage the Quebec Nationalist movement.

Since then, Canada has been fighting against Quebec separatists. (The Province has elected separatist governments many times over the past 3 decades, and obviously they aren't interested in cooperating nicely with the other provinces and federal government.) The prime ministers over the past decades have been more interested in appeasing Quebec (usually to the detriment of the rest of the country). Annoyingly, I would have no problem with Quebec separating (they have been a drag on the economy for a long time); however, far too many Quebecois think they can separate from Canada, yet still remain Canadian citizens (and receive assistance from the rest of Canada). Our government doesn't have the guts to call their bluff.

And just in case someone assumes it was just a one time remark over 30 years ago, France is still at it. During the last referendum, they claimed they would gladly recognize a 'free Quebec', even though the referendum question was unclear on what the voter was deciding. (Most countries were rightly staying neutral; it was mainly France who was trying to encourage separation.)

Some gratitude for you, after Canada helped saved them in World War 2. (Ironically, there was little support for fighting in Europe from the Quebecois. Most political support for the war came from English Canada.)

 

[Flo]

Ignore it Flo. There has been a a real nasty undercurrent of xenophobia on this forum recently, and not just from Jedi Knight. Don't take them seriously.

It's not the xenophobia as such that is the more grating, it is the patent stupidity and the double standard: so easy to remain rational and civil when picking on woowoos, ready to insert asterisks in the middle of rather mild profanities in order not to shock the kids, but unable to keep a minimum of respect, decency, civility or any kind of rationality when discussing politics and especially other countries ... and this from a supposedly thinking elite ...

 

[Flo]

Kindly remove your facts from my bigotry.

Thanks.

But Seriously.

Charles de Gaulle:

"Vive le Quebec, Vive le Quebec Libre"

and:

"Non"

Can any French person explain to me what purpose these comments had other to deliberately antogonise, humiliate and cause economic and political harm to my people?

This French person can explain to you that not all French persons approve(d) of them, or find them extremely intelligent. I don't think De Gaulle wanted so much to humiliate or otherwise harm anyone, only that he thought an alliance of all French-speaking countries, provinces, and population would protect the French language from "contamination" from English

The current policy from the Academie Française, no more intelligent than encouraging dissent in Canada but whose harmful effects only extend to French citizens, consists in

a) trying to ban useful, everyday use, English words and replace them with useless, cumbersome French equivalent,

b)making sure that French students don't get a good command of the language (so they will keep peppering French with inappropriate English words)

c) subsidising French songs and movies nobody wants (or should) listen or watch,

d) whining.

 

[a_unique_person]

This French person can explain to you that not all French persons approve(d) of them, or find them extremely intelligent. I don't think De Gaulle wanted so much to humiliate or otherwise harm anyone, only that he thought an alliance of all French-speaking countries, provinces, and population would protect the French language from "contamination" from English

The current policy from the Academie Française, no more intelligent than encouraging dissent in Canada but whose harmful effects only extend to French citizens, consists in

a) trying to ban useful, everyday use, English words and replace them with useless, cumbersome French equivalent,

b)making sure that French students don't get a good command of the language (so they will keep peppering French with inappropriate English words)

c) subsidising French songs and movies nobody wants (or should) listen or watch,

d) whining.

hi flo, didn't realise we had another nationality participating. i have already had a discussion with headscratcher about france. you will find he is not so bad, and just likes to poke fun at various points of any nationality. he is not biased for or against anyone.

de gaulle seemed to be owed for WWII, even if he outstayed the obligation for a few too many years. vietnam might have been a much different story without him.

as for the language issue, it is very interesting. I have been told that in quebec they speak french from 100 years ago.

as for the issue of new words in french, is it really just going to turn into english, or are they being paranoid and about, say, 10% will be english words, (which is really just latin, german, old english and french mixed up in a big jumble), and that's as far as it will go.

in the long run, all languages are always changing, and i suppose in the end the world will be speaking one language. that would be in about 1000 years or so, so I can't see it being much of an issue now.

 

[Flo]

as for the language issue, it is very interesting. I have been told that in quebec they speak french from 100 years ago.

as for the issue of new words in french, is it really just going to turn into english, or are they being paranoid and about, say, 10% will be english words, (which is really just latin, german, old english and french mixed up in a big jumble), and that's as far as it will go.

in the long run, all languages are always changing, and i suppose in the end the world will be speaking one language. that would be in about 1000 years or so, so I can't see it being much of an issue now.

Hi,

You're partly right, the french spoken in Quebec still uses quite a lot of words and expressions that have been out of use in France for 100 +yrs, but the main difference lies in different meaning given to the same words on both sides of the Pond, a bit like Brit-speak and American-speak

I think the issue of new words in French is a mix of paranoïa and bad management. One key example is the word "Walkman", coined by a Japanese (notorious for their misuse of foreign language), and banned by the Academie française in favor of "Baladeur" (litteral translation), both words basically unfit to describe the actual object ... IMO, the best way to protect a language is 1) saying or writing interesting original things with it, 2) teaching it properly, 3) teaching other languages properly.

I don't think there will ever be an unification of all languages: even the Chinese emperors couldn't achieve having the whole country and their vassals to speak the same language, despite having them adopt the same script ...

 

[Jon_in_london]

Flo, thanks for your explaination. But what about De Gaulles flat and blatantly unreasonable veto to British entry into the EEC (thats where the "non" comes from).

 

[a_unique_person]

Flo, thanks for your explaination. But what about De Gaulles flat and blatantly unreasonable veto to British entry into the EEC (thats where the "non" comes from).

you can't have it both ways, they still aren't sure they even want to be in the EEC.

 

[Flo]

Flo, thanks for your explaination. But what about De Gaulles flat and blatantly unreasonable veto to British entry into the EEC (thats where the "non" comes from).

What do you mean, "unreasonable" ? He was just concerned the Brits would have us sterilise our cheese !


Seriously, I don't remember the exact circonstances, but it had to do with the feeling (already) that GB was some kind of 5th column from the US, and that the US would therefore have an undue influence over the building of Europe through the British.

Some people still laud his visionary talents ... I personally think he was living in the past.

(do you know that when GB adopted the metric system, a radio station announced, on April's fool day, that as a return courtesy, we were going to adopt driving on the left ?)

 

[Jon_in_london]

Wonder what the origins of "5th Column" are?

 

[iain]

Wonder what the origins of "5th Column" are?

Fifth Column

A secret subversive group that works against a country or organization from the inside, as in The right-to-life movement has established a fifth column among freedom-of-choice activists. This term was invented by General Emilio Mola during the Spanish Civil War in a radio broadcast on October 16, 1936, in which he said that he had una quinta columna (a fifth column) of sympathizers for General Franco among the Republicans holding the city of Madrid, and it would join his four columns of troops when they attacked. The term was popularized by Ernest Hemingway and later extended to any traitorous insiders.

 

[Segnosaur]

This French person can explain to you that not all French persons approve(d) of them, or find them extremely intelligent. I don't think De Gaulle wanted so much to humiliate or otherwise harm anyone, only that he thought an alliance of all French-speaking countries, provinces, and population would protect the French language from "contamination" from English

How could De Gaulle think that breaking up Canada would not hurt Canadians as a whole?

And why is France still interferring in Canadian politics decades later, even after we've shown that Canada as a whole is very helpful in protecting French in Quebec?

And while not all French people may agree with the actions of De Gaulle and Chirac, you voted for them. He represents you.