190 thoughts on “Doug Stanhope and Saving the French”
Are you the one who was talking about not involving people into personal attacks or something?
Maybe you should cut down on the bullcrap
Person A: having a pizza and writing B.S on blogs/forums
Person B: presume you were referring to yourself …
Person A : person B is making personal attacks blah blah…
Now who first insinuated that posters here were eating pizza and writing B.S in blogs? Who first made that “attack” ?
since sharon likes questions:
Who’s more foolish: the fool, or the fool who follows?
I’m sorry you felt aimed. I was emphasizing barney’s statements and referring to general attitude of the trolls .
Thibault.
Don’t pay too much attention to trollie. It’s a bit confused
@thibault
After so many attacks aimed at me in this site, just look at #100 following your post, you can understand why I took your comments as aimed at me. I didn’t realize you were talking generally.
See what I mean, Thibault ? lol
Matters to chew on:
The fact of the matter is that Britain did “bug out” at Dunkirk. For example, Churchill had instructed British forces at Singapore to “fight to the last man”, being the British enjoyed a 3:1 military advantage in strength over Japanese invading forces. The Japanese infantryman was tough –much tougher than his British counterpart and so the British were defeated, driven all the way down the Malayan Peninsula to their island fortress, Singapore — Gen. Percival presenting the white flag to the Japanese Commander, Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita, so-called Tiger of Malaya ( the Japanese had no air support during this campaign, their infantry advancing south –on bicycles, during battle lulls. The British BrewsterBuffalo, a single-engine fighter, had been employed in the British defense to no avail (it was soon learned during the War in the Pacific that Japanese forces could hardly be beaten when opposing forces were equal in men and material).
The British Expeditionary Forces in France, realizing they could not meet the test in alliance with their French ally against the Germans did, in a sense, “bug out” at Dunkirk (it was a hurried, desparate deparature in any man’s language, largely enabled by French covering forces). In retreat on their island haven, they –Churchill and his Cabinet– fully expected that America, under Pres. Roosevelt (anglophilic to the core), would save British interests and so it was to happen. The crux of the issue is that the British –by pure circumstance– had no need of surrender; indeed, they might go back to their little island and continue with the British Empire intact! Had Hitler not spoken of this in his Mein Kampf ? Had Hitler not pulled his generals back at Dunkirk –in effect giving the British time to re-access matters after having had their butt kicked ? As we all know, these British “cousins of the ‘German’ Saxons” might well rest assured; for, our Uncle Sam and truly their Uncle Samwould come the rescue.
Touching on the German Blitzkreigof WW II: Truly, an awesome attack operation by combined armor, infantry, air support — an “endless” onslaught, men/material of seemingly inexhaustable supply, effecting the outcome to be (what else ?). The operation has been referred to as “rolling artillery” and evolved as a battle approach following WW I. Keep in mind: No nation could have resisted the blitzkreig, presenting on Germany’s west border, WW II. Consider: Had either the U.S., the Russian or the British nation been located adjacent to that border, chaos would surely have ensued with a rapid fold-up (I would have given Washington, D.C., perhaps a week or ten days with our then standing Army; London would have fallen in three days; the Soviet Regime, being more diffuse, would require more time –perhaps several months; however, the fall of that state would happen [I state this with the German Army being fully engaged — having no other concern and the Russians standing alone]).
NOTE : The British General Staff during WW I remained under strict orders to restrict battle losses; or, ” let the French do the dying” –Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August. The sequel to this admonition resulted with the British effecting few, if any, wilful closures with the German enemy; i.e., a deliberate straying on the battlefield that avoided combat ( a serious matter of honor for the British; for, a confrontation was to occur later between French and British Commanders in the field).
Fred (the other Fred), While I recognize your insight and appreciate your points, I, gracefully, remind you that this is a blog for addressing French bashing. I strongly recommend that it is not in our interests , no matter how suttle, to bash Allies. This does not mean that we can’t critize individual comments or decisions, just be aware that the UK was an Ally in WWII and they very much are today. Just my opinion.
Thanks Fred for that analysis. I presume that when the Brits went back to their little island as you put it, Hitler left that little Island alone and Brits went back to having a cup of tea & crumpets till the Normandy invasion.
Who knew that the London blitz was invented by British propaganda, not to mention the Battle of Britain which no doubt was collaborative effort by Hollywood and the British propaganda machine. Now if only we could find the director who made Coventry look like it was bombed to hell.
I’m with Fred Orth, enough dissecting of history for political argument. While the subject is fascinating and quite thrilling to learn about, one cannot extrapolate to today’s issue of French bashing, save explain the roots of some of the prejudice that exists on both sides.
Anybody can take a historical fact out of context, or turn it into a symbol – for I have done it – as a communication exercise – as well as John J. Miller, Mark Molesky or any user of any forum that has dealt with Franco-American politics.
Let’s never forget:
None of us are collectively and perpetually guilty for the actions of some
None of us can collectively and perpetually take credit for the actions of others (the point Doug Stanhope is making here)
Thank you
Just out of curiosity, how do you know collective guilt doesn’t exist. As far as I know the Germans after WW2 officially accepted collective guilt for atrocities committed in the name of Germany during WW2.
There are situations where, at least the intelligent portion of the population, will accept a “collective ” guilt. A lot of Germans for the brutality towards Jews and Gipseys, French for the 1940 collapse, Americans for the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, etc., British for the mistakes with colonialism. Mistakes are made, it’s one of the things that happens in a democracy. We’re all still Allies. Love them all.
States can expressive a form of collective guilt.
But no individual should have to carry that weight, save those who subscribe to some form of deep Catholicism.
Fred, I agee somewhat but I must say I don’t think “mistakes” is the right word to use for genocide of Indians and slavery no matter who committed them, whether it was by european colonialists (Spanish, British, French, Portuguese) or later USA, Canada & Latin America. Also wanted to note that the genocide of Indians and slavery occurred throughout the ‘new world’, not merely within American borders.
As far as I know asking countries to take responsiblity for their actions is not assigning individual blame or guilt. I doubt that when the French parliament passed a resolution about the Armenian genocide they were saying individual Turks are guilty and therefore each individual Turk is guilty and should carry the weight of that burden.
Sharon, Good point, I couldn’t agree with you more. Hopefully, the Allies will never do it again. Getting the rest of the World on board, we may be facing an uphill struggle.
[The fact of the matter is that Britain did “bug out” at Dunkirk. For example, Churchill had instructed British forces at Singapore to “fight to the last man”, being the British enjoyed a 3:1 military advantage in strength over Japanese invading forces. The Japanese infantryman was tough –much tougher than his British counterpart and so the British were defeated, driven all the way down the Malayan Peninsula to their island fortress, Singapore – Gen. Percival presenting the white flag to the Japanese Commander, Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita, so-called Tiger of Malaya……]
Thank you Fred for all those facts. Food for thought for the lecturers and otherwise armchair generals who find their way to miquelon.org (by accident of course) from time to time. Since it wasn’t a French surrender, I wonder how many of our British/American friends are aware of this little factoid.
Reminding some people who desperately want us to admit our inferiority , and use double standards and doubtful histrionics to that end, of some conveniently widely swept under the rug historical truths is not bashing IMO.
If reminding us of our folding fast in WWII is not bashing then reminding the “reminder” of some other historical fact as a reply is not bashing either.
Trolls obviously lack intellectual coherence.
Some people will never learn. Freedom liquor, baby.
[[Source: BBC
Calls for a boycott of Scottish goods have been made in the US following the controversial decision to release the man convicted of carrying out the Lockerbie bombing.
A website urging Americans to “Boycott Scotland” has been set up featuring a list of e-mail addresses for prominent Scottish and UK politicians, as well as contact details for Scottish newspapers and a list of Scottish products and companies. The site accuses the Scottish and UK governments of committing a “flagrant betrayal” by releasing Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi.
Grassroots campaigns were also taking hold on social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook, while calls have even been made to have Scotch whisky renamed as Freedom Liquor.
Tourist body VisitScotland said it had received e-mails from Americans pledging to cancel holidays in Scotland.
Prehaps if these “facts” had been proved with credible sources than one might consider them facts but till then……..
It is quite amusing that anything negative about Britain is automatically believed as “facts” even though no proof is provided.
Prehaps if these “facts” had been proved with credible sources than one might consider them facts but till then…….
I’m sorry, trollie. I forgot you were the utmost authority on what constitute facts and what doesn’t.
It is quite amusing that anything negative about France is automatically believed as “facts” even though no proof is provided.
There I fixed it for you, trollie.
Hey, trollie you’ve been trolling here for a while now.
Have you browsed other sections of miquelon.org such as French Bashing ?
You might learn a few things and stop clutching at straws.
I was reading about anti-Polish sentiment in the United States and I noticed some similarities with anti-French sentiment in the same country.
Notice how Fox had to apologize and vowed to never air that line ever again.
There’s been many (and I mean a lot, a lot) of jokes and references to the French being cowards and nazi collaborators on American TV and radio (miquelon’s site is well documented in that regard) and yet not once had any Network executive apologized and vowed to never air the incriminating lines ever again. Au contraire.
See that’s the difference between other ethnic groups and the French. We don’t have associations or lobbies to defend us and put a stop to that anti-French bigotry.
[[On November 14, 2007, FOX aired the episode of Back to You, “Something’s Up There“, which contained a controversial Polish slur. The slur involved Marsh trying to convince the show’s lone Polish-American character, Gary, to go bowling after work by saying: “Come on, it’s in your blood, like kielbasa and collaborating with the Nazis.” FOX later apologized on November 20, 2007. They vowed never to air the line of dialogue again in repeats and/or syndicated broadcasts. FOX stated that, “The line was delivered by a character known for being ignorant, clueless, and for saying outlandish things. Allowing the line to remain in the show, however, demonstrated poor judgment, and we apologize to anyone who was offended.”[51]]]
Out of 300 million people in the USA, how many are taking part in the boycott Scottish theme? Thousands ? hundreds? That would still make it 0.000001% of the population of USA.
Those who are writing so enthusiastically of an anti-Scottish sentiment running rampant in the USA are indulging in wishful thinking.
More facts to chew on:
The London Blitz is “small change” when viewed across the totality of destruction wreaked upon singular European nations during WW II. Most of us are aware of Dresden; or, payback time for London, Coventry, etc; however, for many Germans the firestorms that consumed Dresden are not to be forgotten nor forgiven.
Regarding the Battle of Britain: Primarily an “air show” with the British coming out ahead; i.e., being home-based and requiring only a landing for refueling to carry on with the show as needed. Weather patterns were to eventually call the act on the Germans and that is factual history. Regarding propaganda. Harry Truman at one time made a remark
on the subject, saying: The U.S. Marine Corps had a greater propaganda machine than did Stalin ! Now, if trollie Sharon suspects that Hollywood was called upon to effect favorable reviews of then British
war efforts, who can disagree ? To my mind the most noxious offender in this respect is the Fox Network with broadcast journalist, Bill O’Reilly, being lead-bitch of the dogpack.
Regarding The Tiger of Malaya, Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita:
This Japanese commander was executed (hanged) by Allied forces shortly after WW II. He had been held responsible for war crimes taking place under his over-all command –said crimes occuring against Phillipino civilians during the Japanese “last stand” inside Manila.
Jurists of repute would argue that local commanders held responsibility
for what had occured; but, these men were all dead and someone had to answer. Keep in mind that Yamashita had won a great victory at Singapore over the British –said victory, it being proclamed by the defence at Allied war trial proceedings, ruling as the causative factor in his conviction.
[[Out of 300 million people in the USA, how many are taking part in the boycott Scottish theme? Thousands ? hundreds? That would still make it 0.000001% of the population of USA.Those who are writing so enthusiastically of an anti-Scottish sentiment running rampant in the USA are indulging in wishful thinking. ]]
Of course we are aware of the absurdity of this boycott and that it’s a fringe movement by loons and extremists. That’s not the point, trollie. You can’t even understand that ?
This blog used to be an oasis where we could discuss and document French-bashing without having to argue trolls like you. Which we otherwise have to face pretty much anywhere else on the net.
This is an anti French-bashing blog after all and since you don’t give a crap about French-bashing and since apparently from now on every post we make about French-bashing or related to French-bashing will be accompanied if not buried by your nonsensical bullcrap then this blog is in danger of losing a lot of its interest (IMHO).
I’m not sure what miquelon is trying to achieve by keeping someone like you around but I sincerely wish he’d reconsider. In the interest of this blog of which a lot of people care about deeply.
Or you could do a) the mature thing, pack your things and leave of your own accord or god forbid b) actually start contributing something constructive to the blog.
There’s no shame in going with a) since your trolling has been quite successful.
And thank you Fred once again for a very informative post.
Sharon, I think that you are right, the boycott is limited, but, no thanks to the outrage expressed on CNN, MSNBC, Fox, NBC, etc. PBS and NPR were, pretty much, neutral.
Don’t like Scotland bashing either. I do get irritated with the leadership of a certain Nation in North Africa, though.
“C’est un véritable rebondissement ! La Libye ne serait sans doute pas impliquée dans l’attentat contre le Boeing 747 qui a explosé en 1988 au-dessus de l’Ecosse, à Lockerbie exactement… Ce que disait déjà Monsieur X en 1998. Aussi, je vous propose de réécouter intégralement cet enregistrement. Mais d’abord, j’ai demandé à mon interlocuteur pourquoi l’agent secret libyen, qui était considéré jusqu’à aujourd’hui comme le principal instigateur de cet acte terroriste qui a provoqué la mort de 270 personnes, sera rejugé et peut-être innocenté…”
One tell tale sign of someone with a very weak point of view, is when they have to censor the opposing viewpoint. You can’t even rebuke one “troll”?
@Fred Orth: Yep, you are right the Libyans pulled some strings (oil) to get his release. Can’t blame the British government for looking after its national interests (access to Libyan oil reserves).
When push comes to shove all governments put national interest first. However the Libyans seem to have got carried away and their welcome home party with Scottish flags waving by Libyans has left a bad taste.
[[About Lockerbie. Rendez-vous avec X. “C’est un véritable rebondissement ! La Libye ne serait sans doute pas impliquée dans l’attentat contre le Boeing 747 qui a explosé en 1988 au-dessus de l’Ecosse, à Lockerbie exactement… Ce que disait déjà Monsieur X en 1998. Aussi, je vous propose de réécouter intégralement cet enregistrement. Mais d’abord, j’ai demandé à mon interlocuteur pourquoi l’agent secret libyen, qui était considéré jusqu’à aujourd’hui comme le principal instigateur de cet acte terroriste qui a provoqué la mort de 270 personnes, sera rejugé et peut-être innocenté…”]]
Ce serait un énorme embarras pour la communauté internationale, pas que l’Ecosse,mais il semble bien qu’on s’achemine quand même vers ce dénouement.
Regarding Lockerbie:
Time will tell if deals were indeed arranged between Britain (Scotland) and Libya for the release of the Lockerbie bomber; meanwhile, the scent of petroleum fumes remains sharply in the nose of many Americans found directly and indirectly affected by the bombing. We know those among us who suffer the most will never have their fill in the sense of a thirst for justice —that being aborted by the actions of theScottish Minister. Perhaps we should come to realize that the action taken by the Minister more properly rests under diplomacy of a “type”; moreover, a type registered for the British under the label, Perfidious Albion, by Roman occupiers during their 400 yr. stay of the island.
The call for a boycott of Scottish goods in this country would make no impression; inasmuch, being the derivation of many of it’s citizens, still recognizable in the flesh. Make no mistake, British Isle descendants –English, Irish, Scots, Welsh– consciously or unconsciously, more or less, consider the other as “brethren” when the status quo of their likes and dislikes are seen to be “threatened” . Christian Fundamentalist Religion is seen to best typify this fixed mentality ( we recognize, of course, their oft-expressed dislike if not hatred of the other in the old country).
This is not the first time western countries have made shameful deals which resulted in the release of terrorists. Germany and France to name a few have done it and it is also known that some European countries pay ransom money to get their citizens freed from Somali pirates.
Those who express holier than thou attitudes towards the British over this Libyan affair seem to have a very short memory.
^^
because the “scotch-bashing” is coming primarily from the evil French and Germans ?
[:facepalm]
There is no ethnicity called “Scotch”, maybe you were referring to Scotch whisky? Well, who knew people felt so strongly about a drink. LOL
#127
Yeah because that’s what really matters, trollie.
The troll is down to correcting grammar errors now. Ans it fails once again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch_%28adjective%29
[ However, ‘Scotch’ is still in occasional use in England and Ireland, and common use in North America. 1965, the historian A. J. P. Taylor, wrote: “Some inhabitants of Scotland now call themselves Scots and their affairs Scottish. They are entitled to do so. The English word for both is Scotch, just as we call les français the French and Deutschland Germany. Being English, I use it.[3]Preface to English History 1914–1945]
Christ, what rock did Fred (midwest) crawl out from.
His stream of conciousness ramblings would be hilarious if they weren’t so inaccurate. Where to start?
The battle of Britain was an air show: No, it was crucial to the course of the war, if the UK had lost then Germany would have gained control of UK air space and then would have tried to invade. At that point we were the only western allied country left standing.
23,000 civilians were killed, 32,000 injured, 550 allied airmen killed and 2,000 RAF planes destroyed. It was also important in that it caused a shift in American opinion in that before many in the US thought that the UK could not survive An air show?! Please…
Britain was not guaranteed American support in 1939 when the UK evacuated Dunkirk with over 200,00 allied troops including 120,000 FRENCH troops. This evacuation mainly being caused by the ineptitude of the French generals .
In fact, the USA did not join the war until 1941 and this was despite the majority of the American public being against it.
This [DO NOT CONFUSE COMMENT SECTION WITH SITE] is pathetic. Fighting suposedly anti-French comments by propagating lies and half-truths about the British and denigrating the bravery of the British government which in the main wanted to fight Germany and the British service men.
I understand what you trying to do, but you are going about it in the WRONG WAY.
Trollie got some reinforcement, it seems.
There’s still a possibility they’re the same person but our new friend seems to have a better command of the English language.
[[This [DO NOT CONFUSE COMMENT SECTION WITH SITE] is pathetic. Fighting suposedly anti-French comments by propagating lies and half-truths about the British and denigrating the bravery of the British government which in the main wanted to fight Germany and the British service men. I understand what you trying to do, but you are going about it in the WRONG WAY.]]
Supposedly, huh ? Damn you guys aren’t even trying anymore. What happened to subtlety ?
And what are you doing to fight French-bashing except for posting on an anti French-bashing blog to try and discredit the cause ?
It’s half truth and lies when it’s about the British/Americans but 100% truth and valid criticism when it’s about the French, right ?
Of course, massa.
Who can’t take criticism again ?
Well, here’s the old “we’re all allies” guy back to reinterate that 1) We ARE ALLIES and we should not bash France, the UK or the United States. 2) The issue here is French bashing since , oh say, 2000. WWII is old history, but it does seem to be the source of a lot of the bashing, so let’s keep our points relivent to reflection back, not fighting it again. 3) Criticism should only address individual or governmental statements, videos (which I can’t hear) or slurs – NOT NATIONS.
This, of course, is only my opinion.
Americans, justifiably outraged by the Scottish Minister’s abortion of justice in the Lockerbie bomber’s release, will find scant relief in the perspective offered by our trollie, Sharon, to the effect that “everybody does it” ; i.e., make the payoff that secures release of their national. The fact that the Lockerbie bomber was a convicted felon, most deserving of his sentence –most nations would have executed him– bears no resemblance to those innocent hostages seen taken and held for ransom. The Somali pirates, certain politically inspired groups in South America
and elsewhere, typify the latter . . . . . . and that’s “O. K.” –ransom being paid to effect their freedom. Since 2 + 2 still equals 4, the rationale
espoused by Sharon is, for lack of a better word, moral rot; indeed, without justice you have nothing (has this woman been binging on haggis ? ).
To Barney and to Fred Orth:
Thanks for your succinct comments. You guys are welcome to the grognard ranks.
Nice blog. I’ve been reading it occasionally for a while now.
Somewhat stormy discussion sometimes but that’s what happens when such topics are raised inforums. People will throw rocks at each other even when they (almost) agree on most things. Not that it happened this much in your columns though.
Back to Doug Stanhope and this nice video. It corroborates lots of things that may be noticed in field. I have been working in international business for 10 years and both US and French (and others too but I’m trying to stick to this blog’s storyline) partners seem to grow more knowledgeable of each other (be it on cultural levels, historical levels, and not solely WWII, mind you, and so on) month after month. Call me an overoptimistic poor devil but things change and, if I agree with Miquelon’s “long tail” theory and reckon with France’s (Europe ?) share of anti-americanism, I also observe a very positive trend of mutual respect that might save us after all.
Want to get rid of cliches ? Take part in international meetings and actually meet people from other countries face to face, you’ll be overwhelmed with newly gained knowledge and possibly wisdom (although I’m not at all claiming to be wise, ask my wife). For enriching it is to discuss Borat with a guy from Kazakhstan (and discover he’s 5 years ahead of time technology and business strategy wise), WWII and National socialist propaganda (is it Godwin again ?) with young German managers, 1950’s Hollywood propaganda and the Marshall plan’s contribution to US subsequent domination with my good friend Ian from Seattle, etc. etc.
There will always be bashers, may this site and others contribute to shift their hate-filled undocumented (and probably time-consuming) speeches into intelligible constructive debates.
This moment of optimism and pure merriment is brought to you for free. Enjoy. And keep up the good work.
You seem to have good things to say about others but only critical remarks about the USA ” hollywood propaganda & Marshall plans contribution to US domination”.
So I am afraid since you didn’t practise what you preach, your sermon will fail on deaf ears. Now how about discussing “care packages” with those young German managers.
I come into contact with a lot of Europeans in my line of work and thankfully the majority of them don’t have the bile displayed by some over here. But I would be careful about swallowing wholeheartedly everything they say, Europeans are also a product of their media which is biased etc. Ignorant minds can very easily be fed nonsense.
So whats new?
Big M’s response to Fred Midwest’s diatribes get a slap on the wrist while Big M & Barney can spew insults and name calling with impunity.
@BigM
I am rather enjoying Fred Midwest’s Rush Lumbugh impersonation.
It is quite entertaining. Leave him alone. LOL
To the BigM:
Forget it, Pommy, Hitler never entertained any serious notion of invading Britain. Have you read Mein Kampf , wherein it was spelled out that the British Empire need only step-aside in “My Battle”; indeed, his plans for a 1, ooo yr. Reich entailed co-existence with the potential rival, living in peace, side by side (Hitler had a great admiration for Shakespeare, believing his works to be the embodiment of Aryan (German) genius; moreover, the Anglo-Saxon upper-class element of Britain could surely be brought around, he figured, having common blood-ties to their counterparts in Germany [we note the Duke of Windsor’s exile to Burmuda during the war, it being feared his sympathies would further infect the rather “chancy” situation in Britain]).
550 airmen killed ( Company A & Company B ? ) you say; so, not an insignificant number being foreign nationals –principally Poles. Sadly enough, these same Poles were “treated like dirt” by the British at the war’s ending. Look it up, facts are facts.
You talk about a shift in American public opinion stemming from
British-made efforts in the air. Difficult to say, keeping in mind Roosevelt’s on-going, game-playing in support of British interests at the time. As mentioned earlier, Roosevelt was anglophilic to the core and we must look back to James Madison to find an American President so close to being treasonous. One other point: Weather patterns (English weather) precluded the Germans from continuing on with their air strikes in the so-called Battle of Britain; this, as they were gaining the ascendancy. It has been said that two more weeks would have finished the job. Mother Nature is fickle.
Hitler’s confrontations with the British, such as they were, could be likened to a rivalry of street “punks” ; or, who would stand “first” in the neighborhood. Each presumed to carry a big stick though not entirely assured as to his prowess. It was to develope that in passing by each other on the city sidewalk, a “bumping” of the shoulders occured, each party not sure if the contact had been intentional and, more importantly, deserving of a response. The more each worried about a “false” impression being formed in the mind of the other, regarding a supposed trait of weakness, would bring greater an eagerness to dispel any images of self-doubt. And so as happened, chancing on the street a second “bumping” was to occur; this, with a rapid turn-about — the most vigorous of the pair launching a “teach you” attack upon his opponent which resulted in a bloody nose.
Any so it was to happen with Germany and Britain –a trouncing of the latter’s professional army that would cause his removal in excape from the continent; or, a signal reminder to “stand aside and stay out of the way, I have a job to do”.
Pommy? So you are an Aussie..figures .
After all, a lot of Irish convicts were sent down under.
Thanks Jocoul for your comment, a welcome respite from some of the trolling in the comment section.
@Marc, you’re very welcome, I thought we could use some soothing comments here, although it still sounded insulting to some, jeez
@Sharon, sermon? where?
US propaganda issue : just like everybody else (France, UK, Germany) did outright propaganda during WWII, and subtler propaganda (call it what you will) afterwards.
Negative remark about France so you’ll feel better : I’m not proud of France’s dealing with the Algerian war. It was a random pick, there are many to pick from.
“I would be careful about swallowing wholeheartedly everything they say” – it’s not about swallowing, it’s about having an open discussion, freed from cliches, prejudices and taboos (and not feeling assaulted at every word).
“Europeans are also a product of their media which is biased etc. ” Most probably so, does it mean US media are not biased ? I need to call the US portion of my family so as to spread the good news.
<Troll mode on>
“Ignorant minds can very easily be fed nonsense. ” Yes, that’s how the US ended up in Iraq, but of course it was not propaganda (negative remark about France so as to make up for what I’ve just written so you feel even better : past and present leaders from France and their “obscure” friendships. Random pick again.
<Troll mode off>
Ciao
What are we supposed to call people who come to anti French-bashing blogs to demand that we not only never express any form of criticism whatsoever about the British/Americans’ involvement in WWII (and that only after years of reading anti-French comments regarding WWII ) but are only too happy to trash France even further all the while never expressing outrage even once at French-bashing or even acknowledging the issue seriosuly ? Which wether they like it or not is why this blog exists;
And seriously. What is trollie still doing here ?
Nice posts Jocoul.
Also I laughed at that : “Europeans are also a product of their media which is biased etc. ”
What about foxnews? The fear issue in the american media? Don’t you think french-bashing might be a produce of the media? I can say: pretty much, seeing all the french bashing sentences listed on that blog and coming from mass-media or USA officials… sad
But I don’t blame you Sharon cause : “Ignorant minds can very easily be fed nonsense. ”
[[ I come into contact with a lot of Europeans in my line of work and thankfully the majority of them don’t have the bile displayed by some over here. ]]
Maybe that’s because you don’t start the conservation with:
“oh and by the way before we begin working together, I’d like to tell you how much you acted like pussies during WWII and that if it weren’t for us you’d speaking German right about now. And if you dare say anything I’ll call you fascists and humorless pricks. Now that’s out of the way, let’s begin”
Are you the one who was talking about not involving people into personal attacks or something?
Maybe you should cut down on the bullcrap
Person A: having a pizza and writing B.S on blogs/forums
Person B: presume you were referring to yourself …
Person A : person B is making personal attacks blah blah…
Now who first insinuated that posters here were eating pizza and writing B.S in blogs? Who first made that “attack” ?
since sharon likes questions:
Who’s more foolish: the fool, or the fool who follows?
I’m sorry you felt aimed. I was emphasizing barney’s statements and referring to general attitude of the trolls .
Thibault.
Don’t pay too much attention to trollie. It’s a bit confused
@thibault
After so many attacks aimed at me in this site, just look at #100 following your post, you can understand why I took your comments as aimed at me. I didn’t realize you were talking generally.
See what I mean, Thibault ? lol
Matters to chew on:
The fact of the matter is that Britain did “bug out” at Dunkirk. For example, Churchill had instructed British forces at Singapore to “fight to the last man”, being the British enjoyed a 3:1 military advantage in strength over Japanese invading forces. The Japanese infantryman was tough –much tougher than his British counterpart and so the British were defeated, driven all the way down the Malayan Peninsula to their island fortress, Singapore — Gen. Percival presenting the white flag to the Japanese Commander, Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita, so-called Tiger of Malaya ( the Japanese had no air support during this campaign, their infantry advancing south –on bicycles, during battle lulls. The British Brewster Buffalo, a single-engine fighter, had been employed in the British defense to no avail (it was soon learned during the War in the Pacific that Japanese forces could hardly be beaten when opposing forces were equal in men and material).
The British Expeditionary Forces in France, realizing they could not meet the test in alliance with their French ally against the Germans did, in a sense, “bug out” at Dunkirk (it was a hurried, desparate deparature in any man’s language, largely enabled by French covering forces). In retreat on their island haven, they –Churchill and his Cabinet– fully expected that America, under Pres. Roosevelt (anglophilic to the core), would save British interests and so it was to happen. The crux of the issue is that the British –by pure circumstance– had no need of surrender; indeed, they might go back to their little island and continue with the British Empire intact! Had Hitler not spoken of this in his Mein Kampf ? Had Hitler not pulled his generals back at Dunkirk –in effect giving the British time to re-access matters after having had their butt kicked ? As we all know, these British “cousins of the ‘German’ Saxons” might well rest assured; for, our Uncle Sam and truly their Uncle Sam would come the rescue.
Touching on the German Blitzkreig of WW II: Truly, an awesome attack operation by combined armor, infantry, air support — an “endless” onslaught, men/material of seemingly inexhaustable supply, effecting the outcome to be (what else ?). The operation has been referred to as “rolling artillery” and evolved as a battle approach following WW I. Keep in mind: No nation could have resisted the blitzkreig, presenting on Germany’s west border, WW II. Consider: Had either the U.S., the Russian or the British nation been located adjacent to that border, chaos would surely have ensued with a rapid fold-up (I would have given Washington, D.C., perhaps a week or ten days with our then standing Army; London would have fallen in three days; the Soviet Regime, being more diffuse, would require more time –perhaps several months; however, the fall of that state would happen [I state this with the German Army being fully engaged — having no other concern and the Russians standing alone]).
NOTE : The British General Staff during WW I remained under strict orders to restrict battle losses; or, ” let the French do the dying” –Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August. The sequel to this admonition resulted with the British effecting few, if any, wilful closures with the German enemy; i.e., a deliberate straying on the battlefield that avoided combat ( a serious matter of honor for the British; for, a confrontation was to occur later between French and British Commanders in the field).
Fred (the other Fred), While I recognize your insight and appreciate your points, I, gracefully, remind you that this is a blog for addressing French bashing. I strongly recommend that it is not in our interests , no matter how suttle, to bash Allies. This does not mean that we can’t critize individual comments or decisions, just be aware that the UK was an Ally in WWII and they very much are today. Just my opinion.
Thanks Fred for that analysis. I presume that when the Brits went back to their little island as you put it, Hitler left that little Island alone and Brits went back to having a cup of tea & crumpets till the Normandy invasion.
Who knew that the London blitz was invented by British propaganda, not to mention the Battle of Britain which no doubt was collaborative effort by Hollywood and the British propaganda machine. Now if only we could find the director who made Coventry look like it was bombed to hell.
I’m with Fred Orth, enough dissecting of history for political argument. While the subject is fascinating and quite thrilling to learn about, one cannot extrapolate to today’s issue of French bashing, save explain the roots of some of the prejudice that exists on both sides.
Anybody can take a historical fact out of context, or turn it into a symbol – for I have done it – as a communication exercise – as well as John J. Miller, Mark Molesky or any user of any forum that has dealt with Franco-American politics.
Let’s never forget:
None of us are collectively and perpetually guilty for the actions of some
None of us can collectively and perpetually take credit for the actions of others (the point Doug Stanhope is making here)
Thank you
Just out of curiosity, how do you know collective guilt doesn’t exist. As far as I know the Germans after WW2 officially accepted collective guilt for atrocities committed in the name of Germany during WW2.
There are situations where, at least the intelligent portion of the population, will accept a “collective ” guilt. A lot of Germans for the brutality towards Jews and Gipseys, French for the 1940 collapse, Americans for the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, etc., British for the mistakes with colonialism. Mistakes are made, it’s one of the things that happens in a democracy. We’re all still Allies. Love them all.
States can expressive a form of collective guilt.
But no individual should have to carry that weight, save those who subscribe to some form of deep Catholicism.
Fred, I agee somewhat but I must say I don’t think “mistakes” is the right word to use for genocide of Indians and slavery no matter who committed them, whether it was by european colonialists (Spanish, British, French, Portuguese) or later USA, Canada & Latin America. Also wanted to note that the genocide of Indians and slavery occurred throughout the ‘new world’, not merely within American borders.
As far as I know asking countries to take responsiblity for their actions is not assigning individual blame or guilt. I doubt that when the French parliament passed a resolution about the Armenian genocide they were saying individual Turks are guilty and therefore each individual Turk is guilty and should carry the weight of that burden.
Sharon, Good point, I couldn’t agree with you more. Hopefully, the Allies will never do it again. Getting the rest of the World on board, we may be facing an uphill struggle.
[The fact of the matter is that Britain did “bug out” at Dunkirk. For example, Churchill had instructed British forces at Singapore to “fight to the last man”, being the British enjoyed a 3:1 military advantage in strength over Japanese invading forces. The Japanese infantryman was tough –much tougher than his British counterpart and so the British were defeated, driven all the way down the Malayan Peninsula to their island fortress, Singapore – Gen. Percival presenting the white flag to the Japanese Commander, Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita, so-called Tiger of Malaya……]
Thank you Fred for all those facts. Food for thought for the lecturers and otherwise armchair generals who find their way to miquelon.org (by accident of course) from time to time. Since it wasn’t a French surrender, I wonder how many of our British/American friends are aware of this little factoid.
Reminding some people who desperately want us to admit our inferiority , and use double standards and doubtful histrionics to that end, of some conveniently widely swept under the rug historical truths is not bashing IMO.
If reminding us of our folding fast in WWII is not bashing then reminding the “reminder” of some other historical fact as a reply is not bashing either.
Trolls obviously lack intellectual coherence.
Some people will never learn.
Freedom liquor, baby.
[[Source: BBC
Calls for a boycott of Scottish goods have been made in the US following the controversial decision to release the man convicted of carrying out the Lockerbie bombing.
A website urging Americans to “Boycott Scotland” has been set up featuring a list of e-mail addresses for prominent Scottish and UK politicians, as well as contact details for Scottish newspapers and a list of Scottish products and companies. The site accuses the Scottish and UK governments of committing a “flagrant betrayal” by releasing Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi.
Grassroots campaigns were also taking hold on social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook, while calls have even been made to have Scotch whisky renamed as Freedom Liquor.
Tourist body VisitScotland said it had received e-mails from Americans pledging to cancel holidays in Scotland.
Read more : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8217857.stm ]]
@Barney
Prehaps if these “facts” had been proved with credible sources than one might consider them facts but till then……..
It is quite amusing that anything negative about Britain is automatically believed as “facts” even though no proof is provided.
Prehaps if these “facts” had been proved with credible sources than one might consider them facts but till then…….
I’m sorry, trollie. I forgot you were the utmost authority on what constitute facts and what doesn’t.
It is quite amusing that anything negative about France is automatically believed as “facts” even though no proof is provided.
There I fixed it for you, trollie.
Hey, trollie you’ve been trolling here for a while now.
Have you browsed other sections of miquelon.org such as French Bashing ?
You might learn a few things and stop clutching at straws.
I was reading about anti-Polish sentiment in the United States and I noticed some similarities with anti-French sentiment in the same country.
Notice how Fox had to apologize and vowed to never air that line ever again.
There’s been many (and I mean a lot, a lot) of jokes and references to the French being cowards and nazi collaborators on American TV and radio (miquelon’s site is well documented in that regard) and yet not once had any Network executive apologized and vowed to never air the incriminating lines ever again. Au contraire.
See that’s the difference between other ethnic groups and the French. We don’t have associations or lobbies to defend us and put a stop to that anti-French bigotry.
[[On November 14, 2007, FOX aired the episode of Back to You, “Something’s Up There“, which contained a controversial Polish slur. The slur involved Marsh trying to convince the show’s lone Polish-American character, Gary, to go bowling after work by saying: “Come on, it’s in your blood, like kielbasa and collaborating with the Nazis.” FOX later apologized on November 20, 2007. They vowed never to air the line of dialogue again in repeats and/or syndicated broadcasts. FOX stated that, “The line was delivered by a character known for being ignorant, clueless, and for saying outlandish things. Allowing the line to remain in the show, however, demonstrated poor judgment, and we apologize to anyone who was offended.”[51]]]
Out of 300 million people in the USA, how many are taking part in the boycott Scottish theme? Thousands ? hundreds? That would still make it 0.000001% of the population of USA.
Those who are writing so enthusiastically of an anti-Scottish sentiment running rampant in the USA are indulging in wishful thinking.
More facts to chew on:
The London Blitz is “small change” when viewed across the totality of destruction wreaked upon singular European nations during WW II. Most of us are aware of Dresden; or, payback time for London, Coventry, etc; however, for many Germans the firestorms that consumed Dresden are not to be forgotten nor forgiven.
Regarding the Battle of Britain: Primarily an “air show” with the British coming out ahead; i.e., being home-based and requiring only a landing for refueling to carry on with the show as needed. Weather patterns were to eventually call the act on the Germans and that is factual history.
Regarding propaganda. Harry Truman at one time made a remark
on the subject, saying: The U.S. Marine Corps had a greater propaganda machine than did Stalin ! Now, if trollie Sharon suspects that Hollywood was called upon to effect favorable reviews of then British
war efforts, who can disagree ? To my mind the most noxious offender in this respect is the Fox Network with broadcast journalist, Bill O’Reilly, being lead-bitch of the dogpack.
Regarding The Tiger of Malaya, Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita:
This Japanese commander was executed (hanged) by Allied forces shortly after WW II. He had been held responsible for war crimes taking place under his over-all command –said crimes occuring against Phillipino civilians during the Japanese “last stand” inside Manila.
Jurists of repute would argue that local commanders held responsibility
for what had occured; but, these men were all dead and someone had to answer. Keep in mind that Yamashita had won a great victory at Singapore over the British –said victory, it being proclamed by the defence at Allied war trial proceedings, ruling as the causative factor in his conviction.
[[Out of 300 million people in the USA, how many are taking part in the boycott Scottish theme? Thousands ? hundreds? That would still make it 0.000001% of the population of USA.Those who are writing so enthusiastically of an anti-Scottish sentiment running rampant in the USA are indulging in wishful thinking. ]]
Of course we are aware of the absurdity of this boycott and that it’s a fringe movement by loons and extremists. That’s not the point, trollie. You can’t even understand that ?
This blog used to be an oasis where we could discuss and document French-bashing without having to argue trolls like you. Which we otherwise have to face pretty much anywhere else on the net.
This is an anti French-bashing blog after all and since you don’t give a crap about French-bashing and since apparently from now on every post we make about French-bashing or related to French-bashing will be accompanied if not buried by your nonsensical bullcrap then this blog is in danger of losing a lot of its interest (IMHO).
I’m not sure what miquelon is trying to achieve by keeping someone like you around but I sincerely wish he’d reconsider. In the interest of this blog of which a lot of people care about deeply.
Or you could do a) the mature thing, pack your things and leave of your own accord or god forbid b) actually start contributing something constructive to the blog.
There’s no shame in going with a) since your trolling has been quite successful.
And thank you Fred once again for a very informative post.
Sharon, I think that you are right, the boycott is limited, but, no thanks to the outrage expressed on CNN, MSNBC, Fox, NBC, etc. PBS and NPR were, pretty much, neutral.
Don’t like Scotland bashing either. I do get irritated with the leadership of a certain Nation in North Africa, though.
About Lockerbie. Rendez-vous avec X.
“C’est un véritable rebondissement ! La Libye ne serait sans doute pas impliquée dans l’attentat contre le Boeing 747 qui a explosé en 1988 au-dessus de l’Ecosse, à Lockerbie exactement… Ce que disait déjà Monsieur X en 1998. Aussi, je vous propose de réécouter intégralement cet enregistrement. Mais d’abord, j’ai demandé à mon interlocuteur pourquoi l’agent secret libyen, qui était considéré jusqu’à aujourd’hui comme le principal instigateur de cet acte terroriste qui a provoqué la mort de 270 personnes, sera rejugé et peut-être innocenté…”
One tell tale sign of someone with a very weak point of view, is when they have to censor the opposing viewpoint. You can’t even rebuke one “troll”?
@Fred Orth: Yep, you are right the Libyans pulled some strings (oil) to get his release. Can’t blame the British government for looking after its national interests (access to Libyan oil reserves).
When push comes to shove all governments put national interest first. However the Libyans seem to have got carried away and their welcome home party with Scottish flags waving by Libyans has left a bad taste.
[[About Lockerbie. Rendez-vous avec X.
“C’est un véritable rebondissement ! La Libye ne serait sans doute pas impliquée dans l’attentat contre le Boeing 747 qui a explosé en 1988 au-dessus de l’Ecosse, à Lockerbie exactement… Ce que disait déjà Monsieur X en 1998. Aussi, je vous propose de réécouter intégralement cet enregistrement. Mais d’abord, j’ai demandé à mon interlocuteur pourquoi l’agent secret libyen, qui était considéré jusqu’à aujourd’hui comme le principal instigateur de cet acte terroriste qui a provoqué la mort de 270 personnes, sera rejugé et peut-être innocenté…”]]
Ce serait un énorme embarras pour la communauté internationale, pas que l’Ecosse, mais il semble bien qu’on s’achemine quand même vers ce dénouement.
Regarding Lockerbie:
Time will tell if deals were indeed arranged between Britain (Scotland) and Libya for the release of the Lockerbie bomber; meanwhile, the scent of petroleum fumes remains sharply in the nose of many Americans found directly and indirectly affected by the bombing. We know those among us who suffer the most will never have their fill in the sense of a thirst for justice —that being aborted by the actions of theScottish Minister. Perhaps we should come to realize that the action taken by the Minister more properly rests under diplomacy of a “type”; moreover, a type registered for the British under the label, Perfidious Albion, by Roman occupiers during their 400 yr. stay of the island.
The call for a boycott of Scottish goods in this country would make no impression; inasmuch, being the derivation of many of it’s citizens, still recognizable in the flesh. Make no mistake, British Isle descendants –English, Irish, Scots, Welsh– consciously or unconsciously, more or less, consider the other as “brethren” when the status quo of their likes and dislikes are seen to be “threatened” . Christian Fundamentalist Religion is seen to best typify this fixed mentality ( we recognize, of course, their oft-expressed dislike if not hatred of the other in the old country).
This is not the first time western countries have made shameful deals which resulted in the release of terrorists. Germany and France to name a few have done it and it is also known that some European countries pay ransom money to get their citizens freed from Somali pirates.
Those who express holier than thou attitudes towards the British over this Libyan affair seem to have a very short memory.
^^
because the “scotch-bashing” is coming primarily from the evil French and Germans ?
[:facepalm]
There is no ethnicity called “Scotch”, maybe you were referring to Scotch whisky? Well, who knew people felt so strongly about a drink. LOL
#127
Yeah because that’s what really matters, trollie.
The troll is down to correcting grammar errors now. Ans it fails once again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch_%28adjective%29
[ However, ‘Scotch’ is still in occasional use in England and Ireland, and common use in North America.
1965, the historian A. J. P. Taylor, wrote: “Some inhabitants of Scotland now call themselves Scots and their affairs Scottish. They are entitled to do so. The English word for both is Scotch, just as we call les français the French and Deutschland Germany. Being English, I use it.[3] Preface to English History 1914–1945]
Christ, what rock did Fred (midwest) crawl out from.
His stream of conciousness ramblings would be hilarious if they weren’t so inaccurate. Where to start?
The battle of Britain was an air show: No, it was crucial to the course of the war, if the UK had lost then Germany would have gained control of UK air space and then would have tried to invade. At that point we were the only western allied country left standing.
23,000 civilians were killed, 32,000 injured, 550 allied airmen killed and 2,000 RAF planes destroyed. It was also important in that it caused a shift in American opinion in that before many in the US thought that the UK could not survive An air show?! Please…
Britain was not guaranteed American support in 1939 when the UK evacuated Dunkirk with over 200,00 allied troops including 120,000 FRENCH troops. This evacuation mainly being caused by the ineptitude of the French generals .
In fact, the USA did not join the war until 1941 and this was despite the majority of the American public being against it.
This [DO NOT CONFUSE COMMENT SECTION WITH SITE] is pathetic. Fighting suposedly anti-French comments by propagating lies and half-truths about the British and denigrating the bravery of the British government which in the main wanted to fight Germany and the British service men.
I understand what you trying to do, but you are going about it in the WRONG WAY.
Trollie got some reinforcement, it seems.
There’s still a possibility they’re the same person but our new friend seems to have a better command of the English language.
[[This [DO NOT CONFUSE COMMENT SECTION WITH SITE] is pathetic. Fighting suposedly anti-French comments by propagating lies and half-truths about the British and denigrating the bravery of the British government which in the main wanted to fight Germany and the British service men.
I understand what you trying to do, but you are going about it in the WRONG WAY.]]
Supposedly, huh ?
Damn you guys aren’t even trying anymore. What happened to subtlety ?
And what are you doing to fight French-bashing except for posting on an anti French-bashing blog to try and discredit the cause ?
It’s half truth and lies when it’s about the British/Americans but 100% truth and valid criticism when it’s about the French, right ?
Of course, massa.
Who can’t take criticism again ?
Well, here’s the old “we’re all allies” guy back to reinterate that 1) We ARE ALLIES and we should not bash France, the UK or the United States. 2) The issue here is French bashing since , oh say, 2000. WWII is old history, but it does seem to be the source of a lot of the bashing, so let’s keep our points relivent to reflection back, not fighting it again. 3) Criticism should only address individual or governmental statements, videos (which I can’t hear) or slurs – NOT NATIONS.
This, of course, is only my opinion.
Americans, justifiably outraged by the Scottish Minister’s abortion of justice in the Lockerbie bomber’s release, will find scant relief in the perspective offered by our trollie, Sharon, to the effect that “everybody does it” ; i.e., make the payoff that secures release of their national. The fact that the Lockerbie bomber was a convicted felon, most deserving of his sentence –most nations would have executed him– bears no resemblance to those innocent hostages seen taken and held for ransom. The Somali pirates, certain politically inspired groups in South America
and elsewhere, typify the latter . . . . . . and that’s “O. K.” –ransom being paid to effect their freedom. Since 2 + 2 still equals 4, the rationale
espoused by Sharon is, for lack of a better word, moral rot; indeed, without justice you have nothing (has this woman been binging on haggis ? ).
To Barney and to Fred Orth:
Thanks for your succinct comments. You guys are welcome to the grognard ranks.
Nice blog. I’ve been reading it occasionally for a while now.
Somewhat stormy discussion sometimes but that’s what happens when such topics are raised inforums. People will throw rocks at each other even when they (almost) agree on most things. Not that it happened this much in your columns though.
Back to Doug Stanhope and this nice video. It corroborates lots of things that may be noticed in field. I have been working in international business for 10 years and both US and French (and others too but I’m trying to stick to this blog’s storyline) partners seem to grow more knowledgeable of each other (be it on cultural levels, historical levels, and not solely WWII, mind you, and so on) month after month. Call me an overoptimistic poor devil but things change and, if I agree with Miquelon’s “long tail” theory and reckon with France’s (Europe ?) share of anti-americanism, I also observe a very positive trend of mutual respect that might save us after all.
Want to get rid of cliches ? Take part in international meetings and actually meet people from other countries face to face, you’ll be overwhelmed with newly gained knowledge and possibly wisdom (although I’m not at all claiming to be wise, ask my wife). For enriching it is to discuss Borat with a guy from Kazakhstan (and discover he’s 5 years ahead of time technology and business strategy wise), WWII and National socialist propaganda (is it Godwin again ?) with young German managers, 1950’s Hollywood propaganda and the Marshall plan’s contribution to US subsequent domination with my good friend Ian from Seattle, etc. etc.
There will always be bashers, may this site and others contribute to shift their hate-filled undocumented (and probably time-consuming) speeches into intelligible constructive debates.
This moment of optimism and pure merriment is brought to you for free. Enjoy. And keep up the good work.
You seem to have good things to say about others but only critical remarks about the USA ” hollywood propaganda & Marshall plans contribution to US domination”.
So I am afraid since you didn’t practise what you preach, your sermon will fail on deaf ears. Now how about discussing “care packages” with those young German managers.
I come into contact with a lot of Europeans in my line of work and thankfully the majority of them don’t have the bile displayed by some over here. But I would be careful about swallowing wholeheartedly everything they say, Europeans are also a product of their media which is biased etc. Ignorant minds can very easily be fed nonsense.
So whats new?
Big M’s response to Fred Midwest’s diatribes get a slap on the wrist while Big M & Barney can spew insults and name calling with impunity.
@BigM
I am rather enjoying Fred Midwest’s Rush Lumbugh impersonation.
It is quite entertaining. Leave him alone. LOL
To the BigM:
Forget it, Pommy, Hitler never entertained any serious notion of invading Britain. Have you read Mein Kampf , wherein it was spelled out that the British Empire need only step-aside in “My Battle”; indeed, his plans for a 1, ooo yr. Reich entailed co-existence with the potential rival, living in peace, side by side (Hitler had a great admiration for Shakespeare, believing his works to be the embodiment of Aryan (German) genius; moreover, the Anglo-Saxon upper-class element of Britain could surely be brought around, he figured, having common blood-ties to their counterparts in Germany [we note the Duke of Windsor’s exile to Burmuda during the war, it being feared his sympathies would further infect the rather “chancy” situation in Britain]).
550 airmen killed ( Company A & Company B ? ) you say; so, not an insignificant number being foreign nationals –principally Poles. Sadly enough, these same Poles were “treated like dirt” by the British at the war’s ending. Look it up, facts are facts.
You talk about a shift in American public opinion stemming from
British-made efforts in the air. Difficult to say, keeping in mind Roosevelt’s on-going, game-playing in support of British interests at the time. As mentioned earlier, Roosevelt was anglophilic to the core and we must look back to James Madison to find an American President so close to being treasonous. One other point: Weather patterns (English weather) precluded the Germans from continuing on with their air strikes in the so-called Battle of Britain; this, as they were gaining the ascendancy. It has been said that two more weeks would have finished the job. Mother Nature is fickle.
Hitler’s confrontations with the British, such as they were, could be likened to a rivalry of street “punks” ; or, who would stand “first” in the neighborhood. Each presumed to carry a big stick though not entirely assured as to his prowess. It was to develope that in passing by each other on the city sidewalk, a “bumping” of the shoulders occured, each party not sure if the contact had been intentional and, more importantly, deserving of a response. The more each worried about a “false” impression being formed in the mind of the other, regarding a supposed trait of weakness, would bring greater an eagerness to dispel any images of self-doubt. And so as happened, chancing on the street a second “bumping” was to occur; this, with a rapid turn-about — the most vigorous of the pair launching a “teach you” attack upon his opponent which resulted in a bloody nose.
Any so it was to happen with Germany and Britain –a trouncing of the latter’s professional army that would cause his removal in excape from the continent; or, a signal reminder to “stand aside and stay out of the way, I have a job to do”.
Pommy? So you are an Aussie..figures .
After all, a lot of Irish convicts were sent down under.
Thanks Jocoul for your comment, a welcome respite from some of the trolling in the comment section.
@Marc, you’re very welcome, I thought we could use some soothing comments here, although it still sounded insulting to some, jeez
@Sharon, sermon? where?
US propaganda issue : just like everybody else (France, UK, Germany) did outright propaganda during WWII, and subtler propaganda (call it what you will) afterwards.
Negative remark about France so you’ll feel better : I’m not proud of France’s dealing with the Algerian war. It was a random pick, there are many to pick from.
“I would be careful about swallowing wholeheartedly everything they say” – it’s not about swallowing, it’s about having an open discussion, freed from cliches, prejudices and taboos (and not feeling assaulted at every word).
“Europeans are also a product of their media which is biased etc. ” Most probably so, does it mean US media are not biased ? I need to call the US portion of my family so as to spread the good news.
<Troll mode on>
“Ignorant minds can very easily be fed nonsense. ” Yes, that’s how the US ended up in Iraq, but of course it was not propaganda (negative remark about France so as to make up for what I’ve just written so you feel even better : past and present leaders from France and their “obscure” friendships. Random pick again.
<Troll mode off>
Ciao
What are we supposed to call people who come to anti French-bashing blogs to demand that we not only never express any form of criticism whatsoever about the British/Americans’ involvement in WWII (and that only after years of reading anti-French comments regarding WWII ) but are only too happy to trash France even further all the while never expressing outrage even once at French-bashing or even acknowledging the issue seriosuly ? Which wether they like it or not is why this blog exists;
And seriously. What is trollie still doing here ?
Nice posts Jocoul.
Also I laughed at that : “Europeans are also a product of their media which is biased etc. ”
What about foxnews? The fear issue in the american media? Don’t you think french-bashing might be a produce of the media? I can say: pretty much, seeing all the french bashing sentences listed on that blog and coming from mass-media or USA officials… sad
But I don’t blame you Sharon cause : “Ignorant minds can very easily be fed nonsense. ”
[[ I come into contact with a lot of Europeans in my line of work and thankfully the majority of them don’t have the bile displayed by some over here. ]]
Maybe that’s because you don’t start the conservation with:
“oh and by the way before we begin working together, I’d like to tell you how much you acted like pussies during WWII and that if it weren’t for us you’d speaking German right about now. And if you dare say anything I’ll call you fascists and humorless pricks. Now that’s out of the way, let’s begin”