Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DireWolfSpirit

International Events VII- Afghan Catastrophe

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Arakan said:

Aha. Interesting. Xenophobia is thrown at me. Doesn’t matter. What matters is that the USA is a BULLY as bad as China or Russia or even worse because you are more powerful. You always want to have it your way. And the reason you throw xenophobia at me is because you simply don’t know the stuff or you cannot emphatize how it feels to be on the receiving end of US arrogance. North Stream 2 is another good example how you treat your „partners“ when they don’t „listen“ to you. Maybe inform yourself. 

LOL, looks like I touched a nerve.  I do enjoy how it took you two posts to flail about in every which manner on why the US and Americans are the worst.  It's like creating a thread ostensibly about "feminist heroes" only to somehow make it a polemic against US foreign policy and "mainstream" media. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DMC said:

LOL, looks like I touched a nerve.  I do enjoy how it took you two posts to flail about in every which manner on why the US and Americans are the worst.  It's like creating a thread ostensibly about "feminist heroes" only to somehow make it a polemic against US foreign policy and "mainstream" media. 

Cool. Any comment about 7 killed children by US freedom drones? Thought so…LOL.

Edited by Arakan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Arakan said:

Cool. Any comment about 7 killed children by US freedom drones? Thought so…LOL.

You're right.  Because I'm American I am totally in favor of US drones killing 10 civilians and 7 children.  In fact when I heard the news I laughed maniacally and stroked my pet cat Mr. Bigglesworth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DMC said:

You're right.  Because I'm American I am totally in favor of US drones killing 10 civilians and 7 children.  In fact when I heard the news I laughed maniacally and stroked my pet cat Mr. Bigglesworth.

You literally reacted with a LOL smiley on the post where I broke the news about the murdered children. Maybe think about it. And stop your generalization attempts. Stop making it personal. It’s you, not Americans. Start to address the content or leave it be. All you do is ad hominem. 

What is your opinion on the issue at hand wrt the conflict France/USA? What is your opinion on the „it was a mistake“ defence after another drone attack killing children? 

Otherwise leave me alone, ignore me and that’s it. 

Edited by Arakan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Arakan said:

You literally reacted with a LOL smiley on the post where I broke the news about the murdered children. Maybe think about it.

You didn't "break" the news, I was laughing at your reaction randomly bringing in the drone strikes when all I did was make a joke about the French retreating.

13 minutes ago, Arakan said:

And stop your generalization attempts. Stop making it personal. It’s you, not Americans. Start to address the content or leave it be. All you do is ad hominem. 

I don't know what this means.  I should stop with generalizations, but I should also stop making things personal - which are two entirely different things.

As for addressing the actual content, I think France of course has a legit beef against the US and Australia - who you curiously never mention.  And I don't know what "opinion" to have about killing 7 children beyond it is horrifying.

Edited by DMC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Arakan,

I think you're a bit quick to go right to xenophobia. It was a playful joke. Now that said, not all jokes land. I got a warning point for a Nazi reference I made responding to you which was not meant to actually call your grandparents Nazis. I had made the same joke a few times to @A Horse Named Stranger, and he in kind was playful. The intent of a joke matters, as well as who makes it, and if it's not funny then you need to make it clear why. Another example, I once made a joke about the U.S. having to save England in WW2. @Hereward took offense to it, so I apologized, explained the context, and we kept things moving. Xenophobia implies actual fear and hatred. I don't think that's in play here. 

Regarding the topic at hand, Frances does have a right to be angry, but it does seem petty overall because at the end of the day they lost out on a contract that as far as I can tell they weren't meeting, and Australia was presented with a better deal and took it. Those are the breaks sometimes.

6 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The fact that China is unhappy with the deal should be all you need to confirm it as a great outcome.

Clearly this places Australia in a stronger position to oppose Chinese aggression. 

Now this here is actual xenophobia. Obviously relations with China for U.S. and other Western powers are complicated, but it should not be viewed as a great outcome because China is unhappy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I think you're a bit quick to go right to xenophobia.

To be fair, Arakan was not the first one to mention xenophobia, I was.  He said "MAGA style," which I interpreted as xenophobia, more or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DMC said:

To be fair, Arakan was not the first one to mention xenophobia, I was.  He said "MAGA style," which I interpreted as xenophobia, more or less.

Fair enough. Just figured it was worth pointing out. Two Simpsons clips come to mind:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Frances does have a right to be angry, but it does seem petty overall because at the end of the day they lost out on a contract that as far as I can tell they weren't meeting,


Yeah I get why France are angry at the US and Australia, but it seems like they should save at least an equal amount for their representative company and their partners who were through either incompetence or deliberate design stiffing Australia on that deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, polishgenius said:


Yeah I get why France are angry at the US and Australia, but it seems like they should save at least an equal amount for their representative company and their partners who were through either incompetence or deliberate design stiffing Australia on that deal.

Hard to say without details. Those issues are usually only played up if you want out of a contract on the cheap. Otherwise you usually find a solution. I wouldn't be aware of any contract that could be fulfilled to the letter. Especially in defense. But of course, there might be more serious issues in this specific situation. Just hard to imagine it is so different from other huge projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making fun of France is not anything people in our circles do.  Honestly, a lot of USians are really sorry this happened.  At least the ones who know history and all that sort of book larnin' stuff and cultural stuff and you know, actually spending time there, and actually knowing French people -- a shrinking few, of course, but still, we try.

But you know ... hey England is so unimportant that France's ambassador didn't even bother to do diplo performance theater and go home, as France's and Australia's did. That's how little Britain matters around the world.

So ... how much fun is making fun look like now all you all who think making fun of France is the world's way?

Edited by Zorral

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2021 at 1:13 AM, Rippounet said:

In a nutshell, the US is no doubt offering Australia more for its money, and everyone knows that. Just as everybody knows that neither France nor the EU intend to seriously stand up to China in the near future. Way I see it, the fake outrage is i) because France is a pretty big arms dealer, the government and the defense industry don't want that kind of thing to repeat itself, so they have to make a point, and ii) maybe they're hoping to get some kind of compensation. I have a few anecdotes about the corruption and kickbacks that defense deals imply in France (our political class is shamelessly corrupt).
Also, for all we know, this whole thing is payback for something else. France has always been a reluctant NATO partner (Trump hurt that alliance badly: Macron even pronounced it "dead" in 2019), while historically pushing for a stronger European military alliance independent of the US. I dunno how true that is (I have this idea that @Hereward will know that), but there's a perception here that the UK was an obstacle to that.

Basically this, I think.

I just don't fully understand what the UK goverment is doing there.

On the one hand, they are pretty desperate to get into the good graces of the US (and the current UK goverment is rumoredly not that popular with Irish Joe), but pissing off both the EU and China is quite a steep price for that. Global Britain is angering two major trading blocs.

As for Australia, yeah, they quite rightly concluded that the EU is not gonna pick up arms, if push were to come to shove. So them switching to US supply and getting superior technology for their money makes perfect sense.

The US supplied a more willing ally against China with better equipment, thus closened their ties there, and the US economy will be happy about that deal, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kiko said:

Hard to say without details. Those issues are usually only played up if you want out of a contract on the cheap. Otherwise you usually find a solution. I wouldn't be aware of any contract that could be fulfilled to the letter. Especially in defense. But of course, there might be more serious issues in this specific situation. Just hard to imagine it is so different from other huge projects.

Right.  I suspect France isn't just angry about losing the deal, its how they lost the deal.

9 hours ago, kiko said:
9 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Nah, making fun of France for surrendering is pretty much a universal joke enjoyed around the anglosphere I’m afraid.

Fixed that for you :ninja:

And I suspect that is true too.  H7's response was the best one here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Loge said:

 

Fitting (diesel engines) to a submarine designed for a nuclear power plant might not have been the best idea to begin with.

Perhaps it was lost in translation and France thought it supposed to be delivering ferries?:D

Edited by DireWolfSpirit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here let's put things right. Americans probably never achieve independence without her (France). At least not for many, many generations into the future after 1776.

Something all Americans should understand.

Plainly stated, if France hadn't supported the United States during the American Revolution, there wouldn't be a United States today. George Washington was a great general, but the Continental Army simply didn't have the money, men, training, or seafaring vessels necessary to defeat the British.Nov 17, 2015

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

On the one hand, they are pretty desperate to get into the good graces of the US (and the current UK goverment is rumoredly not that popular with Irish Joe), but pissing off both the EU and China is quite a steep price for that. Global Britain is angering two major trading blocs.

 

 

The current British government position is pretty much to annoy the EU as much as possible in every conceivable way and then blame it on the EU. It's idiotic, but it's consistent. As for China, it might be Hong-Kong related maneuvering- we've got no real power to stop them but some of his/their reactions to China's ignoring assurances that HK would retain certain freedoms suggests that that seems to be one thing that Boris and his govt actually feel some kind of responsibility for. I mean, it might just be former-Empire-related posturing too, but offering half the population of Hong Kong immigration and citizenship within five years is kind of a big deal even if it's not remotely plausible that even a good fraction take them up on it.

 

2 hours ago, Zorral said:

But you know ... hey England is so unimportant that France's ambassador didn't even bother to do diplo performance theater and go home, as France's and Australia's did. That's how little Britain matters around the world.

Britain's overinflated sense of its own international worth is pretty funny, but in fairness, in this instance it's much more likely to be because France and the UK are neighbours and have a more constant flow of ambassador-related matters than the US and particularly Australia, so the performance theatre would have been more likely to disrupt actual stuff.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Here let's put things right. Americans probably never achieve independence without her (France). At least not for many, many generations into the future after 1776.

Something all Americans should understand.

Plainly stated, if France hadn't supported the United States during the American Revolution, there wouldn't be a United States today. George Washington was a great general, but the Continental Army simply didn't have the money, men, training, or seafaring vessels necessary to defeat the British.Nov 17, 2015

The above is true, but the French had their good points too :P

Edited by Derfel Cadarn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...