Enough said

[ArtKramr]

An officer in the U.S. naval Reserve was attending a conference that included
admirals from both the U.S. Navy and the French Navy. At a cocktail reception,
he found himself in a small group that included personnel from both navies.

The French Admiral started complaining that whereas Europeans learned many
languages, Americans learned only English. He then asked, "Why is it that we
have to speak English in these conferences rather than you speak French?"

Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's because the
Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you would not have to
speak in German."

The group became silent.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[Skysurfer]

ArtKramr wrote :

> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
> because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
> you would not have to speak in German."

Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
Enough said.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Skysurfer" > wrote in message
. 0.4...
>
> Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
> Enough said.
>

Yup. Without the help of France the US would be an English-speaking country
today.

[Jarg]

"Skysurfer" > wrote in message
. 0.4...
> ArtKramr wrote :
>
> > Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
> > because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
> > you would not have to speak in German."
>
> Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
> Enough said.

Given that the United Kingdom came into being in 1801, you are incorrect.

Jarg

[Skysurfer]

Steven P. McNicoll wrote :

>> Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
>> Enough said.
>
> Yup. Without the help of France the US would be an
> English-speaking country today.

LOL. I'm sure you've understood what i meant.
But imagine, without France you'd still have the 5 o'clock tea and a
Queen :-p

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Skysurfer" > wrote in message
.4...
>
> LOL. I'm sure you've understood what i meant.
>

I did.


>
> But imagine, without France you'd still have the 5 o'clock tea and a
> Queen :-p
>

Isn't tea time 4 o'clock?

[Skysurfer]

Jarg wrote :

>> > Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
>> > because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it
>> > so you would not have to speak in German."
>>
>> Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
>> Enough said.
>
> Given that the United Kingdom came into being in 1801, you are
> incorrect.

Given that Germany won the 1870's war and we were still speaking in
French after that, the original post was incorrect ...

[[email protected]]

Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:

> "Skysurfer" > wrote in message
> >
> > But imagine, without France you'd still have the 5 o'clock tea and a
> > Queen :-p

> Isn't tea time 4 o'clock?

Hah, caught you! Only a bloody Torry would know that!

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

[ArtKramr]

>Subject: Re: Enough said
>From:
>Date: 1/13/04 10:45 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
>
>> "Skysurfer" > wrote in message
>> >
>> > But imagine, without France you'd still have the 5 o'clock tea and a
>> > Queen :-p
>
>> Isn't tea time 4 o'clock?
>
>Hah, caught you! Only a bloody Torry would know that!
>
>Bill Ranck
>Blacksburg, Va.


Only old ladies and sick people drink tea.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[Steven P. McNicoll]

> wrote in message ...
>
> Hah, caught you! Only a bloody Torry would know that!
>

Couldn't a Yank that spent a few years in the UK while serving in the USAF
know it as well?

[[email protected]]

Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:

> > wrote in message ...
> >
> > Hah, caught you! Only a bloody Torry would know that!
> >

> Couldn't a Yank that spent a few years in the UK while serving in the USAF
> know it as well?

Sigh, it was just an American Revolution joke. Nevermind.


Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

P.S. I actually listen to a BBC radio program called TeaTime
via the Internet. Lot's of us know what tea time is, really.

[Helomech]

"Skysurfer" > wrote in message
. 0.4...
> ArtKramr wrote :
>
> > Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
> > because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
> > you would not have to speak in German."
>
> Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
> Enough said.

Oh you mean the French? Yeah they showed up after 90% of the fighting was
done..........

[Tarver Engineering]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Skysurfer" > wrote in message
> . 0.4...
> >
> > Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
> > Enough said.
> >
>
> Yup. Without the help of France the US would be an English-speaking
country
> today.

Why?

You do understand that it was Arnold that won in the North?

Without Arnold, there would have been no 300 iron cannon for Green to drag
to Yorktown. Victory had nothing to do with the French, outside the number
of Merchants French privateers took. And then the US had to go to war with
those same pirates, less than 20 years later.

[Peter Stickney]

In article >,
(ArtKramr) writes:
>>Subject: Re: Enough said
>>From:
>>Date: 1/13/04 10:45 AM Pacific Standard Time
>>Message-id: >
>>
>>Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
>>
>>> "Skysurfer" > wrote in message
>>> >
>>> > But imagine, without France you'd still have the 5 o'clock tea and a
>>> > Queen :-p
>>
>>> Isn't tea time 4 o'clock?
>>
>>Hah, caught you! Only a bloody Torry would know that!
>>
>>Bill Ranck
>>Blacksburg, Va.
>
>
> Only old ladies and sick people drink tea.

I have to beg to differ, there, Art. If you're going to be way out
in the boonies, cruising timber for Chadbourne's Mill, or International
Paper, or whatever, Tea's a lot more logistically suitable than
Coffee. Of course, the way those Canadien treecutters taught me to
make it, it comes out about 20 weight, and will etch an enamelled
steel cup.

(But then there's Tea Peritonitis to watch out for.)

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

[nemo l'ancien]

>
C'est cela oui....
Et avec la très brillante marine US de l'époque, vous auriez fait quoi?
Nager comme des grenouilles...

[nemo l'ancien]

Helomech <Helomech@ wrote:

> "Skysurfer" > wrote in message
> . 0.4...
>
>>ArtKramr wrote :
>>
>>
>>>Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
>>>because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
>>>you would not have to speak in German."
>>
>>Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
>>Enough said.
>
>
> Oh you mean the French? Yeah they showed up after 90% of the fighting was
> done..........
>
>
>
U' R so stupid...

[nemo l'ancien]

Official leaflet of the US army, 1944
"We are not coming here to free French people... we are here becauswe US
have been under threat by a malicious power...

No more Comment

You just come when et where your own interest are in balance. Don't tell
me about fight for freedom. It's fight for Dollar...

[Cub Driver]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:39:26 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>Isn't tea time 4 o'clock?

3 o'clock.

My family was Irish. Dinner was at 5. Early to bed, early to rise!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>I have to beg to differ, there, Art. If you're going to be way out
>in the boonies, cruising timber for Chadbourne's Mill, or International
>Paper, or whatever, Tea's a lot more logistically suitable than
>Coffee. Of course, the way those Canadien treecutters taught me to
>make it, it comes out about 20 weight, and will etch an enamelled
>steel cup.

While Art was taking it easy in the wild blue yonder, I was working on
a farm in Concord MA, pitching hay in the August sun.

We had a thermos of tepid tea, blacker than coffee. My father would
ration it out to cut the thirst and wash the dust out of your mouth.

Twenty-five cents an hour. There were gangs of kids who came out from
Boston and lived in the old CCC barracks. They were parceled out to
the farms as they were needed.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> 3 o'clock.
>
> My family was Irish. Dinner was at 5. Early to bed, early to rise!
>

Traditional English tea time is 3 o'clock?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"nemo l'ancien" > wrote in message
...
>
> Official leaflet of the US army, 1944
> "We are not coming here to free French people... we are here becauswe US
> have been under threat by a malicious power...
>
> No more Comment
>
> You just come when et where your own interest are in balance. Don't tell
> me about fight for freedom. It's fight for Dollar...
>

Just as French aid in the American revolution was for French interests.

[nemo l'ancien]

Can't you remember that the last western embassador supporting Vichy's
regime was Admiaral Leahy?
So, each side has to shut it down

[ArtKramr]

>Subject: Re: Enough said
>From: nemo l'ancien
>Date: 1/13/04 11:32 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Helomech <Helomech@ wrote:
>
>> "Skysurfer" > wrote in message
>> . 0.4...
>>
>>>ArtKramr wrote :
>>>
>>>
>>>>Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
>>>>because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
>>>>you would not have to speak in German."
>>>
>>>Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
>>>Enough said.
>>
>>
>> Oh you mean the French? Yeah they showed up after 90% of the fighting was
>> done..........
>>
>>
>>
>U' R so stupid...


I don't realy believe that LaFayette was really French because he never
surrendered to anybody.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[ArtKramr]

>Subject: Re: Enough said
>From: nemo l'ancien
>Date: 1/13/04 11:51 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Official leaflet of the US army, 1944
>"We are not coming here to free French people... we are here becauswe US
>have been under threat by a malicious power...
>
>No more Comment
>
>You just come when et where your own interest are in balance. Don't tell
>me about fight for freedom. It's fight for Dollar...


well I fought in the liberation of France but really came for the dollars. I
looked everywhere and couldn't find any dollars at all. I even looked under the
graves of my fallen friends. Not a dollar in sight. what a waste of time, and
what a pig you ar you slimy son of a bitch.. Next time the Germans have you by
the throat wel'l let them eat you alive as you so well deserve. Thank us for
your freedom you piece of crap. No offence of course.





Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[Tarver Engineering]

"ArtKramr" > wrote in message
...
> >Subject: Re: Enough said
> >From: nemo l'ancien
> >Date: 1/13/04 11:32 PM Pacific Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >Helomech <Helomech@ wrote:
> >
> >> "Skysurfer" > wrote in message
> >> . 0.4...
> >>
> >>>ArtKramr wrote :
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
> >>>>because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
> >>>>you would not have to speak in German."
> >>>
> >>>Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
> >>>Enough said.
> >>
> >>
> >> Oh you mean the French? Yeah they showed up after 90% of the fighting
was
> >> done..........
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >U' R so stupid...
>
>
> I don't realy believe that LaFayette was really French because he never
> surrendered to anybody.

LaFayette was all of 17.

[Alan Minyard]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:48:44 +0100, Skysurfer > wrote:

>ArtKramr wrote :
>
>> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
>> because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
>> you would not have to speak in German."
>
>Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
>Enough said.

The French were at war with Britain, they were an absolute
monarchy that had no interest in US independence. They were
simply trying to fight the British (at York town). The French
and Indian war was certainly not an attempt to help the
English colonies attain independence.

Al Minyard

[Tarver Engineering]

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:48:44 +0100, Skysurfer > wrote:
>
> >ArtKramr wrote :
> >
> >> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
> >> because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
> >> you would not have to speak in German."
> >
> >Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
> >Enough said.
>
> The French were at war with Britain, they were an absolute
> monarchy that had no interest in US independence. They were
> simply trying to fight the British (at York town).

The French did not win Yorktown, Alan.

That was Green and his 300 iron cannon.

Without that, Washington surrenders at Yorktown, to half the English fleet.

[John Mullen]

nemo l'ancien wrote:

>
>>
> C'est cela oui....
> Et avec la très brillante marine US de l'époque, vous auriez fait quoi?
> Nager comme des grenouilles...

LoL

en fait, tu as raison. il faut rire...

John

[Rob van Riel]

"Jarg" > wrote in message >...
> Given that the United Kingdom came into being in 1801, you are incorrect.

Unless I've missed something England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland were
all under the same crown since 16-something at least. What happened in
1801 that was significant enough to call that the beginning of the UK?

Rob

[Tarver Engineering]

"Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
om...
> "Jarg" > wrote in message
>...
> > Given that the United Kingdom came into being in 1801, you are
incorrect.
>
> Unless I've missed something England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland were
> all under the same crown since 16-something at least. What happened in
> 1801 that was significant enough to call that the beginning of the UK?

You would be thinking of 1704 and the unification of the kingdom. It was
also about that time that Celts started wearing skirts and the Tartans were
created.

[Jarg]

The Kingdom of Ireland and the Kingdom of Great Britain merged under the
1802 Act of Union to create the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
thus the "United Kingdom".

Jarg

"Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
om...
> "Jarg" > wrote in message
>...
> > Given that the United Kingdom came into being in 1801, you are
incorrect.
>
> Unless I've missed something England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland were
> all under the same crown since 16-something at least. What happened in
> 1801 that was significant enough to call that the beginning of the UK?
>
> Rob

[Jarg]

Ooops, 1801 Act of Union rather.

Jarg

"Jarg" > wrote in message
m...
> The Kingdom of Ireland and the Kingdom of Great Britain merged under the
> 1802 Act of Union to create the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland,
> thus the "United Kingdom".
>
> Jarg
>
> "Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
> om...
> > "Jarg" > wrote in message
> >...
> > > Given that the United Kingdom came into being in 1801, you are
> incorrect.
> >
> > Unless I've missed something England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland were
> > all under the same crown since 16-something at least. What happened in
> > 1801 that was significant enough to call that the beginning of the UK?
> >
> > Rob
>
>

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Skysurfer wrote:
> LOL. I'm sure you've understood what i meant.
> But imagine, without France you'd still have the 5 o'clock tea and a
> Queen :-p


So what have they done for us...lately?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

[Alan Minyard]

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:38:45 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" > wrote:

>
>"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:48:44 +0100, Skysurfer > wrote:
>>
>> >ArtKramr wrote :
>> >
>> >> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
>> >> because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
>> >> you would not have to speak in German."
>> >
>> >Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
>> >Enough said.
>>
>> The French were at war with Britain, they were an absolute
>> monarchy that had no interest in US independence. They were
>> simply trying to fight the British (at York town).
>
>The French did not win Yorktown, Alan.
>
>That was Green and his 300 iron cannon.
>
>Without that, Washington surrenders at Yorktown, to half the English fleet.
>
You are correct. I never said that the French "won" Yorktown, I merely
alluded to their motive for being there.


Al Minyard

[Tarver Engineering]

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:38:45 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" >
wrote:
>
> >
> >"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:48:44 +0100, Skysurfer > wrote:
> >>
> >> >ArtKramr wrote :
> >> >
> >> >> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's
> >> >> because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so
> >> >> you would not have to speak in German."
> >> >
> >> >Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
> >> >Enough said.
> >>
> >> The French were at war with Britain, they were an absolute
> >> monarchy that had no interest in US independence. They were
> >> simply trying to fight the British (at York town).
> >
> >The French did not win Yorktown, Alan.
> >
> >That was Green and his 300 iron cannon.
> >
> >Without that, Washington surrenders at Yorktown, to half the English
fleet.
> >
> You are correct. I never said that the French "won" Yorktown, I merely
> alluded to their motive for being there.

What you wrote is a no-sequitur and revisionist history.

The one thing the French point to WRT their friendship with America is that
America has never been at war with France. This whole affair is more like
an old married couple having a spat.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

> On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:38:45 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" >
wrote:
> >
> >The French did not win Yorktown, Alan.
> >
> >That was Green and his 300 iron cannon.
> >
> >Without that, Washington surrenders at Yorktown, to half the English
fleet.
> >

Without the French fleet in The Battle of the Capes there wouldn't have been
any Battle of Yorktown.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> > On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:38:45 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >The French did not win Yorktown, Alan.
> > >
> > >That was Green and his 300 iron cannon.
> > >
> > >Without that, Washington surrenders at Yorktown, to half the English
fleet.

> Without the French fleet in The Battle of the Capes there wouldn't have
been
> any Battle of Yorktown.

Why would you think that?

It was to save his fleet that the English commander surrendered at Yorktown.
The French fleet in the America's was effectively disabled at the second
Battle of the Capes.

Can you imagine how you would apologise to the Queen, if half her ships of
War were turned to splinters, by General Washington?

[B2431]

>From: "Steven P. McNicoll"
>Date: 1/15/2004 12:39 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: t>
>
>
>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:38:45 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" >
>wrote:
>> >
>> >The French did not win Yorktown, Alan.
>> >
>> >That was Green and his 300 iron cannon.
>> >
>> >Without that, Washington surrenders at Yorktown, to half the English
>fleet.
>> >
>
>Without the French fleet in The Battle of the Capes there wouldn't have been
>any Battle of Yorktown.
>

The French fleet showing up off Yorktown also seems to have convinced
Cornwallis it was time to cut his losses and quit.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Tarver Engineering]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Steven P. McNicoll"
> >Date: 1/15/2004 12:39 PM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: t>
> >
> >
> >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:38:45 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
>
> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >The French did not win Yorktown, Alan.
> >> >
> >> >That was Green and his 300 iron cannon.
> >> >
> >> >Without that, Washington surrenders at Yorktown, to half the English
> >fleet.
> >> >
> >
> >Without the French fleet in The Battle of the Capes there wouldn't have
been
> >any Battle of Yorktown.
> >
>
> The French fleet showing up off Yorktown also seems to have convinced
> Cornwallis it was time to cut his losses and quit.

The French left the Battle of the Capes with broken junk.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
>
> The French fleet showing up off Yorktown also seems to have convinced
> Cornwallis it was time to cut his losses and quit.
>

Well, turning back the evacuation force tends to do that.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "B2431" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > The French fleet showing up off Yorktown also seems to have convinced
> > Cornwallis it was time to cut his losses and quit.
> >
>
> Well, turning back the evacuation force tends to do that.

No, but you have come a step closer to reality.

The 300 cannon would have cut the English lines to bits, just as easily as
they could have turned the English fleet to splinters. Washington had set a
trap and it worked.

Perhaps the French delayed the English long enough for the trap to be
completed.

[nemo l'ancien]

I'm not like you. Under attack, I steel do not feel any anger...
Anger is on your side, because you don't like to be confronted to your
paradoxes...

[Michael Petukhov]

(ArtKramr) wrote in message >...
> An officer in the U.S. naval Reserve was attending a conference that included
> admirals from both the U.S. Navy and the French Navy. At a cocktail reception,
> he found himself in a small group that included personnel from both navies.
>
> The French Admiral started complaining that whereas Europeans learned many
> languages, Americans learned only English. He then asked, "Why is it that we
> have to speak English in these conferences rather than you speak French?"
>
> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's because the
> Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you would not have to
> speak in German."

Yeah not bad. Although frankly it would fair to put russians,
ukranians, belorussians, kazahs etc soviet people on the first place.
After
all those "soviet barbarians" actually eliminater 80+% of German
armed force both in terms of man power and equipment.

>
> The group became silent.

I would like to hope he was thinking about above.

Michael
>
>
> Arthur Kramer
> 344th BG 494th BS
> England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
> Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
> http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[ArtKramr]

>ubject: Re: Enough said
>From: (Michael Petukhov)
>Date: 1/16/04 4:18 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
(ArtKramr) wrote in message
>...
>> An officer in the U.S. naval Reserve was attending a conference that
>included
>> admirals from both the U.S. Navy and the French Navy. At a cocktail
>reception,
>> he found himself in a small group that included personnel from both navies.
>>
>> The French Admiral started complaining that whereas Europeans learned many
>> languages, Americans learned only English. He then asked, "Why is it that
>we
>> have to speak English in these conferences rather than you speak French?"
>>
>> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's because the
>> Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you would not have
>to
>> speak in German."
>
>Yeah not bad. Although frankly it would fair to put russians,
>ukranians, belorussians, kazahs etc soviet people on the first place.
>After
>all those "soviet barbarians" actually eliminater 80+% of German
>armed force both in terms of man power and equipment.
>
>>
>> The group became silent.
>
>I would like to hope he was thinking about above.
>
>Michael
>>

Yes, but he added, " with the extensive help of US equipement:, food, trucks,
planes, ammunition all shipped at great risks and losses via the Murmansk run"
I am sure he addded that. (grin)


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[RobbelothE]

>Subject: Re: Enough said
>From: (Michael Petukhov)
>Date: 1/16/2004 6:18 AM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
(ArtKramr) wrote in message
>...
>> An officer in the U.S. naval Reserve was attending a conference that
>included
>> admirals from both the U.S. Navy and the French Navy. At a cocktail
>reception,
>> he found himself in a small group that included personnel from both navies.
>>
>> The French Admiral started complaining that whereas Europeans learned many
>> languages, Americans learned only English. He then asked, "Why is it that
>we
>> have to speak English in these conferences rather than you speak French?"
>>
>> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's because the
>> Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you would not have
>to
>> speak in German."
>
>Yeah not bad. Although frankly it would fair to put russians,
>ukranians, belorussians, kazahs etc soviet people on the first place.
>After
>all those "soviet barbarians" actually eliminater 80+% of German
>armed force both in terms of man power and equipment.
>
>>

/// SNIP ///

The Germans might not have had all that equipment for the Russians
(er....Soviets) to eliminate had not Stalin signed a non-aggression pact with
Hitler in effect agreeing to Hitler's war with Europe.


Ed
"The French couldn't hate us any
more unless we helped 'em out in another war."
--Will Rogers



(Delete text after dot com for e-mail reply.)

[ArtKramr]

>Subject: Re: Enough said
>From: (RobbelothE)
>Date: 1/16/04 5:43 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>>Subject: Re: Enough said
>>From: (Michael Petukhov)
>>Date: 1/16/2004 6:18 AM Central Standard Time
>>Message-id: >
>>
(ArtKramr) wrote in message
>...
>>> An officer in the U.S. naval Reserve was attending a conference that
>>included
>>> admirals from both the U.S. Navy and the French Navy. At a cocktail
>>reception,
>>> he found himself in a small group that included personnel from both
>navies.
>>>
>>> The French Admiral started complaining that whereas Europeans learned many
>>> languages, Americans learned only English. He then asked, "Why is it that
>>we
>>> have to speak English in these conferences rather than you speak French?"
>>>
>>> Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's because the
>>> Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you would not have
>>to
>>> speak in German."
>>
>>Yeah not bad. Although frankly it would fair to put russians,
>>ukranians, belorussians, kazahs etc soviet people on the first place.
>>After
>>all those "soviet barbarians" actually eliminater 80+% of German
>>armed force both in terms of man power and equipment.
>>
>>>
>
>/// SNIP ///
>
>The Germans might not have had all that equipment for the Russians
>(er....Soviets) to eliminate had not Stalin signed a non-aggression pact with
>Hitler in effect agreeing to Hitler's war with Europe.
>
>
>Ed
>"The French couldn't hate us any
>more unless we helped 'em out in another war."
> --Will Rogers
>

But we never will. Too much Ammrican blood in French soil as it is. And then
they accuse us of :doing it for the money" instead of thanking us for saving
them.



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[Pierre-Henri Baras]

> But we never will. Too much Ammrican blood in French soil as it is. And
then
> they accuse us of :doing it for the money" instead of thanking us for
saving
> them.


ROTFLMAO
Change your attitude towards the French and maybe I'll think about it.
You can't seriously expect any regards considering the stuff you said here
since you arrived. It's mere common sense, not politics!


--
Pierre-Henri Baras
___________________________
French Fleet Air Arm
http://www.ffaa.net

Encyclopédie de l'Aviation
http://www.aviation-fr.info

[ArtKramr]

>Subject: Re: Enough said
>From: "Pierre-Henri Baras"
>Date: 1/16/04 11:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>> But we never will. Too much Ammrican blood in French soil as it is. And
>then
>> they accuse us of :doing it for the money" instead of thanking us for
>saving
>> them.
>
>
>ROTFLMAO
>Change your attitude towards the French and maybe I'll think about it.
>You can't seriously expect any regards considering the stuff you said here
>since you arrived. It's mere common sense, not politics!
>
>
>--
>Pierre-Henri Baras

I assume that is an apology and a thank you for all the American blood that
went into liberating France.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[Tank Fixer]

In article >,
says...
> Steven P. McNicoll wrote :
>
> >> Who helped USA to get its independence from UK ?
> >> Enough said.
> >
> > Yup. Without the help of France the US would be an
> > English-speaking country today.
>
> LOL. I'm sure you've understood what i meant.
> But imagine, without France you'd still have the 5 o'clock tea and a
> Queen :-p

You havn't been to San Fransisco have you ?


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
>
> Yeah not bad. Although frankly it would fair to put russians,
> ukranians, belorussians, kazahs etc soviet people on the first place.
> After
> all those "soviet barbarians" actually eliminater 80+% of German
> armed force both in terms of man power and equipment.
>

How much of the German armed force both in terms of man power and equipment
did those "Soviet barbarians" eliminate from France?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Pierre-Henri Baras" > wrote in message
...
>
> Nope! I'd rather surrender to a mosquito than to thank YOU (grin).
>

Interesting phrase, I expect many to pounce on it!

[Pierre-Henri Baras]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > a écrit dans le
message de news: et...
>
> "Pierre-Henri Baras" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Nope! I'd rather surrender to a mosquito than to thank YOU (grin).
> >
>
> Interesting phrase, I expect many to pounce on it!
>

It was on purpose; to show some people here what we think of the
stereotype....
PH

[Alan Minyard]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:35:14 +0100, "Pierre-Henri Baras" > wrote:

>Nope! I'd rather surrender to a mosquito than to thank YOU (grin).
>You don't deserve a thankyou; but you should be donated a corkscrew to get
>your head out of your butt. I'm fed up with your arrogant, selfish,
>stubborn, hypocrite and pathetic attitude.
>
>Old age doesn't explain everything.
>And being a veteran doesn't allow everything either.
>
>See you in hell (or in Vegas; If ever I return there be sure to expect a
>polite visite from me to your retirement home; it's easy to say what you've
>been saying behind a screen).

Or to a Frenchy, same difference.

Al Minyard

[Alan Minyard]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:29:41 +0100, "Pierre-Henri Baras" > wrote:

>
>"Steven P. McNicoll" > a écrit dans le
>message de news: et...
>>
>> "Pierre-Henri Baras" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > Nope! I'd rather surrender to a mosquito than to thank YOU (grin).
>> >
>>
>> Interesting phrase, I expect many to pounce on it!
>>
>
>It was on purpose; to show some people here what we think of the
>stereotype....
>PH
>
>
No one cares what the French think, they are totally un-important.

Al Minyard

[Skysurfer]

Alan Minyard wrote :

> No one cares what the French think, they are totally un-important.

They are so un-important that you can't stop talking and complaining
about them !
If they are so "un-important", just forget them.

[Drazen Kramaric]

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 20:44:01 +0100, nemo l'ancien
> wrote:


>So, why your government so clearly supported Vichy and Petain?

Because most of French supported it. Vichy regime was legal government
of France.


Drax

remove NOSPAM for reply

[Grantland]

(Drazen Kramaric) wrote:

>On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 20:44:01 +0100, nemo l'ancien
> wrote:
>
>
>>So, why your government so clearly supported Vichy and Petain?
>
>Because most of French supported it. Vichy regime was legal government
>of France.

What!? You support these filthy gangsters? Et tu, Drax?

Bah!

[Drazen Kramaric]

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 19:15:44 GMT, (Grantland)
wrote:


>>Because most of French supported it. Vichy regime was legal government
>>of France.
>
>What!? You support these filthy gangsters? Et tu, Drax?

Check the history of France. Petain was legally appointed the prime
minister of French government. He was perfectly within his
prerogatives when he asked for terms and agreed to them. Such a
procedure was nothing extraordinary in European wars.

When Petain became head of state, he got the necessary authorisation
from French parliament.

British attack on French fleet at Mers-el-Kebir was little different
than Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The difference in British favour
is that French admiral was warned, but on the other hand, unlike
Japanese, British attacked their former ally who has just suffered a
defeat. People often speak about Italian "stub in the back", but
actually it was Churchill who stubbed France in the back by hitting
Mers-el-Kebir.

The following events (attack on Dacar, invasion of Syria) did little
to improve French attitude towards Britain.

Note that throughout 1940 and 1941, USSR, USA, China and most of the
world outside British Empire sphere of influence continued to
recognise Vichy France as legal government of France.

What Vichy regime did to French citizens and resident aliens of Jewish
origin is despicable, of course, but it doesn't change the fact that
Vichy regime was legal and that vast majority of French people
supported the armistice in June 1940.


Drax

[Jim Doyle]

"Drazen Kramaric" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 19:15:44 GMT, (Grantland)
> wrote:
>
>
> >>Because most of French supported it. Vichy regime was legal government
> >>of France.
> >
> >What!? You support these filthy gangsters? Et tu, Drax?
>
> Check the history of France. Petain was legally appointed the prime
> minister of French government. He was perfectly within his
> prerogatives when he asked for terms and agreed to them. Such a
> procedure was nothing extraordinary in European wars.
>
> When Petain became head of state, he got the necessary authorisation
> from French parliament.
>
> British attack on French fleet at Mers-el-Kebir was little different
> than Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The difference in British favour
> is that French admiral was warned, but on the other hand, unlike
> Japanese, British attacked their former ally who has just suffered a
> defeat. People often speak about Italian "stub in the back", but
> actually it was Churchill who stubbed France in the back by hitting
> Mers-el-Kebir.
>

I wouldn't necessarily call Mers-el-Kebir a 'stab in the back,' although I
grant you the attack on a former ally by oneself is rarely seen as
otherwise. IIRC Britain and France had in place an understanding in early
1940 that neither party would pursue peace terms as a separate identity.
When the French moved towards capitulation, Churchill relented, though he
gave - in express terms - his requirement for the French Navy (the fourth or
fifth largest in the world) to sail for British waters. They didn't, and the
rest is history. The raid on Mers-el-Kebir was not a malicious act; the
horrible practicality of it was simply to prevent the considerable French
naval assets from falling into German hands.

German surface vessels played a minor part in the Second World War, but with
a dispensable French fleet at their command (manned by Germans, I suspect),
I can't see how they wouldn't have played these in the Battle of the
Atlantic to their significant benefit.

Churchill made the only decision he could under the circumstances, would you
not make the same call?

Jim D

> Drax

[Drazen Kramaric]

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:31:15 -0000, "Jim Doyle"
> wrote:



>Churchill made the only decision he could under the circumstances, would you
>not make the same call?

No. It was the unison opinion of the experts, i.e. British admirals
that such attack was not necessary. Churchill was but an amateur who
just presided over the naval fiasco in Norway but managed to see his
boss kicked out of office and take his place.

Attack against Mers-el-Kebir was a political action, performed in the
worst tradition of the Perfidious Albion against an ally who was on
the ropes. For full nine months, Britain was unable to field more than
nine divisions, none of them armoured. The best British fighters have
been kept out of the front. British bombers pursued their own strategy
while the front was crumbling and Royal Navy failed to stop
Kriegsmarine from enabling a naval invasion of Norway.

And such Britain decided to show to America how tough it was by
attacking France, of all nations.

It was definitely not a Churchill's finest hour and he got every
single French sailor killed at Oran on his conscience.


Drax

[Keith Willshaw]

"Drazen Kramaric" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:31:15 -0000, "Jim Doyle"
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> >Churchill made the only decision he could under the circumstances, would
you
> >not make the same call?
>
> No. It was the unison opinion of the experts, i.e. British admirals
> that such attack was not necessary. Churchill was but an amateur who
> just presided over the naval fiasco in Norway but managed to see his
> boss kicked out of office and take his place.
>
> Attack against Mers-el-Kebir was a political action, performed in the
> worst tradition of the Perfidious Albion against an ally who was on
> the ropes. For full nine months, Britain was unable to field more than
> nine divisions, none of them armoured. The best British fighters have
> been kept out of the front.

Wisely as the events of the Battle of Britain showed

> British bombers pursued their own strategy while the front was crumbling

Incorrect, they were subservient to the tactical requirements
dictated by the army and paid the price in the destruction of
the Battle and Blenheim squadrons in futile attacks on
tactical targets defended by Bf-109's and light flak.
Bomber command didnt come in to existence until 1942.
In 1940 the 10 bomber squadrons in France (the Advanced Air
Strike Force) and the Blenheims of no. 2 Group were tasked
with providing tactical support to the army.
Meanwhile the 'heavies' (Hampdens, Wellingtons and Whitleys),
their flight no longer restricted by the neutral air spaces over the
Netherlands and Belgium, were required to disrupt communications
and transportation directly behind the German front. This turned out to
be impossible in the absence of escort fighters but some squadrons
took 85% casualties trying.


> and Royal Navy failed to stop
> Kriegsmarine from enabling a naval invasion of Norway.
>

How they could have stopped the forces crossing
from Denmark I dont know, perhaps you'd care
to provide a winning strategy ?

> And such Britain decided to show to America how tough it was by
> attacking France, of all nations.
>

There was a very real fear that those units would end up in German
hands. You are however correct that there was a political
dimension. One of the reasons voiced in the US congress
for not supplying Britain with weapons was the fear that they,
along with the RN would end up in German hands. Churchill's
actions tended to defuse this fear.

> It was definitely not a Churchill's finest hour and he got every
> single French sailor killed at Oran on his conscience.
>

It seems to me that the French Admiral in charge had a good
share of the blame, he could have agreed to internment
in a neutral port but decided this would offend against
'The Glory of France'. The French ships in Alexandria
were demilitarised without a shot being fired.

Keith

[Alan Minyard]

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 22:30:44 GMT, (Drazen Kramaric) wrote:

>On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:31:15 -0000, "Jim Doyle"
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Churchill made the only decision he could under the circumstances, would you
>>not make the same call?
>
>No. It was the unison opinion of the experts, i.e. British admirals
>that such attack was not necessary. Churchill was but an amateur who
>just presided over the naval fiasco in Norway but managed to see his
>boss kicked out of office and take his place.
>
>Attack against Mers-el-Kebir was a political action, performed in the
>worst tradition of the Perfidious Albion against an ally who was on
>the ropes. For full nine months, Britain was unable to field more than
>nine divisions, none of them armoured. The best British fighters have
>been kept out of the front. British bombers pursued their own strategy
>while the front was crumbling and Royal Navy failed to stop
>Kriegsmarine from enabling a naval invasion of Norway.
>
>And such Britain decided to show to America how tough it was by
>attacking France, of all nations.
>
>It was definitely not a Churchill's finest hour and he got every
>single French sailor killed at Oran on his conscience.
>
>
>Drax

The "French sailor" was supporting a nazi regime dedicated to
the destruction/invasion of the UK. They got exactly what they
deserved.

Al Minyard

[Drazen Kramaric]

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:19:47 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
> wrote:


>> The best British fighters have been kept out of the front.
>
>Wisely as the events of the Battle of Britain showed.

Loss of France was a heavy blow to the Allied cause. Much misery could
have been prevented had Allies stopped Germans in 1940. Luftwaffe
suffered seriously during the Battle of France and who knows how much
additional effort could have snatched the air superiority from
Germans, a superiority that was essential to German success.

>> British bombers pursued their own strategy while the front was crumbling

>Meanwhile the 'heavies' (Hampdens, Wellingtons and Whitleys),
>their flight no longer restricted by the neutral air spaces over the
>Netherlands and Belgium, were required to disrupt communications
>and transportation directly behind the German front. This turned out to
>be impossible in the absence of escort fighters but some squadrons
>took 85% casualties trying.

Where were the fighters? Sitting in Britain?


>How they could have stopped the forces crossing
>from Denmark I dont know,

Royal Navy could have stopped everything else and secured the steady
flow of men and material into central and northern Norway. Throughout
the campaign, Germans used no more than two corps of land troops with
initial attacks performed with regimental sized battle groups.


>It seems to me that the French Admiral in charge had a good
>share of the blame, he could have agreed to internment
>in a neutral port but decided this would offend against
>'The Glory of France'.

Let's see, there's French admiral, commanding French ships in North
African port under French control and for some reason he should have
succumbed to the demand of British admiral? Gensaoul was no idiot and
he understood that his ships with reduced crews could not prevent
British seizure the moment they sailed from the port.

>The French ships in Alexandria were demilitarised without a shot being fired.

Apples and oranges. The shot wasn't fired, but British were the only
ones with the pointed guns against their allies. Again, nothing to be
proud of.


Drax
remove JAMRZIMSPAM for reply