Notre Dame Cathedral is burning - Ile de France

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Balin

The Lonesome Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Apr 24, 2016
1,231
2,115
243
Valence - France
#81
If America did not get into the European theatre, WW2 would definitely have turned out different. Not only did we have soldiers that fought for Europe, we had a whole group that did nothing but help return stolen art from the Germans.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
WW2 not necessarily but the World after WW2 that's for sure.
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
7,538
3,635
743
49
#84
We Americans need to learn more about WWI as well. If we did we would find out that the French lost around 2 MILLION in WWI and only about 500,000 in WWII. Americans did indeed, "save the day" in WWI and WWII did indeed turn round at Stalingrad. The USSR lost over 22 million...likely closer to 28 million. It's the sort of chest pumping bravado that says to a Frenchmen "you'd be speaking German if it wasn't for us" that causes some of the back and fort angst...Even if true, likely not because even under German rule they likely could have held their language intact, it's just rude and insensitive. Can you imagine them telling us we would still be under the Queen if not for them? While it may be somewhat true, it's rude and insensitive and somewhat inaccurate as well.

Look, I used to say stuff like that, but I doubt I would ever be so rude to say that to a Frenchmen directly. We really don't know if "they would be speaking German" if it wasn't for us...They certainly might be speaking Russian, but who knows.
But see the difference is I would never downplay the French part in the American revolution because I know that they helped us win the war, between them and help from Indians plain and simple. Yet like this guy they constantly downplay America's part in helping turn the tide in world war II.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
7,538
3,635
743
49
#85
They did also warn Iraq when the u.n. "surprise" inspection were going to happen.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Yeah because going to Irak was the best decision the USA ever made. Tied with Vietnam.
Whether or not going to actual war in Iraq was necessary, I'm discussing the fact that French government officials colluded with Iraq to consistently tell them when inspections were going to happen by the UN so that they could move chemical weapons around and not be caught. This happened multiple times it wasn't even just one isolated event.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,976
8,585
1,743
Earth
#86
But see the difference is I would never downplay the French part in the American revolution because I know that they helped us win the war, between them and help from Indians plain and simple. Yet like this guy they constantly downplay America's part in helping turn the tide in world war II.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Maybe he's just being argumentative when faced with the likes of Bleed and his arrogance. Certainly he can't deny that we helped and did in fact turn the tide on the Western front and indeed were integral in winning the war and balancing out the Russians who may have very well overrun the entire continent had we not intervened (a fact he has acknowledged in this thread). He's not wrong in his assessment of WWI and the turning point of WWII (although I'm sure we would disagree on many points). I would bet he gives us more credit in the Japanese theater and less in Europe (not uncommon in Europe). Don't get me wrong I'm Red White and Blue through and through, but I think it's silly to think that a French national educated in France will have the exact same mindset in terms of history as someone educated in the USA. That's the reason I say we have to continue to learn and IMHO travel is a huge part of that.
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,976
8,585
1,743
Earth
#87
WW2 not necessarily but the World after WW2 that's for sure.
Balin - I don't think Western Allies in WWII were prepared for the landing if not for the equipment and massive amounts of soldiers the USA brought to the battle. In fact, the money, ships and men we provided them certainly helped (we could have done far more far sooner) them (the Britts) to hold out until we finally entered the war. As you pointed out correctly, they wouldn't have been in a position to hold out that long had it not been for Geography (I.e. the channel). While, yes, the German defeats on the Eastern front was their ultimate downfall we had to go in and help finish the job on the Western front in face of stiff resistance and big losses. If we had not done so in the numbers we did it would likely have lasted far longer and who knows the outcome as I don't think it would have been a positive one for the French (Russian or German domination pick your poison)...Bottom line I think we couldn't predict what would have happened if the Western Allies didn't act VERY decisively when the opportunity arose. But it wouldn't likely have been good.
 
Last edited:

Balin

The Lonesome Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Apr 24, 2016
1,231
2,115
243
Valence - France
#90
But see the difference is I would never downplay the French part in the American revolution because I know that they helped us win the war, between them and help from Indians plain and simple. Yet like this guy they constantly downplay America's part in helping turn the tide in world war II.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
I don't downplay the role of USA in WW2 I'm factual. I'm just trying to be fair with the URSS and UK who did 99% of the job in Europe.

So you had no problem with Saddam gassing the Kurds? Need I remind you that France colonized Vietnam?
What this has to do with my sentence? I just said the second Iraki war started the mess the Middle East is facing right now.

Maybe he's just being argumentative when faced with the likes of Bleed and his arrogance. Certainly he can't deny that we helped and did in fact turn the tide on the Western front and indeed were integral in winning the war and balancing out the Russians who may have very well overrun the entire continent had we not intervened (a fact he has acknowledged in this thread). He's not wrong in his assessment of WWI and the turning point of WWII (although I'm sure we would disagree on many points). I would bet he gives us more credit in the Japanese theater and less in Europe (not uncommon in Europe). Don't get me wrong I'm Red White and Blue through and through, but I think it's silly to think that a French national educated in France will have the exact same mindset in terms of history as someone educated in the USA. That's the reason I say we have to continue to learn and IMHO travel is a huge part of that.
We still empathize a lot about the D-Day and the Liberation. In fact we only saw US soldiers in France since the URSS and you guys met across the Elbe if I remember correctly.
As I said earlier I don't want to be rude to you or anything you did help during the WW2 but mainly in the Japan Front. War was already won when US soldiers set a foot in the Normandie beaches. You were already preparing yourself for the Cold War.


Balin - I don't think Western Allies in WWII were prepared for the landing if not for the equipment and massive amounts of soldiers the USA brought to the battle. In fact, the money, ships and men we provided them certainly helped (we could have done far more far sooner) them (the Britts) to hold out until we finally entered the war. As you pointed out correctly, they wouldn't have been in a position to hold out that long had it not been for Geography (I.e. the channel). While, yes, the German defeats on the Eastern front was their ultimate downfall we had to go in and help finish the job on the Western front in face of stiff resistance and big losses. If we had not done so in the numbers we did it would likely have lasted far longer and who knows the outcome as I don't think it would have been a positive one for the French (Russian or German domination pick your poison)...Bottom line I think we couldn't predict what would have happened if the Western Allies didn't act VERY decisively when the opportunity arose. But it wouldn't likely have been good.
I do agree with pretty much everything you said.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
15,912
2,508
1,743
So Cal
#91
Bullshit. We'll always be greatful for the American sacrifice on the France soil but don't give it too much credits on the fate of the WW2. The war was already lost by Germany after the turnaround point of Stalingrad battle. The "you would speach german if we didn't come" is
1- Kinda boring
2- Wrong

You just made sure URSS was not the only power in Europe after the WW2. Which was the right thing to do :)
what's that comrade?

okay that is about as ignorant of history as I've ever seen..... Without US assistance beginning in 1940 to both Britain and USSR the battle of Stalingrad in 1942 likely would have had a much different ending.

On September 2, 1940, President Roosevelt signed a “Destroyers for Bases” agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, the United States gave the British more than 50 obsolete destroyers, in exchange for 99-year leases to territory in Newfoundland and the Caribbean, which would be used as U.S. air and naval bases.

In December 1940, Churchill warned Roosevelt that the British were no longer able to pay for supplies. On December 17, President Roosevelt proposed a new initiative that would be known as Lend-Lease. After many months of negotiation, the United States and Britain agreed, in Article VII of the Lend-Lease agreement they signed, that this consideration would primarily consist of joint action directed towards the creation of a liberalized international economic order in the postwar world.

When USSR launched it's counter offensive in Moscow 1941, it did so with half of it's tank force consisting of either British or Canadian tanks... and countless allied aircraft. BECAUSE the US was supplying those countries.

Direct US military tanks and supplies would have been sent to USSR if those resources had not been diverted to the Pacific to fight Japan -- also occurring in 1941.

Britain and French Government in Exile

Without FDR and congress creating the lend lease act, Britain would've been starved into submission and the constant supplies to arm,equip and provide volunteer Pilots the RAF would've eventually lost the battle over Britain

Russia (U.S.S.R)

Without the Untied States Aid in the early part of the German Invasion, it wouldn't been able to move it industrial base to the Ural Mountains, and the loss of Food,Equipment, Supplies, logistical know how and support its Armies would've pulverized to extinction, and lack of those said supplies it wouldn't been able to focus its industrial base on mainly tanks in particular (T-34) and have been forced to deal with the Luftwaffe as well it would've lost the ground war and had little to combat the German Air superiority, since the loss of these factors it would've lost the battle of Stalingrad and Leningrad
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
15,912
2,508
1,743
So Cal
#92
And so are the anti-muslim violences. Don't be close minded.
that is not true. Violence may be "up"... but no where on the scale of the escalated violence against Christians and Jews.

There has been relatively little anti-Muslim violence in France (comparability to other religions), and especially as opposed to the more than 20 Islamic terrorist attacks against France since 2014.

Don't be so close minded to the real facts.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
15,912
2,508
1,743
So Cal
#93
Certainly it was bleed and they did briefly, but you don't tell a Frenchman that he would be speaking German if it wasn't for the USA. My point here is that arrogance is unproductive and rude. I'm not upset about it in anyway, just want people to think in more accurate ways about history and be at least somewhat sensitive to our friends on the other side of the pond. We are all taught history through a certain prism. Right now history is skewed to the left by that prism but even when we skew it right it's not an accurate lenses from which to view it. This is why we need to be life long learners and refuse to believe the first "line" someone tells us about history. It''s lazy. So, I'm sure you agree that it's stupid for us to skew history and not to be accurate in our understanding. I'm not saying they wouldn't be speaking German...just that it's rude, and likely inaccurate long term, to say that.
WTH? it has nothing to do really with WW2 or "speaking Russian"... the French "culture" is arrogance and rude. It always has been.

For you to infer that any comment or phrase spoken by anybody else would be insulting to the culture of rude and arrogance is preposterous.

Frankly, if the French don't like it tough. I don't much care for crapes either. or barrettes. or Peugeot.

likewise, I don't much care for their collective sense of ingratitude. But then... according to them, we are the "ugly Americans".
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,976
8,585
1,743
Earth
#94
WTH? it has nothing to do really with WW2 or "speaking Russian"... the French "culture" is arrogance and rude. It always has been.

For you to infer that any comment or phrase spoken by anybody else would be insulting to the culture of rude and arrogance is preposterous.

Frankly, if the French don't like it tough. I don't much care for crapes either. or barrettes. or Peugeot.

likewise, I don't much care for their collective sense of ingratitude. But then... according to them, we are the "ugly Americans".
When was the last time you were in France? Typically I find when traveling that those who get rude treatment are sometimes themselves the same...Most often we get what we give.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
15,912
2,508
1,743
So Cal
#95
When was the last time you were in France? Typically I find when traveling that those who get rude treatment are sometimes themselves the same...Most often we get what we give.
don't even try to make this about me.....

A 2012 survey by flight comparison site SkyScanner revealed users ranked France as the number one rudest country for travellers and a thread on the travel site Tripadvisor is packed full of complaints about French rudeness.

A quick search on Google reveals that "Why are the French so rude?" appears to be one of the great unanswered questions of our time.
 

NotOnTV

BRB -- Taking an okie leak
Sep 14, 2010
8,137
6,226
743
Gondor
#96
The rudeness of French people is absolutely no myth. We've been to at least a dozen different countries on vacation and nowhere else has the behavior of the populace been so egregiously appalling. NOT EVEN CLOSE! For absolutely no discernible reason whatsoever. I'm glad we saw all the things we did because we are NEVER going back.
 

bleedinorange

Federal Marshal
Jan 11, 2010
16,161
30,299
743
In Pokey's head
#97
Maybe he's just being argumentative when faced with the likes of Bleed and his arrogance. Certainly he can't deny that we helped and did in fact turn the tide on the Western front and indeed were integral in winning the war and balancing out the Russians who may have very well overrun the entire continent had we not intervened (a fact he has acknowledged in this thread). He's not wrong in his assessment of WWI and the turning point of WWII (although I'm sure we would disagree on many points). I would bet he gives us more credit in the Japanese theater and less in Europe (not uncommon in Europe). Don't get me wrong I'm Red White and Blue through and through, but I think it's silly to think that a French national educated in France will have the exact same mindset in terms of history as someone educated in the USA. That's the reason I say we have to continue to learn and IMHO travel is a huge part of that.
Lol! You take yourself entirely too seriously. With little reason.
 
Nov 6, 2010
671
266
613
#98
The rudeness of French people is absolutely no myth. We've been to at least a dozen different countries on vacation and nowhere else has the behavior of the populace been so egregiously appalling. NOT EVEN CLOSE! For absolutely no discernible reason whatsoever. I'm glad we saw all the things we did because we are NEVER going back.
I have a feeling you won't be missed.
 

jobob85

Alcoholistic Sage
A/V Subscriber
Mar 11, 2009
21,736
26,790
1,743
I’ve been to Paris twice for almost 2weeks each time. Never encountered any rudeness. Now, NYC on the other hand......