FRANCE - Some Famous Quotes

current news and history | see keywords

[WOSG]

What's wrong with the French is very simple - ever since the end of the First World War, they have been vulnerable to a school of thought which says that surrender is preferable to war. This is not a school of thought which has, fortunately, caught on elsewhere with the exceptions of Berkeley and Hampstead. I recommend William Shirer's excellent book, "The Collapse of the Third Republic" for more information.

---

MadIvan, well said. And I would add that Britain fell under the appeasement trap in the 1930s for understandable reasons having lost a generation of men in WWI. they genuinely feared war and knew how futile it could be from that experience. But brave men like Churchill resisted the fatal attraction of appeasement, that coddling evil was worse than fighting it. He wasnt listened to until too late.
The failed policies of appeasement led to Hitler conquering Europe. JohnGalt, that was a *bad thing*. It was an avoidable *bad thing* - if France and Britain had stood up to Germany in 1936, instead of waiting until several nations were under nazi rule, Hitler could have been contained. He wasnt and war resulted.

Mr JohnGalt is off on the deep end im afraid, if he really thinks it was just fine for the Germans to occupy Paris (and by extension the rest of Europe). Destruction of democracy, persecution of ethnic minorities, like gypsies, annilation of the Jews, jailing and murder of political dissidents and nationalist opponents, not to mention a militarized society ... hint: bad things, not good. Thankfully Churchill and Roosevelt demanded unconditional surrender. No half-measures. For that reason, we NEVER have to re-fight WWII, like was are about to re-fight Saddam. We didnt 'contain' or 'check' our enemies, we destroyed them and killed their ideologies and power bases completely.

I hope to heck we do the same in Iraq and can do the same to Al Quaeda.

As for William Shirer, his book Rise and Fall of the Third Reich was also great. It's a bit shallow to condemn a man politics as a way of judging his work (ad hominem). but if you want a conservative view of the war, read Winston Churchill's history on it.

[JohnGalt]

It was called Dunkirk, or do British history books still call that a great victory? Can you point out where I said the British surrendered?

I get LewRockwell's daily e-mail just as I get the Federalists daily e-mail, or are Reaganites freaks in your opinion as well? Only people not so sure in their beliefs (like say, someone who sites leftwing journalists for historical 'proof')fear opinions from others.

[JohnGalt]

I suggest you folks quit reading leftwing journalists and start reading conservative historians.

As for Churchill being a historian; my goodness, that is like Clinton's biography being the staple of understanding the 1990s. Why don't you start with at least a moderate liberal like AJP Taylor and then try a Conservative like Clive Ponting?

I think it was just fine? Now you are acting like a feminized liberal ascribing feelings to my reading of events. You folks were taught well by the lefties, I'll say that much.

Hitler was dually elected by his people on a platform of correcting the wrongs of the Versailles Treaty. As a supporter of the German Conservative Monarchist position, I would never have let Kaiser Whilhelm abdicate in favor of lawless Jacobism you Wilsonians so worship.

[merak]

I hate to say it, but I'm starting to dislike these people. At this point, if I'm in a treestand with a 14-point buck standing 40 yards away, a frog sitting next to the buck, and one cartridge in the rifle, I'm not sure I wouldn't shoot the frog just on general principles...

[MadIvan]

Your quote:

Germany defeated France, Poland, and England for that matter because of tactics

By mentioning England in the same breath as France and Poland, you imply surrender. Of course, your earlier comment about Britain not being in the front lines painted you as being historically illiterate anyway.

I get LewRockwell's daily e-mail just as I get the Federalists daily e-mail, or are Reaganites freaks in your opinion as well?

Sophistry. I said LewRockwell.Com was loaded with freaks, not the others. However, if you did not agree at least in part with the philosophy shown there, you would not likely have mentioned. I sometimes read the Guardian, but it's hardly something that I would mention with any pride, as the Guardian does not reflect my opinions at all.

Only people not so sure in their beliefs (like say, someone who sites leftwing journalists for historical 'proof')fear opinions from others.

I don't fear opinions from others. I hear crap opinions as well as good ones all day. I am sick of hearing many of the crap ones - my robust response to you is due to the scent of horse excrement that surrounds yours.

Ivan

[LBGA]

I am 1/4 French. Thank heavens that is a recessive gene (French genes retreat, too) as my son is now proudly serving in the military, and he has a real gun.

[WOSG]

"France, like Germany, has been a battleground for so long, can you blame them for wanting peace? "

so long??? how about SO LONG AGO.
Yeah, lots of Americans and Brits died on their soil.
55-60 years and 84-88 years ago.

9/11 was 2 years ago...

In the interim, while France and Germany has enjoyed the NATO protection, America has fought wars in teh cold war to secure freedom and defeat and contain Communism, in Korea, Vietnam, and elsewhere.

"My only comment is that the French solidier is as brave and capable as the next, it was their leadership that was corrupt, uneducated, and incompetent;"
Dont cofuse some Jay Leno-type jokes for the SERIOUS critiques;
It is precisely the LEADERSHIP that is the issue.
French leadership *today* is corrupt and venal, and is catering to Muslim and anti-American undercurrents that will divide the Atlantic alliance. They are trying to restrain
American 'hyper-power' for no real good reason except envy and their own desire for grander power. Even Blair is on
to their games and has spoken on the foolishness of seeing Europe as a "counterwieght" to the US instead of an ally.




"The French are still a better friend who have contributed several great works to Western culture and they did keep out the Muslim Hordes. " Stopping muslims in 700AD is hardly relevent to current French culture. Today there are 5 million Algerians in France. French politicians like Chirac today are kowtowing to that seething minority rather than telling the truth to their own people. Result? Antisemitism, the rise of ultra-nationalists like Le Pen (a socialist/nationalist bufoon, hardly a friend to the US).

France is a country that believes too much in government and nationalism. These statists want to impose statism on Europe via the EU, on us via agreements like Kyoto, and on their African 'friends' aka neo-colonial satraps. This is going in the wrong direction. We need freedom worldwide, they offer statism. We need free trade, they offer barriers like rules against GM foods and aid to farmers, govt owned companies, etc.

"I get called a Hitler worshipper for suggesting we should have left the French to the Nazi's ..." And if you defend Stalin or Castro, you'll be called a Commie. Funny how that works, eh?

[MadIvan]

I suggest you folks quit reading leftwing journalists and start reading conservative historians.

I see, we'll approve our reading lists with you, Mr. Almighty, before we say anything in future. Our eyes are opened! All hail the mighty libertarian know-it-all!

But, in your moment of glory, you might well admit that you cannot deny what I was trying to say in quoting Shirer - which was that France was infected by a philosophy which said that surrender was preferable to war.

As for Churchill being a historian; my goodness, that is like Clinton's biography being the staple of understanding the 1990s. Why don't you start with at least a moderate liberal like AJP Taylor and then try a Conservative like Clive Ponting?

Churchill was the prophet of the 20th century, and understood a lot more than you could possibly know in your brief 28 year life-span. Had he been listened to, we would have avoided Communism - as he advocated strangling Bolshevism in the crib. If he had been listened to, World War II, would likely have been a lot shorter than it was. He had tremendous command of the language as well as insight. For you to dismiss him out of hand speaks of your casual arrogance.

I think it was just fine? Now you are acting like a feminized liberal ascribing feelings to my reading of events. You folks were taught well by the lefties, I'll say that much.

Sophistry. Do you think Hitler should have been destroyed or not? Yes or no, please. I realise you libertarians have a problem with yes or no questions, but do attempt to answer this one.

Hitler was dually elected by his people on a platform of correcting the wrongs of the Versailles Treaty.

Incorrect. He received less than 40% of the vote in any election. He was brought into power on a deal with Von Papen and other ministers. His was a coalition government initially, and he barely received plurality. Next?

As a supporter of the German Conservative Monarchist position, I would never have let Kaiser Whilhelm abdicate in favor of lawless Jacobism you Wilsonians so worship.

Sophistry. No one here is saying that Woodrow Wilson was any great shakes.

OK, endless sophistry, historical illiteracy, and poor taste from you. The more you talk, the more the intellectual noose draws tighter around your neck.

Ivan

[WOSG]

Abstract musings by lefties, notwithstanding, Britain sold their soul to keep Germany from dominating the continent and have not been the same sense. Was it worth it?

Un mitigated cr*p ... sorry Ivan, we now have a guy defending France by attacking Britians Finest Hour. I apologize to you and the Brits and allies who staved off the menace of Hitler for this revisionist outburst.

This frankly reminds me of the goold ol days of American conservatism ... line up the circular firing squad and fire away. Sigh. <p

[MadIvan]

n mitigated cr*p ... sorry Ivan, we now have a guy defending France by attacking Britians Finest Hour. I apologize to you and the Brits and allies who staved off the menace of Hitler for this revisionist outburst.

Don't worry - earlier today I was unleashing hell at a Frenchman. It's not that much more difficult to do so to their sycophants.

Regards, Ivan

[WOSG]

"I get LewRockwell's daily e-mail "

LOL, yet he critiques some of the best WW II histories out there.

I first read Rise and Fall of the Third Reich as a teenager.
It sure didnt turn me into a Liberal, I crammed this read between Solzenitsyn's "Gulag Archipelago" and Ayn Rand's "Atlas shrugged". Read all three books and will you learn MUCH ABOUT TOTALITARIANISM that you cannot get from any other books:


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0449219771/ref=ase_permthegreeezine/102-0881630-1104965

Read the reviews overall ... 4 1/2 out of 5 stars.



http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060007761/qid=1047160706/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-0881630-1104965


I am sure JohnGalt appreiciates this one:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0451191145/qid=1047160814/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-0881630-1104965

[Colt .45]

I will grant that the average foot soldier might have courage, but his leaders will always screw that up. Look at history ... Dien Bien Phu 1948 or 49, General Vo Nyugen Giap surrounded the French Elite paratroops and massacred them because they couldn't fight with determination. Khe Sahn, Tet Offensive of 1968, same General with the same tactics for the NVA, but he ran into American Marines who were not afraid to fight. Very different outcome for him.

WW1 - one of the French generals managed to incite a mutiny among his troops because they were tired of being used for cannon fodder in and around Verdun. And now it is the damnable French leadership (Chirac and that fop Villepan) that have brought this scorn upon themselves by their perfidity. They lend credence to the old question - With friends like them, who needs enemies?

[WOSG]

"Hitler was dually elected by his people on a platform of correcting the wrongs of the Versailles Treaty. "

Hitler dismantled freedom, rule of law, political dissent and rights of protest and organization, as well as free elections, within a few years of gaining power. Hitler's Nazi party never won a free elected majority, but he played enough tricks to fool and then eliminate all opposition. Just as Castro did, just as many communists did to gain power in Eastern Europe, just as Mussolini did, Just as Chavez is trying in Venezuala right now.

"As for Churchill being a historian"

yes, please look him up. I can understand your affinity to the French - your arrogance exceeds your understanding.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/039541685X/qid=1047161282/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_4/102-0881630-1104965?v=glance&s=books

[Chi-townChief]

At the time, the French were the strongest armed force in the world yet the sat on their existential asses while the Nazis butchered the Polish ally that the French had sworn to defend.

[JohnGalt]

I implied no such thing, nor was it my intention to imply anything. In context, in the Battle of France, England was defeated in the field and retreated at Dunkirk leaving behind so much material, it would hard to call Dunkirk anything but a Teutonic route.

I agree with the forefathers and the Constitution so I read any publication whose central debate is 'what would the forefathers do?' or 'what would Jesus do?' I find it a little more satisfying than thinking of funny stuff to call the French. There is an entire range of debate that exists beyond the Murdoch Right and the CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS left; it's called 'America.'

(Left-liberals have no such publication or intellectuals for that matter so they bring nothing to the table but reactionary diatribes and plenty of charlatans. PS, Taki is great; please don't put him in prison.)

FYI, 11 of my ancestors died in the Ypres Salient fighting in the Welsh Dragoons; my Great Uncle was injured by gas and died just 8 short years ago. There is no greater lover of the British Armed Forces than I; it's the leadership I could do without which I guess puts me in league with Kipling, an imperialist conservative...hmm, how 'bout that?

[JohnGalt]

Dismantled freedom? Germany was a disaster to begin with constant fights between Reds and Black shirts. Hitler ended dissent because the people wanted him too. They wanted to go a week without political battle in the street, broken windows, hyper inflation. Castro seized power using violence, which was more like Mussolini, or Franco for that matter, where as the political parties of Germany actually settled on Hitler because he was a 'moderate' and they thought they could control him.

The Night of the Long Knives was Hitler's price for power and the political powers went along with it.

Oh, I see, Churchill is in the History section at Amazon.com ergo he is a historian.

[JohnGalt]

I agree with your assessment on the failure of leaders, but I am sorry the French-German axis is about the Euro and power. Americans will soon discover that when creditors decide that the Euro is safer than greenbacks from a country intent on fighting an East-West battle to the death in the Middle East.

[Oztrich Boy]

or specifically, as coined by the pride of the French Army, The Imperial Guard, at Waterloo: "Sauve qui peut." "Every man for himself."

[SAMWolf]

France can prove Iraq has weapons of mass destuction.

They kept the receipts.

[Xthe17th]

You left out half the countries Hillary. This was an old Buddy Hackett joke:
In Heaven, all the cooks are French, the mechanics are German, the police are British, the lovers are Italian, and the Swedes run the government.

In Hell, the mechanics are French, the cooks are British, the police are German, the lovers are Swedish, and the Italians run the government!