the moslems have declared the election is against Islamic law and have rigged France as an IED. If anyone votes they will explode the device filling the atmosphere with 63 million frenchmen. On the brighter side not much sunlight can get through all those french assholes so the chances are good for a mild cool summer.
Sarkozy is from the same conservative party as incumbent Chirac. If he wins the degree of suckage, regardless of how high or low it is now, will remain largely the same.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-05 13:06 ID:BXmWH++E
lol
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-05 13:57 ID:ji7egH7n
I didn't much give a shit who the french thought should be the US president. I'm sure the french feel the same about our opinion. Just wish them luck and get the fuck out of the way. If your french thanks for that statue thingy.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-06 4:13 ID:lGAwbvjy
bump for election
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-06 4:14 ID:4SULBnXQ
i guess we'll find out tonight (american mid-day).
The only ones who care about France are the niggers in Africa.
Fellow EU countries don't give a shit as well as the Asians and Americans.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-06 14:25 ID:0awQl+i3
>>25
That's not accurate. France is an important member of the EU and the international community.
Anyway, Sarkozy won. Let's get rioting.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-06 17:17 ID:KhoTRzQL
and let the car bombings continue
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-06 17:28 ID:lGAwbvjy
it will be nice to have someone who is head of France who doesn't have a knee-jerk reaction against the United States.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-06 18:01 ID:+DCXc8Iz
>>28
Then you got your man. Sarkozy is ready to suck Bush's cock anytime he wants.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-06 19:14 ID:s/0ORhlQ
>>28
amerikans know all about knee-jerk reactions dont they?
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-06 23:01 ID:ybiQJHzt
>>24
Would i go to the trouble of giving thanks for the statue if i thought there were only Amwayans here? The only thing I have against the french are the mimes and letting those stupid american actors and politicians camp out in their vinyards.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 0:26 ID:CniOfQQp
cool, the French actully voting for a pro-US guy
huzzah!!!
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 0:28 ID:W8pL0rWU
Sarkozy it is. Let's see what he can do.
>>31
my apologies, I skipped over the last sentence.
(I'm in your internets, apologizing!) And I can't speak for the French but I like to hear what others have to say about my country's government no matter where they're from.
>>28
You're right, France has pulled itself up against the U.S. to give itself importance a number of times throughout the years.
In this case, however, and assuming that's what you're referring to, I wish Americans would stop giving the French government shit for opposing the Iraq war. That wasn't knee-jerk. That was... whatever the word is for "opposing an effort to win U.N. support for invading a country because of yellow cake (and thirsty thirsty SUVs)". Common sense.
You could say they led the charge and the subsequent "The french hate us!" backlash (how big was it?) diverted attention onto them and away from criticism of the war, but I thought the kind of person that could be that easily influenced wouldn't oppose bombing another middle-eastern country in the first place.
also age for one of the non-racism threads on /newpol/
>>34
lulz. not being a pussy? you're pretty fucking confused arent you. restraint proves more than being a reactionary twat.
pussy? i'm still lulz'ing.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 1:28 ID:C6YXzNn2
>>35
The reaction of King Leonidas to threats from the Iranians accurately represents what not being a pussy means. It means total war the instant any makes anything closely resembling a threat and blowing it all out of proportion until they are at your feet grovelling pathetically for forgiveness.
Leonidas was a terrible military commander and prolly did Sparta a favor by dying so quickly. Greece later won the war anyway at a time and place of their choosing.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 1:33 ID:UDSq0sEV
>>36
you keep thinking that then. we'll be over here creating civilisation. when you feel like joining let us know. so we can tell you to GTFO FAGGOT!
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 1:33 ID:YsGbIK5s
It should be mentioned that France had some deals w/ Hussein in the past, and that said deals could have been a factor in its objection to OP Epic Virility and Courage.
why? seriously, how is it a good idea to waste the lives of 300 of your own men is a pointless defense of a worthless spot?
Greece was already moving towards war, Leonidas just got impatient.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 2:09 ID:C6YXzNn2
>>42
"Greece was already moving towards war, Leonidas just got impatient."
The Spartans weren't the only ones at the pass. They had 700 allies, who retreated once they found out the Persians had a way to encircle them. They were sent there to delay them so the Greek city states could unify their forces for a defense.
Greece wasn't moving towards war. Athens had many enemies and after seeing Persia defeat the Egyptians and many other kingdoms in the past 100 years many believed that it was just the natural order of things. Most Greek city states were already ruled by macho testosterone saturated warlords with a culture to match, the Spartans just took this to inhuman extremes. With the Spartans and a king, long time enemies of the Athenians, holding back the Persians with just 300 men and then staying behind to fight to the death, the city states of Greece suddenly had a strong emotional and spiritual reason to unify rather than just petty self-interest machiavellian politics.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 2:10 ID:UDSq0sEV
>>41 >>42
you're both wrong. but >>41 is way more wrong than >>42
the whole reason for the spartans to hold up the persians at that pass was so the greek armies could arrive and position themselves to wipe out the superior number of the persians with superior tactics.
You stupid gay moron. Greece's great army victory didn't come until two whole years later. You're thinking of the Athenian navy, which was fighting a separate battle at the time on the other side of Greece.
>>51
Because a lot of people single out France for not joining the war? The war had zero international support, you might as well rag on Germany or Russia.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 17:03 ID:/mRcjtfx
37 countries supported that war, you fucking moron.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 17:10 ID:/mRcjtfx
Supported with troops that is.
There're many more forms of support.
Bitches don't know about my Iraq War.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 17:36 ID:nhRP9gpW
>>54
Three countries other than the US and UK supported with troops at the invasion. Counting later deployments five countries in total contributed more than 1000 soldiers. Out of those five three have since withdrawn. In most of the contries that did contribute popular support was low to begin with. Only someone who slept through the past five years could seriously argue that there was ever international support for the war.
And, thus, I would say it makes little sense to single out France as a country that didn't support the war. The American obsession with France in general has always been enigmatic.
Haha yeah, just keep those comfortable fantasies because reality might hurt your tiny brain.
And while you're growing up here's something to think about:
France was against that war because it had and still has strong connections to the muslisms.
Chirac is not some peace-loving faggot, quite contrary.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 18:14 ID:0Yxa+qvp
Who cares what reason they had. They still didn't support it.
Logic is beyond some people?
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 18:24 ID:/mRcjtfx
Yeah, right. Who cares about motives? Let's just do something, fuck yeah!
Good luck at politics
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 18:32 ID:0Yxa+qvp
Who cares about motives?
Did I say that? Logic really is beyond you.
Let's just do something, fuck yeah!
Or in this case, not do something, but that has little to do with your illiteracy.
Right about what?
That 15 countries withdrawn their troops?
Wow, that surely proofs his claim that nobody supported the Iraq War all along.
You must be a really happy person with your "Who cares what reason they had"-attitude.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 19:16 ID:0Yxa+qvp
>>63
I asked you to quote a sentence from >>56 that you disagreed with.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 19:17 ID:/mRcjtfx
"Three countries other than the US and UK supported with troops at the invasion. Counting later deployments five countries in total contributed more than 1000 soldiers. Out of those five three have since withdrawn. In most of the contries that did contribute popular support was low to begin with. Only someone who slept through the past five years could seriously argue thatthere was ever international support for the war.
And, thus, I would say it makes little sense to single out France as a country that didn't support the war. The American obsession with France in general has always been enigmatic."
This is a travesty. We shouldn't have to debate what is common knowledge, especially not with someone who hypothesizes a "muslim connection".
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 19:30 ID:/mRcjtfx
Now that was pretty obvious.
Ok, standard procedure then.
Your request for a single sentence is ridiculous and childish.
If you cannot deal with context and texts of more than 5 words then stay out of /newpol/.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 19:33 ID:0Yxa+qvp
Your request for a single sentence is ridiculous and childish.
Your refusal to do so indicates you're a troll.
>>70
I've never even been to France. I honestly think you're trolling. It would be one thing if this was right after the invasion, with jingoistic sentiments rampant in the US, but today even most Americans disagree with the Iraq war.
If you're not able to name them then you're disqualified.
Google at least before you jump in a debate.
Seriously guys, hands up who's not for the first time in a politics board.
Everyone over 18 must have a least some experience in debating and know the protocol.
Those who don't should lurk more or rather GTFO.
Could you be more incoherent?
I collect random sentences for a typing program like http://typera.tk, you know.
Read up what has been written so far and try again.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-07 20:31 ID:nhRP9gpW
>>73
First you make asinine statements and now you try to divert attention from them.
First of all, the war never had enough support for a UN resolution. The makeshift "coalition of the willing" included the US and the UK (95 or so percent of the fighting force), Australia, Poland (not forgotten) and a bunch of developing countries and micronations. As I have already stated only five countries actually deployed troops for the invasion (other than US and UK only Australia with 2000 soldiers is worth mentioning) and most of those who would later contribute large contingents have now withdrawn. In many of the contributing countries there was never popular support to begin with; in Spain the decision to go to war even brought down a government. During the entire process there were massive public protests and the governments of the world expressed disapproval. I find it hard to believe that you have not grasped this.
This isn't politics, this is you making stupid and hopelessly outdated claims.
>>73
So you cant name them? Oh well. I guess that happens when you dont want ppl to know that there are in reality less than a dozen countries that were really involved in the initial invasion.
So how many EFFECTIVE countries are there again in the so-called "Coalition of the Willing"?
Nice generalisations. Now, THAT's trolling.
I see that you failed to recognized the ID next to the posts, so you must be a newbie.
Spoilers: there's more to politics then watching a news channel
That's why we have /n/ and /newpol/.
Since you're too retarded for a politics debate I suggest you go to the former instead.
On the other hand, just GTFO.
Even /n/ doesn't need more idiots.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-08 9:10 ID:W2P0O/Qu
>>80
You idiots all have a hive mind, there's no need to distinguish between you.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-08 18:03 ID:cRzfZ6Lb
enjoy ur hastened economic denationalization
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-09 6:25 ID:D0X9atPj
bump for erection
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-09 7:42 ID:6U42LLhH
cock? i thought we were talking pussys in france?!
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-09 13:24 ID:bwFwX8oO
"Sarkozy" is French for "The Dream Is Over."
Seriously, that's what it boils down to. The outdated French social system is kaput. Time to wake up before the Muslims kill you all and realise that official ignorance of racism doesn't make France equal; time to wake up before you go broke and realise that the government's running out of money to pay for its safety net.
There will be much gnashing of teeth. Sarkozy's not the best man, but he was the only one there with the right ideas. Goodbye, old France. We'll miss you.