The Mighty French

[bivonic]

From EHOWA.COM (Adult Jokes and all round not nice stuff)
The History of Majestic French Military Victories

So the French still aren\'t on board with us spanking Iraq. Oh boo hoo.
Let\'s take a look at the mighty French military prowess, shall we?


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.\"

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 Devolution - 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
surrenders?\"

[Whitehall]

That\'s not quite fair to the French. They have indeed had at least one conquest.

They were the original conquerers of Canada - when it was pretty much empty space and a four person canoe was a ship of the line. But then they lost it to the British.

But that brings us around to the \"Cajuns\" and I don\'t want to go there again.

[bivonic]

I\'m French Canadian, I have lots of relatives up there, I even accidentally stepped into the 151st Anniversary of the first of my lineage to settle in Canada.

[proteus]

Might makes right I guess hey? Interesting viewpoint - right out of Dubya\'s playbook. I\'d like all the Chickenhawks out there to be the first to volunteer to fight on the frontlines in Iraq (yes, in spite of efforts by the French, Germans etc., this war is inevitable - Dubya has made that quite clear), and if they are too old, to volunteer their kids to go in their place. Maybe then I\'ll start taking them seriously.

http://www.nhgazette.com/chickenhawks.html (\"http://www.nhgazette.com/chickenhawks.html\")

[Lucky]

Speaking of Canada...I\'ve been wondering about all the freedoms tounge et al say we have because of the wars we\'ve fought and won. When I look at Canada whose easternmost ports were settled before the American Revolution (they didn\'t rebel, thus avoided the American Civil War too) and have certainly not been instrumental in staging any war. I don\'t see any difference in the freedoms the USA and Canada enjoy. I need to know what I am missing here.

Plus, I\'m having trouble factoring in the costs of war in dollars, lives and time...how can we create value in all of this madness?

Does Canada spend their war money on their health care?

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Lucky, I like the way your mind works.

[Lucky]

WILL SOME OF THE POLITICAL MINDS ANSWER MY QUESTION, please?

I don\'t know a thing about politics and am really struggling,

[**DONOTDELETE**]

What kind of idiot would make a judgment about a country\'s ability to win wars ?

[Lucky]

Why such a hostile first post, Yannos?

[Wolfe]

besides, thats closer to fact than a judgement anyways.

[CptKipling]

Would we be saying that France is doomed to forever be on the losing side? Because that would be stupid.

That\'s what he was saying.

People are sensitive to comments about their country, some people here should know that.

[Whitehall]

I spent some time working in Toronto. While it is definitely a \"free\" country, I was cognizant that I no longer had the Bill of Rights on my side. My only official contact was at the border getting a work permit - that was straightforward enough - and getting a speeding ticket. Polite, yes, but a ticket is a ticket although some Canadian friends had just told me the night before that NOBODY got speeding tickets in Canada.

Still, the people seems more passive than in the States although the general politics are quite active. I got the sense that not having to prove themselves with a revolution, they still felt dependent for guidence from the Old Country. They certainly had this royalty worship thing going. Americans took our freedom, Canadians were granted it - BIG difference and it still shows.

The Canadians I met were lovely people - until one mentions Quebec. I was at a bar having a beer and started talking to a couple of guys. Everything was going great until the Francophones came up. Suddenly, I could have been in Bosnia - these guys were talking genocide! Good thing Ontario doesn\'t have the Bomb!

Canadians do seem a bit in awe of Americans and maybe a bit intimidated by our energy, freedoms, and assertiveness. I later put it into perspective by realizing that Canadians look at Americans as Americans look at New Yorkers - loud, pushy, and arrogant. I did notice that black people held their head higher in Canada and they lacked the strutiness that shows overcompensation in some black men.

I came away looking at our freedoms here in the US in a new, more favorable light. Canada is great, but the USA is better.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I party with some canadians. I would describe them as more care free , go with the flow. They love hockey and getting [bad word] up. They are reliable friends. They can be real smartasses, but thats just them. Ususally they run their mouth, but are to drunk to fight , so i protect them! lol To be honest they all seem alittle crazy to me.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

these weren\'t facts ,it was the interpratations of facts ,by a simple minded average american (sorry dude,but this is just a temporary opinion ,it\'s up to you to make it change)
Truth is : US gov. wants this war to happen at any cost ,it\'s a world wide political issue (keeping the hegemony).
And the propaganda (excuse the strong word) in the mass medias ruled by the american power (so ,money) had already began... So let\'s just hate those [bad word] french who are not on our side. \"Who \'s not on our side is our ennemy !\"
COME ON ! How can you be so easily influenced ?
It\'s as if a european would say :

a brief history of the United States :

First ,colonization : Let\'s just take this land ,and kill those [bad word] indians who are frightenning us and OUR land.
(higlilight : giving away alcohol and infected sheets to them)

Then , independence : let\'s just fight those [bad word] british who are trying to rule us.

then , war again : those mother fuckers from the south are just to be binded ,let\'s make war !
(higlight : gettisburgh (don\'t know the correct spell in english) ,as many deads as in the vietnam war)

and so on ,and so on...
Oh yes by the way ,let\'s also mention the first use of atomic bomb against a country that was already surrendering ,first use of napalm against people who hardly had clothes to wear etc etc etc
.
But you know what ?
Usually ,european people don\'t say that.
Don\'t fall in that easyness (?)

Try to think \"individuals\" and not \"governments\"
And to conclude , the one who\'s offending the other is always the one feeling weaker ,he tries to make people think ,he\'s strong and right by claiming it.
But never mind I think your statement is too pathetic to continue arguing.

To the others : sorry for the tone /ubbthreads/images/icons/wink.gif

[Lucky]

I don\'t doubt one bit that the impending war is all about money and oil. In fact, every war you mentioned - French and Indian, Revolution, and Civil, was motivated by greed and civilized by \'freedom\'.

However, I disagree with you about the Japanese \"already surrendering\". They were probably whipped and didn\'t want to know it, but they NEVER would have surrendered. Ever.

[bivonic]

I agree Lucky the Japanese never would had surrendered otherwise, do you think the Kamikazee mentality was only for a few spirited jet fighters? NO. I will respond to the radicalist in a moment, he obviously did not realize that I did not assemble those facts myself but rather cut & paste from a web site, there are a few glaringly wrong statements made that I will address as time permits, I\'m a bit swamped at work at the moment.

[bivonic]

YANNOS -

What nationality are you, where did you grow up, where do you live now & how old are you?

My response to your pathetic diatribe:
<<these weren\'t facts ,it was the interpratations of facts ,by a simple minded average american (sorry dude,but this is just a temporary opinion ,it\'s up to you to make it change) >>

Go ahead & dissect the facts from fiction, I\'m giving you the floor to tell us your interpretation.

<<Truth is : US gov. wants this war to happen at any cost ,it\'s a world wide political issue (keeping the hegemony).
And the propaganda (excuse the strong word) in the mass medias ruled by the american power (so ,money) had already began... So let\'s just hate those [bad word] french who are not on our side. \"Who \'s not on our side is our ennemy !\"
COME ON ! How can you be so easily influenced ? >>

two responses to this:
1. This is not a war about money, it is about protecting America from future terrorist attacks. I live & work in the New York city area & this directly affects me - if I hadn\'t been lucky enough to take an alternate route to work on September 11th, 2001 I would be dead & for what purpose? If this was a war about money that the US has to gain then why aren\'t the stock markets skyrocketing?
2. The French are not standing idly by & taking a neutral stance they are directly hampering the United States efforts to iradicate this vicious dictator & for what purpose, I dare you to answer me that - but I know you won\'t because if you honestly answered that question it would deflate any steam that your argument contains.

<<It\'s as if a european would say :
:
:
But never mind I think your statement is too pathetic to continue arguing.

To the others : sorry for the tone >>

Thanks, I needed a good laugh.

[Whitehall]

It is true that the US government is committed - deeply committed - to disposing Saddam. That will probably require military action - an armed invasion - but if Saddam steps down, that might work too. Bush has too much at stake here to retreat - there is no other way out for him and his administration except victory.

The US will lead a coalition of the willing no matter what France or the UN or NATO decides. France is using our determination to extract the highest costs possible - politically and economically - from the US. The German political leaders are using opposition to the US-lead effort as a way to win votes in former East Germany from the far left - they need all the support they can get since the government is tottering and will soon be replaced with a right-center party.

The French and Germans are betting on the wrong side of history. This episode will mark the beginning of a major erosion of EU/French/German influence in the world. The US will increasingly turn towards Eastern and Central Europe and Britain will join us.

The UN and NATO are both in trouble too. The UN is looking more and more like the League of Nations - dead. NATO only works if the members live up to their responsibilities and commitments - what Germany, France, and Belgium are doing to Turkey is a disgrace.

These guys are just not holding enough cards - and Bush is too wily to fall for their bluffs.

[franki]

\"The German political leaders are using opposition to the US-lead effort as a way to win votes in former East Germany from the far left - they need all the support they can get since the government is tottering and will soon be replaced with a right-center party.\"

Your analysis is right. The current Schroder-government is acting like an elephant in a porcelain cabinet. Even their own intelligence agency (BND) says the Iraq threat should be taken very seriously.

I am afraid though the current government is stable enough to hold on to 2006.

\"The UN is looking more and more like the League of Nations - dead.\"

The credibility of the UN is one of the main reasons I think Iraq should be handled firmly. Currently it is France and Germany that are undermining the UN\'s credibiblity and image, but in the past the USA has been guilty of that too, too many times.

Franki /ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif

[Whitehall]

I think the UN will need restructuring for it to survive and deal effectively with \"collective security\" as well as other global health and environmental issues. Why do the French have a veto on the Security Council anyway?

Too bad about Schroder and his leftist/Green coalition hanging on - I don\'t think that speaks well for the future of Germany. Europe and the US need each other and have too much in common to split.

As the US not being 100% behind the UN - so true. Sometimes I agree with my government in it\'s resistance to UN efforts and sometimes I agree with the UN. However, the US is one of the most democratic governments in the history of the world while most of the UN members are anything but. Libya as chair of the UN Human Rights Committee?!?! The US retains the moral high ground in most cases when dealing with yielding power to the UN.

Two weeks ago I attended a concert in the building and the hall here in San Francisco where the UN Charter was negotiated and signed, right after WWII. It got me thinking.

[Lucky]

You are dead on about France and Germany betting on the wrong side. We WILL win this one. Even though Bush is not the sharpest tack on the board, he is not one bit scared. I like that about him.

It might boost the world economy, too. The reduced oil prices and all the work the aftermath will require could jump start lots of things.

[Elana]

<<Even though Bush is not the sharpest tack on the board, he is not one bit scared. I like that about him. >>

I agree....I really respect that about him.

[bivonic]

I like Bush, but I prefer shaved Bush <oops, wrong thread>.

[Elana]

/ubbthreads/images/icons/laugh.gif/ubbthreads/images/icons/laugh.gif

[Blackwidow_Woman]

>(I like Bush, but I prefer shaved Bush <oops, wrong thread>.) Way to go that cute.. /ubbthreads/images/icons/wink.gif Im sick of hereing about war crap and i personaly dont care as il be here till the end and i will survive no matter what it takes and protect my home property kids and animals and as far as Bush goes well daddy failed so now juniour has to do what he can..I got my own little war going on with my kid and her cancer and she will come befour anything including hereing or see anything to do with war....

[Wolfe]

about money..man am i tired of hearing that crap. take a look at the USA debt of BILLIONS and you know where that debt comes from?..spending OUR tax dollars defending other countries...THEN rebuilding them and feeding the ppl there cause they have no income of thier own..about money, what a crock of shït, if it was about money we wouldn\'t be billions in debt. Now if you wanna talk money, ask the french why they are worried ,and it boils down to, if we kick saddam out, THE SANTIONS WILL BE LIFTED, and then American companies can again do business there(meaning the rich contracts the french have would be voided and they\'d have to deal with a new goverment) . OH MY!!! does this mean thier oil imports are in danger???..so if ANYONE is motivated by money it\'s the French!!

[Whitehall]

Here\'s an example of what the French are considering as ways to help:

\"Former French Army Chief of Staff Jacques Lanxade said in an interview Feb. 5 with Le Parisien that his nation could send as many as 12,000 troops to Iraq if it comes to war. The erstwhile Army chief said that he believed war was inevitable, because the “Bush team has made its decision, and France can,
for example, secure the oil fields in the event of war.\"\'

Right, the US can take Baghdad in house-to-house fighting while the French take control of the only thing of value in the whole country.

Thanks for nothing.

[Lucky]

Will you explain the France-Turkey connection?

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Yes, please, I\'d be very interested too.

[Whitehall]

Turkey has been a solid member of NATO for a long time. It eagerly seeks membership in the European Union, largely for the economic benefits. France has been turning up its nose at that, with the former French president being quite pointed about not admitting a Muslim country like Turkey because, in so many words, \"They\'re not our kind.\"

The US offered to help Turkey with EU membership a few months ago as an inducement for cooperation with us.

The recent stink is that Turkey is asking for help from NATO in protecting itself against Saddam. The US is stationing large numbers of troops and aircraft there and one could expect Saddam to use his Scud missiles with chemical and/or biological weapons to target the air fields and troop staging areas in Turkey. They want NATO to start planning for providing enhanced anti-missile defenses to Turkey.

However, France, Germany and Belgium have vetoed that request saying that would just facilitate a US-lead attack. Ask us AFTER the missiles have landed, then they might agree to allow NATO to help. All the other NATO members voted yes. The US has spent BILLIONS to protect France and Germany against the threat of attack but now, they can\'t even PLAN to help another member on the front line.

This might be the end of NATO and the EU and the start of a major realignment. Lot\'s of people are really pissed.

[franki]

It is very strange this has happened. Germany recently gave Israel Patriot-missiles to help defend them in case of an Iraqi attack, but they refuse to do the same in the case of Turkey!!

Franki /ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif

[Wolfe]

actually there doesnt have to be house to house fighting, lets revert back to midevil days, surround the city and lay seige to it, nothing in, nothing out that we dont let out till only thing left is saddam and his rebels, then it be a whole site safer on everyone. i mean it might take a bit longer but it would save alot of lives i bet, unless the ppl revolt against him and start a fight that we\'d have to get them out of.
that way the civilians be safer unless saddam (which i\'m sure he will as he has before) surrounds himself with them as a shield and they get caught in the smart bombs sent in to get the viper nests that keeps firing upon the troops stationed outside the city.
truth be known the first strike ought to be to land paratroopers into the oil fields and take them over to keep SH from firing them like he did the Kuwait fields...and he will if given the chance i bet. (and before you tree huggers pop off about taking the fields cause of the money thing dont even bother), firing those fields will put millions of tons of pollution into the air that we dont need so has nothing to do with money as to why we need to take those fields first. Those of you that think it\'s about money need to open your eyes, IF it WAS about money..who would stop us from kickin his ass outta there and taking over the country AND it\'s oil fields. I\'ll answer that for you, no one could if that was our intent.( to profit from it) OH sure,there\'d be alot of huffing and puffing over it, and maybe some ill will(which there already is anyways) but thats all it would be as no one really could do a damn thing to us if thats what we wanted to do. (kick him out and take his oil).

[Lucky]

Thanks for the explanation.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Ok, so ... it could be about oil, it could be about money, does anybody wonder if it\'s about religion?

[Lucky]

At first I thought OBLaden was trying to promote his religion. I never thought SH cared about religion. Now I don\'t have a clue.

Don\'t tell Wolfe, but I still think oil and money are involved.

[upsidedown]

I think in situations like this there are multiple things involved that all play a part. It\'s seldom ever one single thing...but a lot of things that all interconnect in the overall scheme of things.

>>At first I thought OBLaden was trying to promote his religion. I never thought SH cared about religion. Now I don\'t have a clue.<<

I do think that religion is a large motivating factor for bin Laden..he apears to think anybody but Muslims on holy land (Saudi Arabia) is offensive. ....but I don\'t think religion has anything to do with Saddam\'s actions. Saddam is not a religious Muslim. In fact, Saddam has murdered more Muslims (in his own country) than anyone else. He could care less about religion, but he gladly uses it as a tool if it serves his purposes and turns people against his enemies.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I\'m afraid of a holy war. If you told me I could either be slow roasted at the stake or convert to Islam, you\'d have to slow roast me, I don\'t have a choice - it\'s one thing I\'d have to die over rather than compromise. Sometimes it seems to me Bin Laden and his ilk really do want everyone dead who isn\'t a Muslim. That scares me worse than anything else.

[upsidedown]

One other thing on religion, but from what I hear bin Laden is not happy with the Saudi royal family either. I forget his feelings about them exactly, but essentially he doesn\'t think they\'re strict Muslim enough. Someone may be able to correct me on his reasons for being displeased with them. I believe Osama would remove them if he had his way, which I believe is why the Saudi Royal family has paid him off over the years...

I think radical Islam is a lot of the problem. Interesting that they consider the West (infadels) as enemies even though our democratic contries allow for freedom of religion and freedom for them to follow their religious customs. Islam is flourishing in the U.S. thanks to our freedoms. Yet, many, probably most radical Muslim countries repress any other religions. Funny the double standard also considering that Saddam has murdered so many Muslims, and the West went to war against Millosovic to save Muslims.

[bivonic]

I still want to know if OBL or UBL to the foreigners is still alive, that station Al Jaheez or whatever used to broadcast videos right, why is it the last two broadcasts have been only audio???? I question if OBL is truly dead (GOD FREAKING WILLING) or if these audio tapes are legit. My heart says that the technology is certainly there for the audio tapes to be reconstructed & that he is no longer living.

Do I want to oust SH? YES, but I am more concerned about OBL as I see that as a more direct threat. I am depending on the leaders in the U.S.A. to have done their reconnaiscence (sorry for the spelling) & to have made the connection.

I also realize that if the US did crack Iraq\'s secret communication code that any information they gained from those intercepts should soley lay in their hands as that would compromise their military strategic advantage if the US was to share that info with the UN as that would give Iraq the opportunity to change their encryption methods.

Long story short, I have the utmost confidence in the leaders of my country, there is no way in hell someone will convince me this is a war of economics, I\'ve seen how much USD it costs to physically go to war & I know there is no way in hell the US comes ahead financially, I think the US stock market would agree with me.

[upsidedown]

I personally doubt that Al Qeda is in a position to get to the technology to fake his voice. But, that\'s just my guess. But, I\'ve heard two really credible thoughts on why UBL has not been seen on video (assuming these audio tapes are truly him.) First, it\'s possible that he was severly injured and disfigured in the bombings in Afghanistan, and doesn\'t want to be seen this way. Another reason is that he may have had cosmetic surgery to alter his look should he need to escape...and he doesn\'t want to give away his new look. Also, if he had a new look, people might be less inclined to believe it\'s him.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I\'m afraid of OBL and his followers. And I don\'t see that we can do anything about them. Even if OBL is dead or were to die soon, assuming he\'s alive. He stands for something that won\'t die just because he does. There will be someone to transition right in behind him and take his place, and the beat goes on. And I wonder if, because we can\'t catch him or do anything about the sneak attacks he will perpetrate, we\'re planning to bomb the be-jesus out of Iraq instead. Just to make it look like we\'re doing something. I don\'t understand how bombing Iraq will stop Osama.

[Lucky]

<I know there is no way in hell the US comes ahead financially>

Hold it....I NEVER meant the USA was doing it for money for the government!!!! The people making the decisions, take Bush and Cheney as an example - Wyoming and Texas = Big Oil Money, PLOC, Halliburton (didn\'t Lady Bird Johnson own most of Brown and Root that bounced into Vietnam and later merged with the notorious Halliburton - get the drift?); their boys are the ones that will benefit financially. In my lifetime, I don\'t know of a politician that has been statesman-like enough to consider the wealth of the country with no personal gain. However, they will create benefits for their respective parties and lobbying groups.

[Wolfe]

i\'m to damn old and cantankerous to change my ways, personnally i think we ought to just nuke all those bastards and save the hassle(and our kid\'s lifes to boot) and if need be go back to riding horses if we cant get along w/o the oil.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Reminds me of a Randy Newman song.

Randy Newman - Political Science

No one likes us
I don\'t know why.
We may not be perfect
But heaven knows we try.
But all around even our old friends put us down.
Let\'s drop the big one and see what happens.

We give them money
But are they grateful?
No they\'re spiteful
And they\'re hateful.
They don\'t respect us so let\'s surprise them;
We\'ll drop the big one and pulverize them.

Now Asia\'s crowded
And Europe\'s too old.
Africa\'s far too hot,
And Canada\'s too cold.
And South America stole our name.
Let\'s drop the big one; there\'ll be no one left to blame us.

Bridge:
We\'ll save Australia;
Don\'t wanna hurt no kangaroo.
We\'ll build an all-American amusement park there;
They\'ve got surfing, too.

Well, boom goes London,
And boom Paree [sic].
More room for you
And more room for me.
And every city the whole world round
Will just be another American town.
Oh, how peaceful it\'ll be;
We\'ll set everybody free;
You\'ll have Japanese kimonos, baby,
There\'ll be Italian shoes for me.
They all hate us anyhow,
So let\'s drop the big one now.
Let\'s drop the big one now.

[Blackwidow_Woman]

(i\'m to damn old and cantankerous to change my ways, personnally i think we ought to just nuke all those bastards and save the hassle(and our kid\'s lifes to boot) and if need be go back to riding horses if we cant get along w/o the oil)

Right on Wolf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i agree with you on that all the way!!!!!!!!!!!!! /ubbthreads/images/icons/wink.gif

[**DONOTDELETE**]

:

\"Former French Army Chief of Staff Jacques Lanxade said in an interview Feb. 5 with Le Parisien that his nation could send as many as 12,000 troops to Iraq if it comes to war. The erstwhile Army chief said that he believed war was inevitable, because the “Bush team has made its decision, and France can,
for example, secure the oil fields in the event of war.\"\'

Right, the US can take Baghdad in house-to-house fighting while the French take control of the only thing of value in the whole country.


Ok sure that could sounds ironical But , just a question , do you know who did brought the technology there to extract oil and what was the pay return for the country who did that ?
you\'d be surprised by the answer

[EXIT63]

http://www.sptimesrussia.com/archive/times/844/opinion/o_8705.htm (\"http://www.sptimesrussia.com/archive/times/844/opinion/o_8705.htm\")

[Mtnjim]

Why does the US need the French in Iraq?

Someone has to show the Iraqies how to surrender!!

[Whitehall]

This joke was supposedly deleted from a broadcast by the BBC -

What do you call a Frenchman marching on Baghdad?








A salesman.