Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Violence against Jews escalates in France
Dallas Morning News ^ | 02/11/2002 | Gregory Katz

Posted on 02/11/2002 7:08:01 AM PST by CatoRenasci

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 last
To: CatoRenasci
>The French were always the most antisemitic of the Europeans...

I'm not an expert on this subject, but I've read that the situation is a little more complex than this.

From what I've read, the deciding issue to the French mindset is the issue of assimilation. If the Jews in question embrace French culture and French citizenship, then French officials accord those Jews full protection of French laws. If -- in the eyes of the French -- the Jews in question separate themselves from French culture by clinging to what the French regard as "Jewish culture" then French officials let the chips fall where they may...

For instance, I've read that during WWII, this dynamic was very strong, with some Jews getting strong protection with France from the persecuting Nazi athority, and others getting handed over...

Mark W.

61 posted on 02/11/2002 1:12:16 PM PST by MarkWar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci; all
>Violence against Jews escalates in France

Right now, France is the mover & shaker of a European Union initiative to unilaterally create a Palestinian state. There's a thread about here: European Union Touts Plan for Palestinian State

Expect more trouble in France. Expect strange media coverage.

The article states that the US has "scaled back its involvement in the region." That may mean that France's proposal has tacit approval of the US...

It looks like Israel is about to go the way of the half a dozen other "allies" of the US, after they've become too big a problem...

Mark W.

62 posted on 02/11/2002 1:37:26 PM PST by MarkWar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
One could fairly plausibly construct a theory of history that everything that has gone significantly wrong in Europe since 800 (formation of the Holy Roman Empire by Charlemagne) can be blamed on the French.

Love it!

You're a far better-read historian than I.

63 posted on 02/11/2002 1:51:20 PM PST by white trash redneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Madiuq
"The official bird of France is the Rooster."

Really?!! I didn't know that. I do know that a fellow in Colorado chopped the head off his rooster and it still lived. It just flapped its wings a few times and walked off! Story has it that it lived for over a year that way. Could there be any parallels here with the French?

64 posted on 02/11/2002 2:25:47 PM PST by nightdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
But, though anti-Jewish thoughts have been in the minds of many Europeans for hundreds of years, France has a special problem. France allowed a lot of the people (Arabs)of its former colonys in North Africa, to move into France. Very many! Too many! And, like America, it is not the native population that is a big danger to the people of the Jewish faith.

Thirty years ago, in Granoble, I felt out of Europe.

65 posted on 02/11/2002 2:39:58 PM PST by Bogie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
But, though anti-Jewish thoughts have been in the minds of many Europeans for hundreds of years, France has a special problem. France allowed a lot of the people (Arabs)of its former colonys in North Africa, to move into France. Very many! Too many! And, like America, it is not the native population that is a big danger to the people of the Jewish faith.

Thirty years ago, in Granoble, I felt out of Europe.

66 posted on 02/11/2002 2:43:50 PM PST by Bogie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
But, though anti-Jewish thoughts have been in the minds of many Europeans for hundreds of years, France has a special problem. France allowed a lot of the people (Arabs)of its former colonys in North Africa, to move into France. Very many! Too many! And, like America, it is not the native population that is a big danger to the people of the Jewish faith.

Thirty years ago, in Granoble, I felt out of Europe.

67 posted on 02/11/2002 2:44:26 PM PST by Bogie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
But, though anti-Jewish thoughts have been in the minds of many Europeans for hundreds of years, France has a special problem. France allowed a lot of the people (Arabs)of its former colonys in North Africa, to move into France. Very many! Too many! And, like America, it is not the native population that is a big danger to the people of the Jewish faith.

Thirty years ago, in Granoble, I felt out of Europe.

68 posted on 02/11/2002 2:44:53 PM PST by Bogie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sneakypete
#53

Yes, I noticed that too. Paris is neo-liberal, and the rest of France is not.

69 posted on 02/11/2002 2:55:03 PM PST by Bogie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
The absolute critical point on the decision tree, the one point at which the whole thing could have been localized in the Balkans, was the Russian mobilization decision.

You obviously know your stuff. But this sentence pretty much defeats your argument. The French are not blameless, but to put all the blame on them for the weaknesses of other governments is a bit much. However, you did warn us about your slant on history in an earlier post.

70 posted on 02/11/2002 6:49:31 PM PST by AshleyMontagu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Seruzawa
It's fun trolling for degraded Frogophiles. Why don't you go soak your head in a bucket of another one of France's gifts to the world.... Thorazine.

You are an embarrassment to this forum. I would explain to you that I am not an apologist for the French. But it would be a waste of my time.

71 posted on 02/11/2002 6:53:04 PM PST by AshleyMontagu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: philosofy123
"...De Gaule...just to name a few good french things"

DeGaulle? What have you been smoking? DeGaulle was the most frenetic anti-American @$$hole that France ever produced. When he threw US forces out of France in the 50's, we should have emptied our war cemeteries (from both wars), brought home our war dead, and left him with thousands of empty holes in the ground.

DeGaulle? Eat cheese and die, Frog.

72 posted on 02/12/2002 2:10:18 AM PST by BlueLancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: philosofy123
"It helped us win our revolution against the Brits."

For the benefit of French self-interest only, not because they had any great love for republics or republicans.

So, even to use your example, if the French can do things solely for their own self-interest, no matter how the end results, then France should have nothing to say to the US when we do the same.

73 posted on 02/12/2002 2:13:19 AM PST by BlueLancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
The UN Security Council should deploy an international observer force into France.
74 posted on 02/12/2002 2:19:53 AM PST by mmmmmmmm....... donuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #75 Removed by Moderator

To: AshleyMontagu
Actually, I don't think governments are necessarily responsible for the weakness of other governments. However, in this particular case, regardless of my mostly jesting Francophobia, I see the French as more culpable than they have generally been thought to be. Although it's been many years since I slogged through the secondary literature (Sidney B. Fay, Bernadotte Schmidt, Luigi Albertini, Gerhard Ritter, [the classics on the origins of WWI] and the work on Sarajevo of Joachim Remak (with whom I studied) of course, plus a good chunk of the primary literature of what was in English and German, less in French which I don't read as well), it seemed to me that the French were busily engaged in wrapping the Russians into an anti-Germanic alliance [made possible by Wilhelm II's stupidly letting the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia lapse] for many years, heavily encouraging Russian Pan Slavism as a counterweight to German and Austrian power, and pushing the Russians towards confrontation with Germany wherever possible. In the specific crisis in July 1914, the Austrians were understandably hot-headed, wanting a 'splendid little war' to punish the Serbs. The other powers, save France, did not want a general European war at that time, although the alliance systems made it easy for a localized crises to degenerate into a general war, as actually happened. [It was Kafka, in 1916, who remarked that the War was 'caused by a tremendous lack of imagination.]

While his generals were, somewhat reluctantly letting Austria know Germany would back her if Russia attacked Austria, Wilhelm was busy trying to keep Russia from going to war. Based on my reading of the literature and the correspondence, my conclusion is that he came within a hair's breadth of succeeding, for Nicholas remembered the disaster of the Russo-Japanese War and did not want to go to war. Here is where the combination of Russian unpreparedness (lack of plans to partially mobilize since 1910 and slow mobilization generally) and extremely strong French pressure from Peleologue came into play and, in my view, pushed the Tsar into war. My reading of the materials leads me to the conclusion that Peleologue knew exactly what he was doing, i.e. that Russian moblization would lead to a general European war, where Russian inactivity would keep the crisis localized, and in order to both help France's client state Serbia and out of a strong French desire for revanche for the humiliating (if deserved) defeat in the Franco-Prussian War in 1870-71, wanted a wider war.

The French went to war more enthusiastically than any other Great Power in 1914, they were looking for a fight. From a purely Russian military viewpoint, they would have been better off waiting until 1916 or 1917, when a number of modernization and rearmament programs were scheduled to be completed. The French were the ones who had to have a war sooner rather than later: their population was not growing as fast as Germany's and their draft classes were getting smaller in relation to Germany's. Really, for the French in pure military numbers, it was war by 1915 or wait for a real change in technology. Also the French technological edge (the 75mm field gun model 1897 primarily) was getting longer in the tooth by 1914, while the Germans were improving their weapons.

I could go on, but I've work to do.....

76 posted on 02/12/2002 3:52:35 AM PST by CatoRenasci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
Thanks for the great reply. The Russia/France situation you describe has a similar parallel today with the U.S. and Israel in the Middle East. Interesting.
77 posted on 02/12/2002 7:16:00 AM PST by AshleyMontagu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: AshleyMontagu
The Russia/France situation you describe has a similar parallel today with the U.S. and Israel in the Middle East.

Whom do you see as France and whom do you see as Russia here? The US is hardly Tsarist Russian, and the Israelis are hardly beating the drums for a general Middle East War. I rather look at the situation as Israel looking to the US for a 'blank check' to deal with the Palstinians, which could draw us into a wider war. However, there is no countervailing alliance system to support the Islamic powers. Russia? no. Iran/Iraq/Saudi? possible, but all are third or fourth rate powers. They love to tweak the eagle's tail and pull feathers where they can, but they know, when push comes to shove that they'd end up like the mouse giving the finger to the swooping eagle in it's "One last moment of defiance" before being eliminated. My read is that they will not challenge the US directly. They know if they use any weapons of mass destruction, we will respond with a John Foster Dulles-style "massive retaliation" that will render much of their countries uninhabitable for generations.

78 posted on 02/12/2002 8:01:17 AM PST by CatoRenasci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
Of course I did not imply an exact analogy could be made to the events leading up to WWI. The analogy I make is that Israel, like France before with Russia, is constantly whispering (shouting?) in Uncle Sam's ear to attack Syria, Iran, Iraq, and now Saudi Arabia. In my opinion this would not benefit the US as much as it would give Israel more breathing room. Sharon's comment comparing Bush to Chamberlain is a perfect example of this sideline coaxing.
79 posted on 02/12/2002 8:19:51 AM PST by AshleyMontagu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson