HOW DARE THE FRENCH FORGET

"...Tallying up totals of war dead in order to confer some kind of moral authority on the country with most casualties is an ethical and moral anti-concept....

I'll keep that in mind the next time President Bush, or any other President, waves the bloody shirt and refers to the dead of September 11th or the dead of Normandy Beach. The point was to try to inspire the imagination of people who know nothing of real war in their home LAND. To have tens of millions of dead bodies and body parts piling up in your wheat fields. To have an entire generation of your best and brightest men ground up or crippled---in mind as well as body. The lack of imagination by some Americans is appalling. No it's worse. It's cretinous and coarse--just like our culture.

"...Russia and Germany signed a non-agression pact in order to more efficiently carve up Poland. Half or Russia's war dead were probably due to Stalin's own near-infinite callousness and contempt with which he treated his own troops. Stalin consistently used his troops as cannon fodder in order to keep his regime in place. This was one of the few tactics at Stalin's disposal since he had systemically purged the cream of his officer corps before the War. Germany similarly should not attain any moral auhority or sympathy for its criminal assault on civilization. It is hard to understand how the French had so many casualties since they lost france in two weeks at the start of the war and only provided one division of "Free French" during the liberation of the count...

What an odious, racist idea that millions of Europeans deserved their fate because of the actions of their govenments. They do not need moral justification from you or any other American "historians"---still less from the "experts" who are pushing this year's passing fashions in making the world "a better place".. Who are you to decide whose deaths are worthy of mourning and learning from and whose are not? Their very humanness is their passport to justification.

The US has had a military tradition since the Revolutionary War of being willing to trade treasure for blood. This is a good tradition that I hope we never relenquish. I am proud of the fact that our troops have historically been the best equipped and most lethal in the world. This is part of an honored tradition of attemtping conserve the lives of our warriors.

I approve. Unfortunately the tens of millions of Europeans who died in the wars in which we arrived well after hostilities started just in time to "save" them did not have that luxury.

And even more unfortunately the United States is entering a era where we are willing to trade blood for treasure.

Germany and France are attempting to recreate the Holy Roman Empire with themselves in control of it. They would like to control the entire European landmass from Brussells and freeze us out..

Europe for the Europeans? LOL! It sounds positively anti-American. After all, OUR political Class is totally devoted to a borderless, cultureless global shopping mall. How dare anyone else imagine otherwise? Why, such a thing might even mean our troops would have to---gulp--come home!!

The horror. The horror.

...Jaques Chirac is no Charlemagne. ...

Well, at least we can agree on something. But, as "The Irishman" points out above, The Suit just might accidentally do something good for the United States by his recalcitrance.

---Boycott all French and German products!!!!!---

OK!! No waffles or potato salad for me.

---The French saved OUR bacon during the American Revolution! If it wasn't for them there probably wouldn't be an AMERICA!! ---

Ok, so we're even.

I'd say our cavalryman's answer pretty well covers it for me.

Do you have a point ? If so, what is it ?

You asked InchDeep, now answer (sans Carroll, Wolf, et al).

bttt

"..I'll keep that in mind next President Bush or any other President waves the bloody shirt..."

I can truly understand why the French would be than happy to forget about the American war dead at Normandy beach and many other places in France. If they are able to forgot our war dead then they might also be able to forget their shameful collaboration with the Nazis under the Vichy regime. While they are at it they might also to be able to forget about the Marshall plan. The quote an 19th century Frecnh Government offcial: "We will astonish the world with our ingratitude!"

"What an odious, racist idea that millions of Europeans deserved their fate because of the actions of their Governments.."

The European experience with two World Wars would certainly justify a certain reticence about any sort of armed conflict. It does not, however, justify craven appeasement of agression. When Hitler annexed Austria, Britain and France could have marched into Germany and thrown Hitler out of power with minimum of loss of life. By the time Hitler conquered Poland it was too late for pre-emptive action.

The leadership cadre in the US has learned the lessons of Munich; I just wish Chirac and Schroeder would remember them.

"Europe for the Europeans? LOL! It sounds positively anti-American...."

"Old Europe" has a great idea. They will spend about 1% of their GDPs on defense so that their armies are little more than glorified militias with neglible force projection capabilities even on the continent of Europe, and then when they are asked to solve a regional security issue as they were by the first Bush administration in Bosnia they will completely screw it up. Then they will beg the US to come in clean up the mess (on our dime, of course). Great. To add insult to injury France and Germany began to use nascent EU trade powers to implement blatant protectionist schemes directed only against US products.

If "Old Europe" wants autonomy and equality in security issues they will have convince their welfare-state-addicted member governmens to SPEND SOME MONEY ON DEFENSE. I would love to have our boys back from Germany while keeping some forward bases as a precaution. Based on 20th century hsitory that would probably be a bad idea as they will need to go back there to help snuff out another crisis in the Balkans.

Thank God for New Europe. Czechoslovakia (where my ancestors come from) and Poland know the meaning of totalitarian oppression and are still willing to fight for their freedom.

bttt

I would love to have our boys back from Germany while keeping some forward bases as a precaution.

Ditto bump

There were about 8 French divisions in North Africa plus assorted smaller units during the Tunisian campaign. I could provide you with the order of battle but am running late today. We certainly didn't have that many divisions operating there at that time. True, many of the French divisions needed to be reequipped and performed mostly garrison roles. Read your history please.

....they didn't have the courage to stop the madness of Hitler and Tojo, and Mussolini when they had the opportunity. This is the lesson that MUST be recalled today. ...In confronting the madman Saddam...

I think it's wise to avoid psychiatric jargon when considering the role of individuals and movements in history. It is unlikely that any of the men you cite were, or are, madmen. To seek solace in the idea that our enemies are insane or demon-possessed has the effect of making us weaker. It prevents us from examining the context of the confrontations. It prevents us from examining our own role in the history of the confrontations.

In the case of each of the "madmen" you cite, the United States played a criticalrole in historic events that gave rise to, or ennobled the cause of, these men in the eyes of their own populations. That is why I never mention WWII without mentioning WWI anymore. The former would have been unthinkable without the latter. I've spent a little time in France too and it is impossible not to come to realize the huge demographic, cultural and physical gash that WWI laid across that country. The net result of the United States' intervention in WWI was a catastrophe for continental Europe.

Don't you find the level of raw racism directed at Europeans who don't toe the American line here on FreeRepublic fascinating? And yet these same people claim that we "liberated" Europe. I wonder what they mean by "liberation"? How about the mocking dismissal of the sheer number of lives lost in the Twentieth Century? Of the incredible economic hardships suffered by the "common man"--the man the United States supposedly represents in the world?

Do you know any men in your family who act like Rumsfield? Who hurl insults in public? Who go out of their way to be as offensive as possible---as though they're playing to the peanut gallery at a hip-hop convention? Its blowhardism as foreign policy!! What ever happened to the traditional notions of American masculinity? I can tell you the men in MY family despise a blowhard. Just look at all the impotent blowhards on this thread!! And we expect the rest of the word to agree to play the peanut gallery just because it amuses some flabby little yuppie lap-top warriors in the neo-con media?

I don't have the sort of personality that holds grudges. But there is cause and effect in human events. There is a reason to examine historical events in their entire context for purposes other than passing tomorrow's exam. Just because the news in America is presented as an unconnected series of atomized events flashing across the screen; exploding; reforming; always in the present; unrelated to anything around it; everything equal---celebrity boob jobs, bombing the Serbs; weight-loss commercials; Rwanda; the Columbia exploding; Laci's SUV; Sadaam smoking a cigar; a tear in the President's eye. Do you belive the rest of the world thinks as we do--or more importantly, wants to?

Do you really believe that the behavior of the United States towards Russia since the fall of the Berlin Wall would never come back to haunt us? Do you really believe that crumbling, weak and corrupt though they were, the Russians did not notice that we kicked Sadaam the first chance we got. (not out of power, mind you. Very odd that, don't you think? condsidering he is the "new Hitler"---a client of theirs (as well as ours depending upon which way the sand was blowing at the time); that we brutalized and destroyed the Serbs--a traditional ally of theirs with deep cultural ties? That we gleefully bombed the Serbs on Orthodox Easter---we who pride ourselves on our "sensitivity" and will not pass gas on a moslem "holy" day.

Do you really believe those nasty, Old Europeans haven't noticed that the United States has been the main source of funding, arming and training of those we were pleased at one time to call "mujahadeen" but whom, in the wake of September 11th, we now call "terrorists.

Do you really imagine that all the families of all the Russian soldiers killed by our clients in Afghanistan have just forgotten the eminence gris that stood behind the hearty, hairy, holy warriors?

Do you believe we learned anything from September 11th? I mean anything of lasting value? I would venture to say that many people in Old Europe do not.

Do you find it at all odd that the men who make up the governments of those European Nations who are supporting us also happen to have been the same dirty, nasty commies against whom, supoosedly, we were waging the Cold War--which our parents funded with their hard-earned tax dollars? What was it all for if, now, those commie apparatchiks are our only allies?

Do you think that just because a huge number of Americans don't know and don't care what their government is doing all over the planet; that just becase we only concentrate on a foreign policy event if our corporate media shines a camera on it; do you think the rest of the world should also not know and not care what we are doing to them?

Well, enough of this rant. The one I lost last night was much more well written and argued. Suffice it to say I could not disagree with you more when you write:

... I think President Bush is absolutely working in the best interest of this nation....

I do, however, agree with you when you write:

"...I'm sick of listening to "expert" pundits from the Carter and Clinton administrations tell us what to do about North Korea and Iraq, after they bungled the job. These cowards, who were more concerned about winning a Nobel Peace Prize than protecting the interests of our country. They want a United States subservient to the United Nations...

But, unlike you, I consider the Bush administration part of the globalist continuum. Whether showing its statist head or its corporate head or its marxist head, or even its "compassionate conservative" head--it is the same hydra.

Forgot to type your name on #112. Although I don't think we're destined to agree....

Please do post the order of battle for the Tunisian campaign. I'd like to see it...

"I don't have the sort of personality that holds grudges...."

That is good. You have raised some good points on this thread. I hope you don't as if you are being "ganged up on". Maybe you can recruit a like-minded confederate to help defend your position; you would then constitute the loyal opposition.

Because your comments on this thread (and other threads) I have developed more of of an understanding to the European perspective on the current crisis. I don't agree with this perspective but I don't think that the Europeans are evil or demented. I think the "Old Europe" mindset is more of accident of history than anything else.

"Don't you find the raw level of racism......."

I haven't detected any racism in comments in this thread or other threads. What I have detected is an extreme level of exasperation with putative allies who seem to be behaving with extreme selfishness and shotsightedness. To criticize current policies French and German (which may soon be changed) governments is not racism it is something that allies should be allowed to do to one another.

"Do you know any men in your family who act like Rumsfield?"

At least Rumsfeld did not personally villify Chirac or Schroeder as the German evironment minister did when she compared Bush to Hitler. Some of the French Ministers have also indulged in equally intemperate remarks about Bush. Where is your outrage concerning those remarks?

"The net result of the United States' intervention in WWI was a catastrophe for continental Europe. "

Excuse me. This statement is called a "gratuitous assertion" in logic. From an American understanding of WWI this statement is not only false but outrageously false. If this is the French view of our intervention in WWI I would certainly like some supporting documentation or an example of some who argues this point in greater detail. I think almost all US mainstream academic historians would find such an assertion to be bizarre.

Admittedly, Preseident Wilson's utopian internationalism caused him to wait to long before intervening on behalf of the "Entente Cordiale" . Ultimately Wilson's approach to the post-war settlement was rejected at Versailles. Clemenceu and Lloyd George must be held accounable for the consequences of the Versailles treaty.

"Do you really believe that the behavior of the United States towards Russia since the fall of the Berlin Wall would never come back to haunt us?"

At last, something I can partially agree with. The demonization of the Serbs was a mistake. Many neo-con analysts are acknowleding that we conducted an unbalanced policy in Serbia in giving unqestioned moral carte blanche to the Albanians. Some of these issues are beginning to be recognized in Milosevc's trail. Some of alleged Serb atrocities were fictions reported dutifully by a credulous
US press corps.

It is worth noting, however, that the US was called into the Serbian mess after two years of feckless peacekeeping efforts by the EU. The Bush I administration had explicitly decided to hand the case over to Europeans as a trail run for independent European Defense Force. It proved to be unalloyed disaster.

"Do you really believe those nasty, Old Europeans haven't noticed that the United States has been the main source of funding, arming and training of those we were pleased at one time to call "mujahadeen" but whom, in the wake of September 11th, we now call "terrorists. "

US funding of the mujahadeen ended after the breakup up of Soviet Union. Without replacement parts the weapons the US gave to the mujahadeen will no longer work. There is no evidence that I am aware of that Islamic terrorist groups
in Chechnya, the Phillipines or other hot spots are using US weapons left over from the Cold War.

Many of the weapons being used by these groups do appear to have come from the "Axis of Evil"; some of them are being supplied from the black market for arms in the fromer Soviet Union!

"But, unlike you, I consider the Bush administration part of the globalist continuum."

Nonsense. Bush is leading us to a better world with the US acting as a benign hegemon, "pares inter pares". The longest period of peace known to Europe was period following the end of the Napoleonic wars until the onset of WWI. The peace was enforced by the benign hegemon of that era Great Britain.

The US finds itself in a similar position today as Great Britain was after the Congress of Vienna. In order to proper fulfill our role we need to divest ourselves of utopian notions of International Relations derived from French and British neo-marxists.

That's not a post. That's performance art.

At the end of Tunisian campaign, these were the divsional assets possessed by the French in North Africa:3rd Algerian, 7th Algerian, 8th Algerian, 9th Colonial, 10th Colonial,2nd Morrocan, 4th Moroccan, 2nd Armored, 1st African Armored, 5th African Armored, 1st Free French. The armored divsions were not fully formed though elements had participated in the earlier fighting. Some of the infantry was also being reequipped. There were also a large number of smaller units and militias. Most of these divisions were formed from the original 8 or so Vichy divisions.

Found a more relevant source of info: for actual fighting during the Tunisian campaign, The French employed 4 full divisions: The Tunisian which was destroyed early in the fighting, the Algiers, Morocco and the Oran divisions (using Vichy designations). The other divsions were garrsisoning and reforming. There was also an equivalent of an armored division (the armored brigade being the equivalent of a British brigade) plus other bits and pieces. We employed 4 or 5 divisions. However, the Vichy equipped divisions were only about as half as effective as a comparable American ones due to their ancient equipment.

I would say in closing that if we include all the French forces in North and Northwest Africa including militias, air force and navy in early 1943, we are looking at perhaps a half million men. True, the majority were colonials (Moslems btw) but there weren't too many French settlers to draw upon. This is far from a shameful performance.

And how many American divisions?

The Americans fielded the 1st Armored, 1st Infantry, 9th Infantry and 34 Infantry. The 3rd Infantry didn't engage until May of 1943. Shortly after the conclusion of the campaign and before Sicily, there were 9 divsions plus two so called replacement divsions. Both American and French units were also garrisoning lines of communications, ports, airbases, supply dumps etc during the Tunisian campaign.