NationStates Jolt Archive

The insurgents/Peaceful people/terrorists in Iraq have captured a Frenchman, and are threatening to kill him unless............











The French pull out of Iraq! Guess that's what living in a cave your whole life does to you! :D :D

No, living in a cave all your life'll give you histoplasmosis. Sorry to quibble. But there it is. Histoplasmosis.

This thread sucks.

The insurgents/Peaceful people/terrorists in Iraq have captured a Frenchman, and are threatening to kill him unless............











The French pull out of Iraq! Guess that's what living in a cave your whole life does to you! :D :D

a source on this story?? Just curious...

Yeah, I think they want the French to server their diplomatic ties with Iraq...

Nice try, though.

No, living in a cave all your life'll give you histoplasmosis. Sorry to quibble. But there it is. Histoplasmosis.
For someone who keeps apologising for quibbling...you sure do it a lot:)

a source on this story?? Just curious...

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3218,36-725394@51-723510,0.html

It's true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histoplasmosis

Unfortunately, this is also true.

That article is in French silly. We all know French is a dead language, as are all languages but English.

Yes, it's true. Here's the same story in English in Forbes.

http://www.forbes.com/work/feeds/afx/2005/12/28/afx2418309.html

AFX News Limited
Iraq rebels threaten to kill French hostage
12.28.2005, 10:19 PM

DUBAI (AFX) - An Iraqi rebel group has claimed responsibility for the kidnapping of French engineer Bernard Planche, threatening to kill him if France did not end its 'illegitimate presence in Iraq', Agence France-Presse reported.

Yes, I'm sure that we're well aware of the massive presence of the French in Iraq, and how much they support the US in suppressing Iraq.

Pretty stupid.

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3218,36-725394@51-723510,0.html

It's true.

http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/chuckle.gif http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/laugh2.gif http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/SWEAT.GIF http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/lmao.gif

http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/chuckle.gif http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/laugh2.gif http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/SWEAT.GIF http://www.cohguru.com/forum/images/smilies/lmao.gif
Yep, it's true alright.

That article is in French silly. We all know French is a dead language, as are all languages but English.
Sorry to quibble, but you're incorrect on that count. Actually, on two counts - chiefly, that French is a dead language, and of course, that all languages other than English are dead languages. However, your first statement is entirely accurate, silly.

Maybe there are French people and companies involved in reconstruction?

They kinda did the same thing with the German hostage - they ended up calling for the end of the relationship between Germany and the Iraqi government (not that there is much of a relationship to speak of).

In the end they probably paid them a ransom and that was that.

Actually, the Germans were involved in the training of Iraqi police.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051228/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_french_hostage;_ylt=AvIQDoHkDvJzvqRtdluC6w8LewgF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--

Aye. I always wondered why they were such bad fighters, and such bad shots.

With brains like these, who needs dumb luck?

Since when did France go into Iraq? :confused:

This proves my theory that terrorists are stupid.

Kidnapping French people? For what?! Doesn't anyone else find this funny?


*I know I'm going to hell* :D

Actually, the Germans were involved in the training of Iraqi police.
As are the French.
But that's not the point - neither France nor Germany have particularly close diplomatic ties with the new Iraqi government.

Sorry to quibble, but you're incorrect on that count. Actually, on two counts - chiefly, that French is a dead language, and of course, that all languages other than English are dead languages. However, your first statement is entirely accurate, silly.
Stop flirting :mad:

Who knows maybe the hundreds of thousands of French in Iraq will pull out. (Purely a jest) Oh here's a joke! How do you stop a french tank?









Shoot the Frenchy pushing it.

Who knows maybe the hundreds of thousands of French in Iraq will pull out. (Purely a jest) Oh here's a joke! How do you stop a french tank?









Shoot the Frenchy pushing it.
I remember one about surrendering to the Boy Scouts.

I remember one about surrendering to the Boy Scouts.

You know it really isn't nice to bash the French in this manner. Besides, suntanned armpits are sexy!

I remember one about surrendering to the Boy Scouts.
do share

As are the French.

They are? Do you have a source on that?

They are? Do you have a source on that?
Sure.
http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/transcripts/2005/050201_joint_press_conf_french_foreign_min.html
On Iraq, it is of course well known that we had different positions on the decision to remove Saddam Hussein's regime. I think it's fair to say we had a complete meeting of minds on the success of the elections in Iraq, and the significance of the success of those elections. My message while I have been here in Paris, both to the Foreign Minister and the Defence Minister is that as we know French troops are not going into Iraq, we would appreciate enormously France playing a significant role in training Iraqi police, and gendarmes, and security services generally and I must say that I have been very impressed to hear from both the Foreign Minister and the Defence Minister their commitment to assist with the training of Iraqi security forces because, again, we completely agree that the more we can build up the Iraqi security forces to defend the forces of democracy, to defend the new and emerging and free Iraq, the less those of us with troops there will be left to do and the sooner we'll be able to leave Iraq and Iraqis in the complete sense they will be able to gain their own sovereignty under the auspices of a free and democratic system.
February 2005

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/04/troops_ed2_.php
The question of sending people to Iraq is a central one, according to NATO officials and diplomats. France and Germany, the two biggest opponents of the Iraq war, have so far declined to offer training except outside Iraq.
February 2005

http://www.smh.com.au/news/After-Saddam/All-26-NATO-allies-will-help-train-Iraq-troops/2005/02/22/1109046924505.html
NATO officials said France was the last to come on board and will contribute just one officer to help coordination at NATO's military headquarters in southern Belgium. But Paris is also considering a financial contribution to the mission and has offered to train 1,500 Iraqi military police in Qatar, outside the NATO program.
February 2005

Ah, interesting.

It said they didn't on alertnet.org.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L2836203.htm

France has no troops in Iraq and is not taking part in any form of police training.

Whatever.

Ah, interesting.

It said they didn't on alertnet.org.
Maybe we're both right, and France offered, but no one wanted it.
And since I don't expect the French to kidnap Iraqis and hold them against their will for some police training, they wouldn't be involved.

But I guess it's the intention that counts.

At least this war in iraq is making the world a safer place.

At least this war in iraq is making the world a safer place.
By drawing all the terrorists there for some training?

By drawing all the terrorists there for some training?

And giving a reason to hold frenchman hostage.

Which makes me wonder. Why the hell do they do that in iraq, and not the Ivory coast, congo, etc?

Which makes me wonder. Why the hell do they do that in iraq, and not the Ivory coast, congo, etc?
They probably would if they could, but French citizens in Cote d´Ivoire (if there are any left) live in heavily guarded compounds, and I don't think there are any civilians in the states that used to be the Congo, just Peacekeepers.

They probably would if they could, but French citizens in Cote d´Ivoire (if there are any left) live in heavily guarded compounds, and I don't think there are any civilians in the states that used to be the Congo, just Peacekeepers.

There aren't many french civi's in iraq, either...

I'm thinking more journalists and engineer's, like this guy.

I'm thinking more journalists and engineer's, like this guy.
I suppose they don't have organised groups of the same calibre there, or the French just organise the security better if they get the chance. :confused:

Just goes to show you that these guys will do anything to get money and a few minutes on CNN, even if it involved make-believe enemies.

Just goes to show you that these guys will do anything to get money and a few minutes on CNN, even if it involved make-believe enemies.

I could make a really bad joke/satire/whatever on this, but I wont...

Who knows maybe the hundreds of thousands of French in Iraq will pull out. (Purely a jest) Oh here's a joke! How do you stop a french tank?

Shoot the Frenchy pushing it.

Since this has become a bash France thread, I'm gonna throw mine in too!

More French Bashing (all in good fun...)



The complete military history of France:

- Gallic Wars
- Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

- Hundred Years War
- Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman." Sainted.

- Italian Wars
- Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.

- Wars of Religion
- France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots

- Thirty Years War
- France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

- War of Revolution
- Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

- The Dutch War
- Tied

- War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War
- Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.

- War of the Spanish Succession
- Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.

- American Revolution
- In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when America does most of the fighting."

- French Revolution
- Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

- The Napoleonic Wars
- Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

- The Franco-Prussian War
- Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

- World War I
- Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

- World War II
- Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

- War in Indochina
- Lost. French forces plead sickness; take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu

- Algerian Rebellion
- Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; "We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.

- War on Terrorism
- France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.




"France has neither winter nor summer nor morals. Apart from these drawbacks it is a fine country. France has usually been governed by prostitutes." Mark Twain.


"I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton.





"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion." Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.





"We can stand here like the French, or we can do something about it." Marge Simpson





"As far as I'm concerned, war always means failure" Jacques Chirac, President of France



"As far as France is concerned, you're right." Rush Limbaugh,





"The only time France wants us to go to war is when the German Army is sitting in Paris sipping coffee." Regis Philbin.





"The French are a smallish, monkey-looking bunch and not dressed any better, on average, than the citizens of Baltimore. True, you can sit outside in Paris and drink little cups of coffee, but why this is more stylish than sitting inside and drinking large glasses of whisky I don't know." P.J O'Rourke (1989).





"You know, the French remind me a little bit of an aging actress of the 1940s who was still trying to dine out on her looks but doesn't have the face for it." John McCain, U.S. Senator from Arizona.





"You know why the French don't want to bomb Saddam Hussein? Because he hates America, he loves mistresses and wears a beret. He is French, people." Conan O'Brien





"I don't know why people are surprised that France won't help us get Saddam out of Iraq. After all, France wouldn't help us get Hitler out of France either" Jay Leno.





"The last time the French asked for 'more proof' it came marching into Paris under a German flag." David Letterman





Only thing worse than a Frenchman is a Frenchman who lives in Canada. Ted Nugent.





War without France would be like ... uh ... World War II.



“The favorite bumper sticker in Washington D.C. right now is one that says 'First Iraq, then France.” Tom Brokaw.





"What do you expect from a culture and a nation that exerted more of its national will fighting against Disney World and Big Macs than the Nazis?" Dennis Miller.





"It is important to remember that the French have always been there when they needed us." Alan Kent





"They've taken their own precautions against al-Qa'ida. To prepare for an attack, each Frenchman is urged to keep duct tape, a white flag, and a three-day supply of mistresses in the house." Argus Hamilton





"Somebody was telling me about the French Army rifle that was being advertised on eBay the other day -- the description was, 'Never shot. Dropped once.'" Rep. Roy Blunt (MO)





"The French will only agree to go to war when we've proven we've found truffles in Iraq." Dennis Miller





Raise your right hand if you like the French ... raise both hands if you are French.



Q. What did the mayor of Paris say to the German Army as they entered the city in WWII?

A. Table for 100,000 m'sieur?





"Do you know how many Frenchmen it takes to defend Paris? It's not known, it's never been tried." Rep. R. Blount (MO)





"Do you know it only took Germany three days to conquer France in WWII? And that's because it was raining." John Xereas, Manager, DC Improv.





The AP and UPI reported that the French Government announced after the London bombings that it has raised its terror alert level from Run to Hide. The only two higher levels in France are Surrender and Collaborate. The rise in the alert level was precipitated by a recent fire which destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively disabling their military.





French Ban Fireworks at Euro Disney

(AP), Paris, March 5, 2003

The French Government announced today that it is imposing a ban on the use of fireworks at Euro Disney. The decision comes the day after a nightly fireworks display at the park, located just 30 miles outside of Paris, caused the soldiers at a nearby French Army garrison to surrender to a group of Czech tourists.

That article is in French silly. We all know French is a dead language, as are all languages but English.
Sacre bleu!! Vous etes fou. :eek:

Since this has become a bash France thread, I'm gonna throw mine in too!
Ouh, how original. Never heard that one before. :rolleyes:

I wonder whether Louis XIV. will feature in that list one day...

Cribbed from http://www.spacecityrock.com/2003_02_16_break-archive.html

I think we should try and see both sides of the argument before launching into silly nationalist tirades.

"1 - Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian."
Actually, they weren't "Italians" -- they were the Romans, who happened at the time to be one of the most fearsome fighting forces the world had ever seen (and who conquered all of Europe, not just France, and parts of Africa and the Middle East, as well). And the Gauls put up a pretty good fight considering that at that point in history they were mostly a loose confederation of tribes with military technology and weapons far inferior to the Romans.

"2 - Hundred Years War - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman.""
Actually, while Joan of Arc may have turned the tide (I tend to think that the French adoption of guerilla warfare tactics had more to do with it, myself), she didn't win the war -- the Hundred Years War lasted until 1453, when the French re-took Bordeaux from the English, and after Charles VII, King of France, captured Paris. Before the war, the English controlled a large part of France (thanks to a strategic marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine), and by the end, the French had expanded, taking every English possession but Calais, which they finally retook in 1565. "Mostly lost," indeed -- the war kicked England off the European continent for good and established France as one of the major powers of the region.

"3 - Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians."
Dumb, dumb, dumb. Get your facts straight -- the French didn't lose the Italian Wars to the Italians, they lost to the Spanish (and, on a smaller scale, to the Swiss), with whom they were attempting to parcel out Italy. In the end (in 1559, sixty years after the wars' start in 1494), Spain controlled the country.

"4 - Wars of Religion - France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots."
The Huguenots were French. Claiming that the Huguenots won over France is a little like claiming the Civil War as a U.S. "victory," which is ridiculous.

"5 - Thirty Years War - France is technically not a participant but still manages to get invaded. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her."
That's funny; France wasn't a participant, but still somehow managed to fight for ten years alongside Sweden and the other allies to finally defeat Austria and force the disintegration of the Holy Roman Empire. Not only was this war not a tie, but France was very much involved.

"6 - War of Devolution - Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux."
I don't know what the red flowerpot has to do with France's success in the war, but I do know that the French were able to invade the Netherlands (part of which belonged to Spain at the time) and had captured a fair amount of territory by the time England, Holland, and Sweden were able to force France to sign a treaty ending the war.

"7 - The Dutch War - Tied. Dutch farmers and tulip growers are tougher than they look."
Yes, especially when aided by Spain, Denmark, and Austria, all of whom had a stake in keeping France away from the Netherlands. Also note at the end of the Dutch War, France ended up with more land in the Franche-Comte region and a bunch of fortresses in Flanders. Doesn't sound like much of a tie to me.

"8 - War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War - Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power."
Okay, let's get this straight: "tie" is a misnomer when you're talking about warfare. France, Spain, England, Austria, and the other European powers at the time weren't out to wipe their enemies off the face of the planet -- they were after A) land, B) money, or C) rule over a particular country. The way this little "history" is painted, any war that ends with a treaty is a "tie," which is crap. Both sides gained some and lost some.

"9 - War of the Spanish Succession - Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since."
Funny, but while the French did technically lose a lot of the battles, and they ended up giving up control of a lot of their European and North American possessions, they came out of the war pretty well, and ended up defeating Austria in 1714. And hey, King Louis XIV's grandson got to be the King of Spain -- how's that for a defeat (especially considering that that was what started the war in the first place)?

"10 - American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; " France only wins when America does most of the fighting.""
It should also be noted that they were the only nation in Europe to back the colonists in any real way. It wasn't necessarily out of the goodness of their hearts, admittedly, but the French supplied the American revolutionaries with so much in the way of supplies and weaponry that 90% of the guns used at the Battle of Saratoga came from France. In addition, the majority of the colonists were not trained soldiers, and the leaders of the Revolution had a hard time pulling together an army, much less getting it organized; the French troops (of which around 6000 were landed in Rhode Island) helped the war effort more than most people today realize -- without the French, the Americans probably would've lost the Battle of Yorktown.

On top of that, French ships blockaded the British, and France was the first nation to recognize the United States as a country and declare war on Britain, an action that subsequently pulled Spain (who wanted Gibraltar back from the British) and The Netherlands (who wanted to trade with the U.S.) into the fray, thereby distracting King George further from his problems overseas and loosening his grip on the colonies.

All that said, though, since when have the French claimed this as a "win"?

"11 - French Revolution - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French."
See the Wars of Religion, above.

"12 - The Napoleonic Wars - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for the Russian winter, Prussian grenadiers or a British footwear designer."
It's ridiculous to lump all of the Napoleonic Wars together; counted separately, France gets quite a bit more in the "win" side. And by "temporary victories," I'm assuming you mean:

1. France's defeat of Italy and Austria, which allowed the French to take over Italy and extend their eastern border to the Rhine (1796-1798)
2. The French conquest of Egypt (1798)
3. Napoleon's defeat of Austria for the second time, when they had the help of Britain and Batavia (1801)
4. The defeat of both the Austrians and the Russians (and yes, that was Austria for three, there; 1805) and the occupation of Vienna
5. The complete defeat of Prussia at the battle of Jena (1806; Prussia ended up as a vassal state to France)
6. Napoleon's second success against the Russians, which gave him Poland and got Russia to help him beat Sweden (1808)
7. His defeat of Britain, Spain, and Portugal, which allowed him to crown his brother King of Spain (1807-1811)
8. His fourth defeat of Austria, when it briefly dared to try to invade France (in 1809)
9. The fact that he united all of continental Europe into one gigantic empire and changed national boundaries forever.


Yeah, I guess that's all pretty minor. If Napoleon hadn't gotten cocky and tried to invade Russia in 1812, we could all be speaking French right now (oh, wait, but we already are, sort of -- see the bottom for a bit more on that). And by the way, Corsica was part of France back then (hell, it may still be; I can't recall). Calling Napoleon a Corsican is like saying George Bush is a Texan and therefore not a "real" American.

"13 - The Franco-Prussian War - Lost. For the first, but certainly not the last time, Germany plays the role of drunk frat boy to France 's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night."
Yes, it was a pretty major loss, but even still, I don't care what George Carlin says -- rape is never funny.

"14 - World War I - Invaded, humiliated and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Winds up a tie for les francaise. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, the American fascination with personal hygiene (a fascination totally foreign to French women) incites widespread use of condoms by American soldiers, thus precluding any improvement in the French bloodline."
France fielded twice as many soldiers in WWI as the U.S. (8,410,000 to our 4,355,000) and lost more than an eighth of them (Russia and Britain were the only countries with more soldiers mobilized and only the Russians had more casualties). Did they fight badly? I certainly doubt it. They just had the unfortunate circumstance of being next door to the enemy, unlike, say, the U.S. and England, who at least had some water in between.

And the bit about the French bloodline is just plain racist, and it pisses me off.

"15 - World War II - A decisive defeat even by French standards. Hitler and the German Youth spend Christmas time sleeping soundly through the winter, then arouse themselves to conquer France in six weeks. Hitler dances in front of the Eiffel Tower, while the French command staff retreats to Algeria to institute a crash language program to teach French privates how to say "I surrender" in German and French generals to say "We surrender" in German. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song and some small portion of the German work ethic. De Gaulle of it all..."
Yeah, and we took what, five years to get around to doing it? And then only after we'd been attacked? The U.S. was no savior, I'm afraid; we took our sweet time in rescuing the nations of Europe, never mind the Jews. On top of that, the French did keep fighting, even if their leaders surrendered. The French lost close to 250,000 men in WWII, which is nearly as many as the U.S. and the U.K. lost, and a lot more than the Dutch and Belgians (who also happened to be occupied, you'll note -- the Netherlands lost 7,900 and Belgium 12,000, by way of comparison) lost. And these are strictly the numbers of official soldiers, mind you -- without the French Resistance, there would have been no D-Day, I guarantee you.

"16 - First Vietnamese war (in Vietnamese circles, known as "the scrimmage", or "the exhibition game" where the varsity squad is kept on the sideline to see how the second string will play) - Lost. French soldiers, fresh off their four year occupation by the Germans, catch a terminal case of Dien Bien Flu."
I feel compelled to point out that the French lost 14,000 more troops in Vietnam than the U.S. did, 74,000 to 60,000. At the battle at Dien Bien Phu alone, on which the writer of this crap makes his wonderful play on words, the Vietnamese killed 6000 French soldiers, a fact that I don't find particularly funny -- would you appreciate somebody chuckling at the way U.S. Marines were mowed down on the beaches of Normandy? Doubtful. Our veterans and war dead are sacrosanct...of course, that doesn't apply to the brave soldiers, dead or alive, of another country, though, does it? Making light of the French experience in Vietnam is just as distasteful as it would be to make light of the American experience; it's disrespectful in the extreme.

The French army finally pulled out because they'd lost too many men fighting a war to hang onto colonial possessions that they didn't even really want to deal with anymore anyway, and the U.S. stepped in to take over not because we gave a damn about the French (or the Vietnamese, for that matter), but because we were scared of the bogeyman of Communism. (And we lost, by the way -- should that be the First Rule of Korean & Vietnamese Warfare, that they can always beat the Americans?)

"17 - Algerian rebellion - Lost. First time an Arab army has beaten a Western army since the Crusades, and produces the first rule of modern Islamic warfare: "We can always beat the French." A nice phrase, but it lacks something in originality, since it is also the first rule of warfare for the Italians, Russians, Prussians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese, Native Americans and capitalists."
I'll admit that France lost Algeria; I think, however, that you need to re-examine your "rules," based on the actual history (see above).

"18 - War on Terrorism - Lost. Incensed at not being included in the original "Axis of Evil," France refuses to participate. When it becomes clear that this is a "no-kidding war," Jacques Chirac looks at his cards and immediately surrenders to that old warhorse, Gerhard Schroeder. For good measure, he also surrenders to five million illegal immigrants from Algeria."
Want to hear about the war on terror? France has fought it for more than ten years now on their own soil, dealing with threats from the Algeria terrorist group GIA, whose attacks have spilled over into Europe -- bombings, airplane hijackings, assassinations, you name it. Believe me, the French know first-hand how terrorism works. They also provided support in the U.S.-led campaign in Afghanistan, including troops, and your little scenario above is, therefore, crap.

I'd like to point out that France has routinely committed its very able soldiers to fight on behalf of the nations of the world in numerous areas -- they sent far more ground troops to the former Yugoslavia, while we Americans were content to bomb from above. Similarly, you don't see any U.S. soldiers trying to quell the civil wars raging in Africa, do you? (Okay, aside from the mess we made in Somalia, which sent the U.S. home with its tail between its legs; how's that for a loss?)

Also, whoever wrote this missed a few fairly major bits of French military history (or glossed over them, as the author seems wont to do with victories):

1. The Crusades - French knights and soldiers fought, led, and did very well in the Crusades, managing to capture Cyprus, Acre, Constantinople, and even Jerusalem until Saladin reclaimed it, and they held on in the Holy Land even after that. The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem survived from 1099-1228 (which is one hundred and thirty freaking years), and if you look at the names of the Kings, you'll notice that nearly all have French names and titles: "Godfrey of Bouillon"; "Fulk of Anjou"; "Amalric I"; "Guy of Lisignane"; "Henry of Champagne," etc. Keep in mind that these were European kings trying to hold onto a tiny, vulnerable kingdom in the middle of a hostile region.

2. The Norman Invasion of England - There's this little thing known as the Norman Invasion. William the Conqueror fought back two previous invasions of Normandy by the English, and then got mad and decided to take the fight to their front door, proceeding to invade the puny little island country, rout the English army at the Battle of Hastings (and the Norwegian army, besides), crown himself king, and set up all his allies as lords of England, positions which a lot of Norman-descended families still hold. In fact, when France later went to war against England in the Hundred Years War, they were warring against the soldiers of the Norman English king.

Oh, and his vassals also managed to conquer Scotland and large chunks of Ireland. Which is how my Irish great-grandmother's maiden name was Grace (from "Gras") and my dad's Scottish grandfather's name was Fraser (from "Freseliere"). If you want a hint of the influence the Normans had on the culture, take a look at the English language -- French loan-words are scattered all over the place. English is basically a Germanic language, remember; anything that sounds remotely Latin probably came from the French.

Now, if you want to argue "hey, the Normans were ex-Vikings who settled in Normandy," you're technically right, but if you want to really be accurate, the French aren't strictly Gauls, either -- they're Franks (who, by the way, kicked the Romans out of Gaul for good), and Burgunds, and Visigoths, and Gauls (who weren't the original inhabitants, mind you, but Celts), and a whole mess of other things. The Normans were Norsemen who settled in France, but by the time of the Norman Invasion, they'd been living there for two hundred and fifty years or so and they had become integrated into what now makes up the French population, so they count as much as anybody, whether they came from Sweden or Swabia. It's far enough back in history as to be immaterial -- you'd be better off arguing that the only truly native English were the Picts, who happen to've been pretty much wiped out by the Saxons.

It's also worth noting, I think, that the Normans also conquered southern Italy in the 10th century, kicking out the Arabs and creating their own kingdom in Sicily in 1130, and that from there they did a great deal of the fighting during the Crusades (see above for more on that).

3. The Battle of Chalons - Yes, it's an old one, but hey, we've already dug up the Gallic Wars, so why not? Way back in 451 AD, Attila the Hun's armies ravaged Europe, the faltering Roman Empire needed help to fight back Attila before he conquered all of the western part of its territory. So the Visigoths, formerly enemies of Rome who had established one of the first kingdoms in France, joined with the Romans and helped them turn back Attila at the Battle of Chalons. Attila survived, it's true, and ended up ransacking Rome anyway later on, but it was one of his few major defeats, and without the aid of the Visigoths, the whole Empire would've gone up in smoke sooner rather than later. So the French beat the Huns (the real ones, not the Germans) -- how many countries can say that?

"The question for any country silly enough to count on the French should not be "Can we count on the French?", but rather "How long until France collapses?""
Sorry to break this to you folks, but France has been around for more than a thousand years now, surviving wars, revolutions, and plagues, and I guarantee you that it'll be around for a lot longer than you or I will.

All this French-bashing makes me sick, but more so when it's based on lies and a skewed, selective view of history. If you're going to attack the French, complain about their politics or their food or whatever else you like, but think twice before you offer up this particular glimpse of their military history as the truth. Feel free to pass this one around, folks, preferably any time some moron sends you the "innocently humorous" version.

Addendum/Corrections: Thanks to the folks who've written in about this post; I appreciate it. I've corrected a few bits in the above: the Normans arrived in 800 AD, making the gap about 250 years, not a thousand (although some sources I've read have Vikings colonizing parts of the continent much earlier); no, it wasn't the Normans who defeated the Norwegian army, but the English (sorry, got that part wrong); and I added the part about the Normans conquering Italy later on. Thanks to Midge, Johan, and Andrew for the corrections!

Thanks as well to Justin for adding more to the list, some of which (like the Crimean War, for example, of which I'm very ignorant) are pretty hefty French triumphs. I can't really go back and incorporate all of them, but in the interests of completeness, here's what he wrote, just about verbatim:

1820-1823 - Spanish Civil War - France essentially went into Spain, conquered Madrid and overran the revolutionary government of Colonel Rafael Nunez, and restored King Ferdinand to the Spanish throne.

1837 - Pasty War - France occupied Veracruz, Mexico and got a 600,000 peso indemity for a French cook who had his property attacked. Legendary Mexican soldier Santa Anna is wounded and loses a leg.

1842 - France occupies the Ivory Coast.

1853-1856 - Crimean War - France, Britain, and the Ottoman Empire defeat Russia in the Crimean peninsula. It was a French defeat of the Malakhov defense line that was crucial in victory. Russia surrendered in 1856 at the Congress of Paris.

1854-1857 - French/Tukolor War - Under Louis Faidherbe, France subjugates the moorish tribes in Northern Senegal, defeats the Umar Tal in the lower Senegal River, and extends French domination of the region south towards present day Gambia.

1854 - France conquers the Oualo Kingdom of present day Mauritania.

1858-1863 - French/Indochina War - French/Spanish forces bombard the port city of Tourane. They (1,000 men) hold out on a year-long seige after taking Saigon in 1859 until another French force relieves them. King Tu Duc cedes three Conchin Chinese provinces, the Con Son Islands. In 1864, Cambodian King Norodom accepts a French protectorate. In 1867, Siam is forced to give up its claim in Cambodia.

1880 - France Occupies Tunis (then part of Ottoman Empire), which quickly surrenders.

1883-1885 - France bombards the cities of Tamatave and Majunga and manages to conquer Madagascar.

1863-1867 - Mexican Reformation War - France, Britain, and Spain initially all invade to regain war debts. Britain and Spain leave, but France further invades and suffers a setback at the battle of Puebla on May 5, 1862 (celebrated as Cinco de Mayo). A year later, a reinvigorated French force takes Puebla and marches onto Mexico City unopposed. The French occupation of Mexico lasts four years under Austrian Maxmillian I. They pull out to diplomatic pressure from the States, and due to European threats from Prussia in 1867.

1884-1885 - Chinese try to take Annam region from French, but are defeated and give up claim on it.

1889-1890 - Franco/Dahomey War - French win control of Porto Novo (modern-day capital of Benin).

1890-1892 - French/Tukolor War - France takes much of the Upper Niger from the Tukolor Empire.

1893 - France again defeats Siam, forcing them to cede Laos after blockading Bangkok.

1899-1900 - French forces defeat Rabah Zobeir, completing their conquest of Chad.

1909-1911 - French forces conquer the Wadai region, a mountainous area between Eastern Chad and Central Sudan.

1919-1920 - French Occupation of Syria - French forces take Damascus, defeating King Faisal. He flees to Iraq.

1919-1926 - Rif War - France bails out Spain's sorry ass in Morocco. Spain
suffered massive routs in 1920 to Berber commander Abd-El Krim. France attacked from the South, allowing Spanish forces to attack from the North and force Krim's surrender in 1926. The Spanish cities of Melila and Ceuta are still Spanish today because of France!

1925-1927 - France puts down Druze revolt of Sultan Al-Atrash. After initial defeats including the capture of General Maurice Sarrail, France attacks Damascus and ends most of the Druze rebellion.

1930-1931 - Yei Bei rebellion - France puts down rebellion of Nguyen Thai Hoc and executes 12 leaders of his group. With much intensity, France puts down the rebellion and reestablishes control of Vietnam.

One other note:
France WON the Battle of Algiers. General Jacques Massu brutally uprooted and crushed most of the rebel FLN. France pulled out on their OWN accord. De Gaulle knew the continued cost of the war would be too much. When he tried to negotiate, mutinous officers like Raoul Salan tried to rebel as did the Pieds-Noirs (the French Algerians). The diplomatic loss of Algeria (it was not a military defeat) almost caused a civil war in France

This sort of thing has happened with other forigners from countries not involved in the war too. I remember seeing an amusing video of some Iraqis demanding that some country (I forget which one, I'm sorry) that wasn't in the war pull out, but they looked very ameteurish and seemed to be filmed in someones living room rather than a dark concrete room that real terrorists use. They were part timers I think.

Bernard Planche vivait seul dans une villa du quartier Mansour, un quartier bourgeois de la capitale irakienne, également considéré comme un haut lieu des enlèvements. Fait rare pour un Occidental, il conduisait seul sa voiture, et ne disposait d'aucune protection, ce qui faisait de lui une cible toute désignée pour les ravisseurs.

That was a bit careless of him, I should say.

Bernard Planche vivait seul dans une villa du quartier Mansour, un quartier bourgeois de la capitale irakienne, également considéré comme un haut lieu des enlèvements. Fait rare pour un Occidental, il conduisait seul sa voiture, et ne disposait d'aucune protection, ce qui faisait de lui une cible toute désignée pour les ravisseurs.

That was a bit careless of him, I should say.

Being French, he probably thought that all Iraqis, especially insurgents, would love to have him there. So he drove alone without bodyguards.

If they kill him, and he hasn't reproduced yet, he should get a Darwin Award.

Cribbed from http://www.spacecityrock.com/2003_02_16_break-archive.html

I think we should try and see both sides of the argument before launching into silly nationalist tirades.

Thankyou! I was looking for that earlier.

Being French, he probably thought that all Iraqis, especially insurgents, would love to have him there.

That comment is uncalled for.

That comment is uncalled for.
It's not a matter of being uncalled for. He, by his actions compared to virtually any other foreigner working there, clearly demonstrated that he believed himself to be as safe as if he were driving around Paris - while he obviously knew that every other foreigner has PSCs and such.

In his mind, he believed that being French made him safe from the insurgents.

It's not a matter of being uncalled for. He, by his actions compared to virtually any other foreigner working there, clearly demonstrated that he believed himself to be as safe as if he were driving around Paris - while he obviously knew that every other foreigner has PSCs and such.

In his mind, he believed that being French made him safe from the insurgents.

I doubt him being French has anything to do with anything. I think him being stupid, on the other hand, is the real issue here. His nationality is inconsequential, and it is uncalled for to allude to it.

I doubt him being French has anything to do with anything. I think him being stupid, on the other hand, is the real issue here. His nationality is inconsequential, and it is uncalled for to allude to it.
I believe that his actions were based on beliefs and attitudes about the relationship between Iraqis, insurgents, and other nations. I believe that he thought that the French were immune because they objected to the war, and were the good friends of Saddam prior to the war.

This may have been stupid, but it's still a French matter.

Whatever the reasons, I hope they let the guy go. They have released others before.
I dont see it helping them much if they hurt or kill this guy. Its like deliberately making another enemy, or giving another enemy some resolve.

Maybe he felt safe, maybe he was just a total fool. I think he's had his rude awakening now.

I find the terrorists pretty stupid. Not a good plan to kidnap foreign nationals from countries that denigrate the efforts of the US.

I heard an interview on public radio with a New York Times reporter who had been stationed in Iraq that the Sunnis actually believe that they are the majority in the country. No wonder they think the voting was rigged. If they are dumb enough to think that they are the majority they would obviously think that their candidates should have gotten the majority vote.

Apparently they also think the French have a troop presence there. I wonder if that level of ignorance coupled with their high attrition rates qualify them for a darwin award?

I find the terrorists pretty stupid. Not a good plan to kidnap foreign nationals from countries that denigrate the efforts of the US.


I dont know-one day they seem stupid, the next more clever.

I know what you are saying,though.

Unfortunately, rather than resolving the French against the insurgents and possibly having them strengthen their relationship with the US against terror, etc, I can almost see this turning more French against the US, citing our presence and action their precipitated the attack on their countryman.

You can see this going there, right? Maybe, that was the intention from the start.

I dont know-one day they seem stupid, the next more clever.

I know what you are saying,though.

Unfortunately, rather than resolving the French against the insurgents and possibly having them strengthen their relationship with the US against terror, etc, I can almost see this turning more French against the US, citing our presence and action their precipitated the attack on their countryman.

You can see this going there, right? Maybe, that was the intention from the start.

Yes. Catch-22 - it's the best catch there is.

That comment is uncalled for.

This thread has degenerated into something uncalled for.

I think they also captured some Chinese workers, then promptly released them when the Chinese kindly reminded them that China could kick thier ass.

Then you come to the Canadian peacekeepers who are still being held (I think they should be dead by now :/) despite Canada's non-participation in the war. Now the French guy.

Lesson learned: Terrorists scoff at pacifism and tremble at asskickings.

I think they also captured some Chinese workers, then promptly released them when the Chinese kindly reminded them that China could kick thier ass.

Then you come to the Canadian peacekeepers who are still being held (I think they should be dead by now :/) despite Canada's non-participation in the war. Now the French guy.

Lesson learned: Terrorists scoff at pacifism and tremble at asskickings.


Maybe they feel China would kick their asses without worrying about adhering to rules.

Maybe they feel China would kick their asses without worrying about adhering to rules.

That too. Plus, I really don't think the Chinese people would care about casualities too much. And even if they do, the state media has a knack for twisting figures around anyway.

Maybe they feel China would kick their asses without worrying about adhering to rules.

If only we didn't have those peaceniks worrying about the rights of foreign terrorists too much, we might actually get a ton of stuff accomplished.

If only we didn't have those peaceniks worrying about the rights of foreign terrorists too much, we might actually get a ton of stuff accomplished.

While I agree on the whole, that can be argued both ways. Sometimes you up the ante. We have too much to lose.
All we need is resolve in this country. When the majority here agree and are unified and not swayed by bullshit polls and press, we can accomplish anything. Right now, there is a terrible undercurrent of doubt and confusion.

I think they also captured some Chinese workers, then promptly released them when the Chinese kindly reminded them that China could kick thier ass.

Then you come to the Canadian peacekeepers who are still being held (I think they should be dead by now :/) despite Canada's non-participation in the war. Now the French guy.

Lesson learned: Terrorists scoff at pacifism and tremble at asskickings.

The only reason Canada didn't go was because the UN didn't approve, and here I thought one of the reasons we didn't go was to protect our sovereignty....

The Canadian Forces were preparing to send a fair amount of troops till the liberals realized that the UN wasn't going to give permission for war.

This french guy has two chances:

1) The Coalition finds out where he is being held and rescues him
2) The French send their only good military unit (the Foreign Legion ) to get him.

I suppose the third option is a ransom is paid thus giving money so they can kidnap and murder more people.

I believe that his actions were based on beliefs and attitudes about the relationship between Iraqis, insurgents, and other nations. I believe that he thought that the French were immune because they objected to the war, and were the good friends of Saddam prior to the war.

This may have been stupid, but it's still a French matter.

Good friends who contributed the second largest european force in the gulf war, and embargo'd Iraq along with the rest of the law abiding world after the war?

(If you get into food for oil, us companies were more guilty of it than french companies, and neither represented the governments of the countries, so thats moot).

I believe that his actions were based on beliefs and attitudes about the relationship between Iraqis, insurgents, and other nations. I believe that he thought that the French were immune because they objected to the war, and were the good friends of Saddam prior to the war.

This may have been stupid, but it's still a French matter.

*ahem* (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10178734&postcount=22)