Today there was a story of 10 French soldiers killed in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban.
The Taliban, of course, are the hostile, ultra-conservative, ultra-orthodox Mujahadeen descendants of the 1980's Afghani resistance against the Soviet occupation. They eventually embraced the similarly virulent and hostile Wahabis of Yemen and Saudi Arabia, a movement which grew into the leadership of Al Qaeda. The Taliban offered safe harbor for Al Qaeda, and of course, Al Qaeda's leadership was living in Afghanistan, on Septemember 11, 2001, and trained and launched those attacks from bases in Afghanistan provided by the Taliban. Fighting the Taliban is nearly equivilant to fighting Al Qaeda, with the sole exception that it is likely the Taliban can be claimed to be legitimate resistance fighters INSIDE Afghanistan.
The French have repeatedly stood by our side when trouble came. They stood by our side in relation to Vietnam and the Viet Minh in the fight against the 'Domino Theory' ludicrousness. They stood by our side in our own Revolution, in the war of 1812, in our own Civil War for that matter. We've fought by their side in WWI, WWII, in Korea, in Desert Storm I, and in Aghanistan. They've, in fact, put more boots on the ground in support of the US than ANY OTHER NATION, bar none, in raw numbers of troops. They lost more troops in WWII, despite fighting less time, than the US, but we forget that. They fought valiantly to liberate Paris, to support the D-Day landings, taking horrific losses among their freedom fighters, but we forget that.
Yesterday 10 more French fighters were killed fighting Terrorism, in a war WE decided needed to be broader than just getting the Taliban and Al Qaeda, ignoring the advice of our allies, including the French and British (who had extensive experience fighting in the Punjab and Kashmiri regions of Pakistan/Afghanistan)- to keep our 'eye on the ball'. They stood by while our troops inadequately attempted to deal with a resurging Taliban.
And yesterday, 10 more Frenchman died. The French have NEVER threatened to pull their troops from Afghanistan.
I wonder how many conservatives today will choose to call them "Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys?" Arrogance is not only a sin, it's ugly and it's vulgar, as well as just plain ignorant and stupid.
My response is "Viv Le France!, Merci Beaucoup"
I wonder just how many of those who suggest the French are "Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys" have actually been to France....
ReplyDeleteIf they have been there, I wonder how many of them have visited folks outside of Paris, and I wonder how many of them have spent extensive time in that fine country.
I am only one person, and can speak only for myself, but I have spent considerable time in France and have found the majority of the French people to be broadly supportive of the United States (if not necessarily of the present administration).
When the majority of the French people do disagree with us, which does happen from time to time, they let it be known vocally, which sounds an awful lot like us when we disagree with them.
Look in the mirror, folks. The Americans, British, and French often get fed-up with one another because we're often annoyingly similar to one another. The big difference is that us Americans have more international leverage, given our Superpower status.
But leverage means very little when our strongest allies decide to take vocal issue with our policies.... They have to listen to us closely, and they do. They're also older countries who have been through a lot more historically, and, given that history tends to repeat itself (particularly when people are paying little or no attention), it might behoove us to listen to what they have to say a little more closely.
We needn't always agree. But we should always listen closely.
P.J.O'Rourke, whom many conservatives, including the voluminous Mitch Berg, like to quote, actually referred to Frenchmen as "smallish, monkey-looking bunch."
ReplyDeletePerhaps it was intended as humor, but since when has racially based humor been funny?
btw gob, I didn't call O'Rourke a racist, or use the term.. just to clarify.
ReplyDeleteI think many people would define the French as a people, perhaps even a culture.. but not a race.. I suppose referring to their physical appearance, that was about their culture then?
The facts are pretty plain, he was making a commment about the physical charactaristics of the French, implying it is genetic, which is derived, 'tada' from their racial traits, and nothing else. So O'Rourke made the racial remark, I didn't invent it. I recommend you think more before you comment further. Nonetheless, despite your misundertanding of the nature of O'Rourke's comments, I'll still call him a rabid bigot - a lackwit Francophobe, illogically attempting to conflate upon the French unflattering physical characteristics.
An interesting observation:
ReplyDeleteRecently... "btw gob, I didn't call O'Rourke a racist, or use the term.. just to clarify."
Previously... "No, it's not ok - he's a bigot, and based on what I've read subsequently, I have no reason to think he's other than racist."
And... "I suppose vulgar, twisted bigot is good enough, though, so yes, one of the neo-con's great heros is a rabid bigot, namely O'Rourke."
Badda,
ReplyDeleteTwo comments, my response was to his INITIAL comment, I CLEARLY called O'Rourke a racist in my second reply based on O'Rourke's own attempt to confer RACIAL traits and tendencies upon the French. You may want to try to follow that along more closely.
O'Rourke is a bigot - the comments he made were bigotted, and rooted in an attempt at racism even if HE didn't understand it's his own dang race.
Second thing - given your past comments and conduct, let me recommend to you that you read the rules of the road here - you're welcome to post, and you'll be treated far more civily than happens at Scared of the Dark - but please be mindful of the fact that this is supposed to be about decent discussion.
I have a question for you, what word(s) would you use to describe O'Rourke's comments if not either racist or bigotted? I don't consider illogically based bigottry any funnier than I do racially based humor, do you?