Funny Americans

[Jarnhamar]

A buddy of mine was telling me a restraunt in North Carolina changed the name of french fries to freedom fries. People on the news apparently were saying they wanted to get rid of everything french in the states. Get rid of the "french" in french kissing, french toast etc.. Some places were going to stop carrying french wines. I got a kick out of that.

One thing that bugged me was a few commericals i saw (thought not lately) where basically the theme of the thing was the US saved france and the rest of europe, shame on them for not supporting the US right now. Like pictures of ww2 graveyards and such. I thought that was a little much.

 

[onecat]

That is totally too much. The US did save France, along with the rest of allies 50 plus years ago. And French, and Germany for that matter have paid off their debt in full. I find it funny how the US is big on freedom and saving the world, but as soon one them says I think YOUR wrong we not helping; the US labals them and says don‘t they count for much. I remmber reading how the US use to call UK the little island with a tiny navy... but now that their buddies their little island in important. But I think that goes with being a superpower, you can speak your mind as long as its something we want to hear.... if not shut up. Its very much like the free trade arangement with we have: it free trade as long its works for US companies, but as soon a Canadian product does well its dumping.

 

[Marti]

it‘s funny Americans take so much credit for saving France in WWI and WWII, but you don‘t often hear them acknowledging the French for saving them during the War of Independance.

 

[nbk]

If the Americans boycott French products, does that mean they give back the statue of liberty?

 

[muskrat89]

There is more to everything than meets the eye. I think you will find, if you dig far enough, that the French Government has billions of dollars in illegal oil contracts with the Iraqis. Dig a little further, and you will find that the French, and the Germans have contributed significantly to Iraq‘s nuclear reactor programs, as well as their "industrial" chemical programs. Their opposition to the use of force is not totally philosophical.

 

[onecat]

"There is more to everything than meets the eye. I think you will find, if you dig far enough, that the French Government has billions of dollars in illegal oil contracts with the Iraqis."
------------------------------------------------------------

From what I‘ve read there is nothing illegal but their oil contracts. Saddam is the legal head of Irag and allowed under UN mandate to sign contracts. If I‘m wrong please correct me; but hear talk about the French contracts on CNN and the BBC and they never said thay were illegal. The French have some like 6 billion in oil deals with Iraq, so for them the war is about oil and that means saying no war

 

[muskrat89]

Granted, I researched about 20 websites, and opinions varied from outright illegal, to barely legal. My point was more that the US has lots of reasons to take out Hussein, including (possibly) oil. France‘s only reason for opposition, it appears, is oil. A sample from The Washington Institute website:
"...Contrast that experience with the approach toward Saddam Hussein, a perpetrator of more-grievous human-rights abuses than Milosevic. Sadly, increasingly lucrative Iraqi business contracts appear to have virtually silenced any European effort at indicting Saddam for war crimes. Russia, for example, has earned more than $1 billion in contracts with Saddam under the oil-for-food programs, and has promises of several billion dollars more in future contracts once sanctions are lifted. In the first four years of the oil-for-food program, France won $3.5 billion in trade with Iraq.

The U.S. (and maybe its close ally in these matters, Britain) appears ready to strike Iraq again any day now as Saddam continues to upgrade his air defenses and challenge the no-fly zone. But the fact that United Nations reports show France and Russia doing much more trade with Iraq than other European countries should not surprise. Unfortunately, France and others are not limiting themselves to legal trade.

With the November 2000 resumption of illegal oil exportation through the Iraq-Syria pipeline, Baghdad receives an additional $1 billion annually outside the tight constraints of the U.N. humanitarian program. With selective contracting, Saddam uses this money to reward countries taking a softer line toward Iraq. According to the July 9, 2001, edition of the Baghdad weekly Nabd Al-Shabab, CMA CGM, France‘s leading shipping company, will soon start defying the sanctions regime on Iraq by ferrying supplies into Iraq. "

Again, my point was everyone is quick to support or (usually) condemn the US. There are few, however "without sin" in the Security Council

 

[onecat]

That is very true, you made really points. And do have to agree with that France‘s only reason for saying no is oil. I think the United States is correct in its view and that war is the option left.

My point has more with US reaction to the anti-war side. If France feels its wrong then that it‘s their opinion, and the US should trying to convince France, Germany and Russia that removing Saddam is the right thing to do: even if its means war. Instead of trying to run them down, with statements like they never win wars and that their country has only 60 miliion people and there fore doesn‘t count. Being a bully, doesn‘t look good when your fighting a bully.

 

[muskrat89]

Well, and you‘re right. That being said, though, I think the US Govt IS trying to sway the French and German governments, through diplomatic means. The US Government is certainly not telling folks in North Carolina to change the name of their french fries. Most of this type of reaction is more grassroots. The average person tends to see things in more black and white, cut and dried - thus their visceral reaction to what they see as plain old non-support. Ask the average Canadian what they think of gun registration or separitism, or any other complicated national issue (or international) and you will probably not get a reasoned debate - just a gut reaction, in-your-face opinion. Also remember that, misdirected or not, there is a lot of connection made between Iraq, and 9/11. This only increases the emotional nature of their opinions.

 

[Jarnhamar]

What if a country simply does not like going to war?
A lot of innocent people are going to die if we bomb iraq. A lot of soldiers are going to die too. If worst comes to worse and our foot soldiers are running through the streets of bagdad where every mother and child could have an AK47 and pictures of blown away children reach the news (gripping an AK or not) theres going to be anti war protests that make the ones from vietnam look like a protest int he park. This is exactly what saddam wants i think. He doesnt care how many of his people die. He does know that the media controls the population though.

A super power country with a powerful military has a lot to gain from going to war. It helps the economy to an extent. It gives them a chance to test new inventions in combat. It gives them a chance to give their soldiers combat experience. It helps justify spending so much money on defense.

To me whats even more ‘scarry‘ then going to war is the fact that the UN might so easily be bipassed. Thats like saying "everyone has to follow the rules but us". What good is the UN? Why do we even contribute to it?

I‘ve watched on the news where the US is considering developing low yield nuclear weapons. "ploto bombs" i think its called (kinda like from star ship troopers). While i think this is a pretty cool idea even though i cant think of who we could use it on except aliens it breaks about 3 or 4 treaties.
Also in the philipeans (sp?) their constitution clearly states that no US ground forces are allowed on their land in a combat role. Except now theres a group of terrorists with ties to al-quaida so their constitution is out the window and marines from a MAU are doing something.
Crazy how quickly fear can change things.

 

[muskrat89]

A super power country with a powerful military has a lot to gain from going to war. It helps the economy to an extent. It gives them a chance to test new inventions in combat. It gives them a chance to give their soldiers combat experience. It helps justify spending so much money on defense.

Is that why France has troops in the Ivory Coast?

Were all of Canada‘s reasons for going to war justified? Genocide or civil war a justification? Iraq has had that. Not being flip, quite the opposite. Many people make this black and white, but I believe there‘s more to it that that. On the other hand, try to evaluate it intellectually, and it gets so convoluted that your brain starts to fry. I don‘t think any country WANTS to go to war which doesn‘t mean its politicians don‘t have their own agendas. But isn‘t that what democracies are for? The politicians being the voice of the people? Well, not exactly, either. Saying Americans want war is like saying Canadians wanted the GST, or to register their guns. I am not for the war on Iraq - to be honest, I don‘t know what to believe anymore. I wouldn‘t want to be the President if a pint of Hussein‘s missing anthrax got into Al-Queda‘s hands somehow, and then into US. Likely? I don‘t know. Who wants to bet on scenarios like that? Maybe strict non-intervention is the best policy. Let people straighten out their own messes - no more wars except for defense. Will the UN stand by while Israel gets swallowed up? Frankly, this debate could take a zillion different turns, and go on forever.....

 

[Jarnhamar]

I think it‘s like a magic trick. You see it and your amazined at it. You can‘t figure it out and you think of a million different things. In the end it‘s usually something so simple you would have never guessed it.

I have no idea what would work in this situation. Not sure what would be the best solution. I can‘t even make an educated guess with out really thinking about it. I DO believe however that saddam hussain wants the US to go to war with them. If someone was calling me on practically begging me to hit them i would wonder "why".

Also, what exactly is the ivory coast??

 

[typhoon85]

Ivory Coast is a country in western Africa

 

[RoyalHighlander]

You know whats really funy?? Until the 1st world war they were called German fries, and were changed to french Fries then...maybe its evolution to Freedom Fries.. whats next?
BUSH FRIES ? ? ? lmfao

 

[Pugil]

Let the inspectors do their as long as they are in Iraq there is no danger. People should remember that it was the US and UK who supported Saddam Hussein in the fist spot for his war against Iran in the 80s. At that time only Israel had received more help from the US in that region. The Western World continued to support Saddam even after he gased the Kurds. It is hypocrit to say that is a war of liberation, but nothing than a war to control oil ( Iraq has the second largest oil field after Saudi Arabia)

 

[Jarnhamar]

I‘ve been watching the news a little more lately.
I never really noticed before the amount of violence in north america.
Thats to say every day someone is dying. One of the most frequently things i‘ve heard about saddam was that he ‘kills his own people!‘

Watching the news today as of lunch time.

-10 year old girl shot in the head in philidelphia (sp) after a snow ball fight. A man opened fire into a crowd of 10 year old‘s.
-Alabama-Man shoots 4 co-workers at 6:30 am this morning.
-A man was arrested after a dog who crawled on his properity to have babies after being hit by a car blew the mother and babies away with a shot gun and shoveled their remains onto a side walk (in full view of school children walking by)
[The guy who killed the dog will probably recieve a stiffer sentence then the guy who shot the girl]

I‘m sure saddam has killed a puppy or two in his day. If were going to go to war with him as a premtive measure (get him before he gets us) then thats great. I support that, but call a spade a spade.Were going in to take over because of gas/oil and we put him in power so we have to fix our mistake. All this good guy vs bad guy rightious stuff is a little too much for me.

The one thing i can say for iraq is i bet you never see a 3 time repeat child rapist or murderer living it up on death row getting steak every friday and a free college diploma.

 

[nbk]

Don‘t forget the US Regan administration supported Saddam gassing the Kurds because they were "terrorists" rebelling against Saddam‘s righteous and just government...

 

[Pugil]

Are they going to change the "French kiss" to something like "freedom kiss"`? :blotto:

 

[SpinDoc]

Well, if they‘re gonna nitpick, they should take a look at the Revolutionary War and how the French gave them a hand...

In fact, one could even possibly argue that the French were supporting the colonial "terrorists" against British rule... I‘m sure the American colonials committed acts that could be construed as "terrorist acts".

Silly people. Good gracious.

 

[Pugil]

House cafeterias change names for ‘french fries‘ and ‘french toast‘ to ‘freedom fries‘ and ‘freedom toast‘ in a culinary rebuke of France stemming from anger over the country‘s refusal to support the U.S. position on Iraq.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/sprj.irq.fries/index.html