Fuck France!

And the frog the rode in on!

So President Bush is in Europe speaking with our allies. On Tuesday he met with the NATO leaders, hat in hand (sort of) in hopes of getting some support for training Iraqi troops. Our good ole buddy France pledged one officer and roughly $7000 to aid in Iraqi training. Now some people are offended by this "snub" that this paultry "support" that this represents, but not me! I'm personally glad that this is what France has pledged and I'll tell you why.

Lets take a look a French military history in a section of the blog I like to call


French Military History




- Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

- Hundred Years War - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman." Sainted.

- Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.

- Wars of Religion - France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots

- Thirty Years War - France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

- War of Revolution - Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

- The Dutch War - Tied

- War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War - Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.

- War of the Spanish Succession - Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.

- American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when America does most of the fighting."

- French Revolution - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

- The Napoleonic Wars - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

- The Franco-Prussian War - Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

- World War I - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

- World War II - Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

- War in Indochina - Lost. French forces plead sickness; take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu

- Algerian Rebellion - Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; "We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.

- War on Terrorism - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.

The question for any country silly enough to count on the French should not be "Can we count on the French?", but rather "How long until France collapses?"

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. All you do is leave behind a lot of noisy baggage."

Or, better still, the quote from the Wall Street Journal: "They're there when they need you."





Now personally, I wouldn't want these fuckers training me! If I were president, I'd actively try to piss off the French. I bet if we can get them to start training and supplying the insurgents in Iraq, the fighting would be over in weeks.




Editor's Note: The above was intended to be satire, a political satire sure, but satire nonetheless. French Military History was stolen from various web sites, and is not a product of Random Acts of Sensless Fuckery. We at RAoSF do not wish to have Frenchies, or Frenchie lovers, throwing bottles of Pierre with a burning hankie stuffed in the top at our offices.
14,717 views 13 replies
Reply #1 Top

Saw it a long time ago but still damn funny

 

Reply #2 Top
I thought for something to be "satire" it had to be, you know, funny. This is just stupid.
Reply #3 Top
Damn funny Pidge. I agree that we don't need these guys. They provided some troops to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, but ISAF only patrolled Kabul, and the French refused to send their troops out to the farther out provinces where there was actual instability and danger. If they want to truly contribute, great, but we shouldn't fret about their lack of support. They don't have much influence in the world anymore, and are still bitter about it. I don't think we should antagonize them, but we surely shouldn't beg them for support either.
Reply #4 Top
Well holy shit Batman is this for real? Can any country be so stupid and ignorant? Holy shit. I never realized the US was so stupid as to seek help and an ally from a nation of complete losership. Insult France as much as you like, just ask yourself why you'd even ask such a lame power for help anyways. Hilarious! Americans say: "Hey Joe, see that piece of shit truck over there? That one. Yeah. You know it's broken down almost everytime it's been used extensively. Almost every time! Hey Joe, let's go take it and get it running for our vigorous and extensive trip around the world!". Does that sound smart silly? You're a goofball. If France helped the US in Iraq then you'd be what? Ignoring the shit you just barfed out? You'd say France was good? Grow up and ask yourself why Bush would ask such a loser nation for help. Unless he's a loser nation himself.
Reply #5 Top
top google result when you query "french military victories."


do that, then click "I Feel Lucky" instead of search. Now that's classic. (Google-bomb!!!!!)
Reply #6 Top
Myrrander - Couldn't figure out the content of the article from the title? Was it too subtle?

Reiki - I have to hope that you wrote that crap on cocaine.

Trollings all around! My Treat.
Reply #7 Top
Reiki, as I said President Bush was talking to all of our NATO allies, not just France. If he had gone specifially to France to ask for help, I would have to agree with you, except for:

Grow up and ask yourself why Bush would ask such a loser nation for help. Unless he's a loser nation himself.


I'm not sure if you are aware of this or not, but President Bush is actually just a person, not a nation (loser nation or otherwise).



Reply #8 Top
- Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

- Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.


Okay as an Italian-American I find this almost as offensive as it is funny...

Damm fine article....by the way for some future info, any time you tell a Frenchman Napoleon was Corsican and not Frenchman....watchout as they tend to explode spraying frogslegs and champagne everywhere....I said that to a french tourist last year...damm near thought he got hot under the collar...but his national cowardice overwhelmed him and he seemed ready to surrender...

One does get a certain chuckle when one considers that France's best military unit, The Foreign Legion, is a mix of ex-patriots from across the world....

One last thing..regarding Afghanistan, one has to wonder since it was pretty much the "good war" according to the euro-socialist pansies yet nato's commitment is what bout 9,500 troops...out of roughly a total force of bout 2 million (excluding US forces from nato)...sometimes I wonder why we even bother with them...if you gonna help, Help..if not get the hell out of the way...just my point of view.
Reply #9 Top
Along the same lines, I found this on a conservative website. Not at all politically correct. Extremely offensive. And FUNNY as hell.


FUN FACTS ABOUT THE FRENCH:

- A Frenchman will fight viciously and without regard to his own life if you stand between him and a white flag.

- Rumor has it that the French don't like bathing. This rumor comes from them smelling.

- To get with modern times, they've adopted a stance of preemptive surrender.

- During the cola wars, France was occupied by Pepsi for six months.

- They like to sell weapons to enemies of America. But come on - what kind of pansies use French weapons?

- Their language not being quite as effeminate as they would like, they also wear berets.

- The Eiffel Tower was constructed so that they would have something very tall to wave a white flag from in case of attack.

- In ancient times, primitive Frenchmen surrendered to thunderstorms.

- They actually have a military, though what purpose it serves is unknown.


NOTE: The source of this is a T-shirt from www.thoseshirts.com.
Reply #10 Top
Hardy har har. You know what I was saying so if you miss the interpretation that's your problem, not mine. I think the silly shit pretaining to France should finally end. It's sooooooooo lame and boring when people get on that shit. And the same goes for Canada's mosquito navy army etc...It's pretty juvenile to use that shit as an argument. All it does is say "if you go against the US's wishes then you'll be verbally abused by the stupid side of American society. You know, the flag saluting bastards who piss blood and love the smell of napalmed babies in the morning. I find it pretty hard to recall that the shitheads who made up the "freedom fries" crap were grown men with good educations. So immature and your society runs wild with it. So let me say how it really is. If Canada decided to join the illegal invasion of Iraq and had decided to kill Iraqis in the same manner Americans do then you'd all shut the fuck up with the juvenile schoolyard taunts and pat Canada on the back for our support. If Canada decides not to get involved with an internationally accepted crime then we're traitors to the US and are spitting on the hand that feeds us etc...You guys should be ashamed for being so two faced and maybe stop being such a good example when I teach my children about what your nation is doing in the world, particularly the Middle East. The innocent mind of a child is so interesting to observe. So many things come out. For example, my sons wonder why North Korea, WITH NUKES AND THREATS TO THE US TO USE THEM, is worthy of 'diplomacy' and then Iraq, who stated they had no WMD or nukes, provided the US with a 10,000 PAGE REPORT ON THEIR NON-EXISTENT WMD PROGRAM (WHICH THEY EDITED THOUSANDS OF PAGES FROM!!!!), is worthy of slaughter. Fucking 8 years old and he understands the logic of oil! Iraq has oil. North Korea has nothing. Oil = slaughter. Nothing = diplomacy. Another example is how my son stated "how can you bring democracy when you bring nothing but an army with weapons?". Ah the tear that formed in my eye! So logical in the way only a child can be. While you couch-hawks barf about exporting freedom and all that bullshit you fail to notice your troops never brought any fucking copies of the US Constitution to Iraq nor any translators outside of the US military. But plenty of killing shit though!
Reply #11 Top
Reiki,

You really should not address issues that you are uninformed about. COUCH-HAWKS? Right....like Greywar is a couch-hawk.... HE'S OVER IN THE WAR ZONE NOW!! Plus, he VOLUNTEERED TO GO. He wasn't a pussy that had to be told that he had to go. He believes in the mission, and in what we are doing, and he grabbed his sack and made the hard decision. I spent 11 months in Afghanistan (as a civilian supporting the military, and no, I didn't work for Halliburton), and I volunteered to go to. Oh yeah, I also spent 2 months in Kuwait. Oh yeah, my job? Providing CIVILIAN LANGUAGE SUPPORT....that's right there genius.....we were supplying HUNDREDS upon HUNDREDS of language support staff to the effort over there. So before you go jabbering about crap you don't know about, check your facts.

I won't argue the argument of diplomacy versus action, and whether the US was justified or not. I've learned that people have their own viewpoints on this, and no matter how much information is provided to them one way or the other, they won't change their minds. You have your opinion on the matter, and that's fine. I won't dispute that with you. But don't DARE to insult the individuals who have the courage to step into harms way because of something they believe in (whether you believe in or not, you should still respect them for their conviction).
Reply #12 Top
And the same goes for Canada's mosquito navy army etc...


what does that mean? And where how the hell did this become something about Canada.

If Canada decided to join the illegal invasion of Iraq and had decided to kill Iraqis in the same manner Americans do then you'd all shut the fuck up with the juvenile schoolyard taunts and pat Canada on the back for our support. If Canada decides not to get involved with an internationally accepted crime then we're traitors to the US and are spitting on the hand that feeds us etc...You guys should be ashamed for being so two faced


no, i think two faced would be if we condemed you for attacking iraq and then berated you for not attacking them.

why North Korea, WITH NUKES AND THREATS TO THE US TO USE THEM, is worthy of 'diplomacy' and then Iraq, who stated they had no WMD or nukes, provided the US with a 10,000 PAGE REPORT ON THEIR NON-EXISTENT WMD PROGRAM (WHICH THEY EDITED THOUSANDS OF PAGES FROM!!!!), is worthy of slaughter.


while I disagree with your use of "slaughter" there (I would say that "slaughter" is what Saddam Hussain did to the Kurds), the answer is pretty clear. the reason you use diplomacy with NK and not with Iraq is because NK had nukes, and because of the envornment. I dont know if you've been to the Korean penisula before (I have) it is not very condusive to fighting a mobil battle like the desert is. Tanks would be severly hampered in the mountains of NK. I firmly believe that we would have kicked NK's ass, but it would have been alot more expensive.

oh yeah, and as you siad, there is no oil in NK.

I really guess you missed the point of the article. it was supposed to be a timely poke a France. It was (as stated in the original article) satire. But as you have missed that, I would like to set the record straight on my beliefs.

Do I think the US had a good reason to invade Iraq?
No

Do I think that the Iraqis are better off today than they were before we invaded?
For the most part, yes.

Do I think that Iraq represented a larger threat to the US than NK did?
No

But I doubt you'll take any of that into consideration, and just in case I haven't pissed you off enough, I have a little something extra for you...

Link
Reply #13 Top
Pretty funny Pidge.

On a serious note though, as "morally upstanding" and "politically correct" as the Canadians would have us believe they are, I had the opportunity to work with their Army in Afghanistan (Princess Patricia's to be exact). I'll concede that they are pretty competent as far as training and operations go, but there was massive RACISM and SEXISM within the units. There were few minorities in the unit there (which is understandable as Canada does have a smaller minority population). But, a few of the white male soldiers expressed how upset they were that they were letting blacks into the Canadian Army. It was going to drag the standards of performance down according to them.

Yeah, Reiki, you guys are WAY more morally upstanding than we are. I'm not saying that we don't have similar issues, but for you to sit on your high horse up there and look down your nose at the US and our military is pretty hypocritical.