Reader's Favorites
Media Casualties Mount

Administration Split On Europe Invasion

Administration In Crisis Over Burgeoning Quagmire

Congress Concerned About Diversion From War On Japan

Pot, Kettle On Line Two...

Allies Seize Paris

The Natural

Gore Book Sales Tank, Supporters Claim Unfair Tactics

Satan Files Lack Of Defamation Suit

Why This Blog Bores People With Space Stuff

A New Beginning

My Hit Parade
Instapundit (Glenn Reynolds)
Tim Blair
James Lileks Bleats
Virginia Postrel
Kausfiles
Winds Of Change (Joe Katzman)
Little Green Footballs (Charles Johnson)
Samizdata
Eject Eject Eject (Bill Whittle)

Space
Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Watch
NASA Space Flight
Hobby Space
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
Mars Blog
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Space Cynic
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Selenian Boondocks
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
True Anomaly
Kevin Parkin
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
Spacearium
Saturn Follies
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)

Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« So Much For Kerry's Complaint | Main | The Overst0ck.Com Television Ad »

After Six Decades, No End To The Quagmire

PARIS (Routers) August 25, 2004

Sixty years after Paris was seized by the "Allies," and the beginning of the American occupation, France remains a failed nation, mired in political corruption and beset by vast pockets of Muslim extremism and anti-semitism, into which the gendarmerie fear to tread. The economy continues to struggle under economic policies driven by failed ideologies, and many of its best and brightest continue to flow out of the country, with only ex-dictators and their families, and hysterical movie stars willing to move there.

Sadly, history has born out the predictions of those who, in the spring of 1944, warned against invading. Many had pointed out what a poor prospect the region was for any kind of democracy, with its long history of belligerence and arrogance, and failed republics.

Noted WW II historian Robert Winthrop pointed out that the occupation got off on the wrong foot from the beginning, when the Americans freely allowed atrocities in the fall of Paris. "In the wake of all the violence and sex that the brutal 'Allies' condoned, it's not surprising that the resentment lives on six decades later."

The corruption of the French government is legendary, with its current president likely avoiding jail only because he's president. The economy continues to limp along, with high unemployment rates, exacerbated by primitive socialistic policies.

The growing Islamic insurgency in the suburbs of the capital and other cities is particularly troubling, and even after six decades of training, it's not clear that the native security forces are up to the job, with many of them refusing to even enter disputed areas.

Many say that, as the US has done with France's similarly failed neighbor Germany, in which many desire a return to communism, it's time to give up and wash our hands of the region.

"Nation building is clearly a failed policy, and we'll have a much more effective foreign policy when we recognize that," said one U.S. State Department official. "At some point one has to realize that there are some places that are simply hopeless, and all we can do is manage them as best we can."

Regardless of the future, in the wake of all their current problems, it is little surprise that the French street views the sixtieth anniversary of the fall of their beautiful capital to western forces as a day of sadness, and hardly one to celebrate.

[Anniversary day update]

Not all have forgotten:

The day was charged with symbolism as France remembered its liberators, from American soldiers who backed a French division, clinching victory, to communist Resistance members in the vanguard of the underground fight.

And there's this:

President Jacques Chirac, in an address at Paris City Hall, urged "vigilance" by younger generations in dealing with present-day manifestations of "this hate of the other, still at work, the most somber face of the human soul."

The president was referring to racist-inspired acts plaguing today's France, including anti-Semitic attacks.

Good for him.

Posted by Rand Simberg at August 24, 2004 04:22 PM

Comments

Fascinating; I recently read Rick Atkinson's North Africa book and realized how badly the French behaved there. Its too bad we have messed up our reputation in Europe, but we need to know more about what really goes on in France - or does it even matter?

Posted by Edward G Cole at August 24, 2004 06:04 PM

Yes! I understand that this is Satire.

Sadly enough, it is also the ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

Posted by leaddog2 at August 24, 2004 06:09 PM

What leaddog2 said.

Exxxxcellent, Rand. ;-p

Posted by Barbara Skolaut at August 24, 2004 06:39 PM

Nice post, Rand. May I recommend a recent post on a similar subject by Meryl Yourish?

"There is no anti-Semitism in France"

Posted by Asparagirl at August 24, 2004 06:54 PM

How can you be this good and I never heard of you before? (This time I followed a link from the Corner at NRO.)

Posted by HandsomeStranger at August 24, 2004 08:28 PM

Great stuff.

Edward, "we" messed up our reputation in Europe????

Posted by Sandy P at August 24, 2004 08:40 PM

Two thumbs up!

Posted by Robert Schwartz at August 24, 2004 10:01 PM

Sorry to have to correct you. But, first of all, the Americans didn't liberate France. Everybody knows De Gaulle did it singlehandedly with some help from Jeanne D'Arc. Actually the French won WW2 alone on all fronts, including the Pacific and the Artic. Second, France didn't need to be liberated since it had never been conquered and, as we all know, the Germans are its best friends and were there (if indeed they were) strictly because the French had invited them to rest there from their campaign in the East. It's true, however, that though no American soldier ever got into France in 44 or later, undoubtly they (the GIs) committed millions of atrocities and human right violations on French soil. It's also worth remembering that the Americans who were never in France went there only to steal France's treasures, like that glory of French painting called the Mona Lisa that is now in the Met. And where do you take it from that there's an Islamic insurgency in France? Everybody in France is French with the exception of those troublemakers, the Joooos who, btw, are Zionazi CIA spies working for Busharon assassin. It's clear that you've not been reading Le Monde, Le Figaro and Libération often enough.

Posted by lafontaine at August 24, 2004 10:16 PM

I applaud you, lafontaine!!
Well written and well said!!

Posted by Celtstorm at August 25, 2004 02:49 AM

Unfortunately, the Franch have chosen to hide the name of their great leader in WWII, a fellow by the name of Pierre Laval, first cousin to a fellow by the name of Quisling, in Norway.

Posted by dick manning at August 25, 2004 05:04 AM

While ranting about the French in a number of posts yesterday on my blog, I came across the TRUTH. The Spanish liberated Paris! LINK

Posted by Chuck Simmins at August 25, 2004 05:46 AM

A more apt, and realisitic comparision, if you wanted to engage "french bashing" (curiously the people who do this the most are the first to scream 'anti semitism"), would be the occupation and subsequent battle of, Algeirs.

And while you're cheering on using the US army as cannon fodder for Israeli interests you may want to read up on "imperial backwash", which is the root of much of France's muslim problem today.

But lets face, it, if France was pro israel, and even anti-us, but pro israel, your views would do a 180 - You're not fooling anyone anymore, lads.

Posted by tacitus at August 25, 2004 07:03 AM

Israel's nukes were developed jointly with the French. Unlike US troops, French and British troops fought along with the Israeli ones in 56. It was the US that didn't allow them to occupy the Suez and depose Nasser. Israel won 56 and 67 with French weapons, particularly with Mirages. The US began backing Israel when, as Bin Laden would say it, it discovered that Israel was the Middle east's strong horse. Israel's victories against the Russian-backed Arabs helped America in the Cold War through the demoralization of the USSR. The French were right to fight the Algerian insurgency which ended with the ethnic cleansing of a population that had been there for longer than most Americans have been in the US. America was absolutely wrong in backing Egypt in 56 or the Algerians at the same time and neither have been much grateful for this ever since. Unlike most American "allies", Israel has always done its own fighting. The US seems to have pretty good deals selling advanced weapons to Israel's enemies like Egypt or the Saudis. America suffered its largest number of casualties in the Middle east before Iraq when it intervened in Lebanon to save Arafat and the PLO leadership from Sharon. It is America that keeps forbiding Israel of getting rid of Arafat, the PLO, Hamas, Johad, Hozbollah etc. In short, Americans have been killed as cannon fodder for Palestinian, Saudi, Kuwaiti, Egyptian and other such interests. America forced Israel not to defend itself against Iraqi rockets during the first Gulf War and then, to please the Arabs, forced the almost suicidal Oslo peace on Israel and gave Arafat's terrorists, who murdered and keep murdering Americans, a beautiful home and base in the disputed territories. And, not to forget, many more Americans have died as cannon fodder for the French in WW1 or WW2 than for Israelis or Jews ever.

Posted by lafontaine at August 25, 2004 08:08 AM

"many more Americans have died as cannon fodder for the French in WW1"

Look up the zimmeran cable sometime, and its relation to the Balfour declaration.

"America was absolutely wrong in backing Egypt in 56 "
From an Israeli, not American point of view. Neocons can't see the differance, apparently. I suppose this justified the Lavan affair in your eyes?

Posted by tactitus at August 25, 2004 09:44 AM

"Americans have been killed as cannon fodder for Palestinian, Saudi, Kuwaiti, Egyptian and other such interests. America forced Israel not to defend itself against Iraqi rockets during the first Gulf War and then, to please the Arabs, forced the almost suicidal Oslo peace on Israel and gave Arafat's terrorists"

Are you really this delusional? From George C. Marshall onward every professional in the state department warned that support of Israel would lead to nothing but problems in the region, which it has.

Israel engaged in deliberate, pre-meditated ethic cleansing in 1948 - not even Israel hides that anymore - and has been the repeated expansionst aggressor. For example, the Knesset declared Jerusalem the capital in 1950 - and conviently found a war to justify seizing that territory. In turn, they demolised the old morraccan quarter - including a muslim quaf beqeuthed by Saladin, and turned into a plaza - memory-hole, stalin style.

Don't try to make israel this poor suffering victim - they have been aggresive militant expansionists- Jabotinsky and others were every bit as 'facist' as their european counterparts.

Sooner or later most Americans will discover the reality you and other neocons have been trying to hide. You can continue to lie, spin, twist and smear, but the truth is catching up to you.

Posted by tacitus at August 25, 2004 09:51 AM

Folks, please ignore the troll.

Posted by Rand Simberg at August 25, 2004 09:56 AM

Neocon quiz question #1:

Where in the US constitution does it say the president is allowed to go to war with out a declaration of congress?

Where does it say in the US constitution that US troops are to be used for interests other than defending our borders?

question #2.
Who said "beware of passionate foriegn attachments"
(hint, it's a guy you don't give a damn about, who was leader of country you would back-stab in a second if it was good for israel).

Posted by . at August 25, 2004 09:58 AM

>>Its too bad we have messed up our reputation in Europe

Well, I can assure you that your reputation is not only ruined in Europe, but in the rest of the world as well.

It's interesting to note that your (the US) reputation among IOC-members now has been finally ruined by dumbya as well. This follows, of course, the excessively jingoistic games at Salt Lake City, after which it was rumoured that there would be a long time before another Olympic Game will be held in the US. Will anyone around here take a guess as to when that will happen?

_________________________________________________

ATHENS (Reuters) - Olympic officials are seething at a campaign ad for President Bush (news - web sites) which, they say, hijacks the Olympic brand.

"We are following what is happening and hope this campaign will stop," said Gerhard Heiberg, head of the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites)'s Marketing Commission.

"We own the rights to the Olympic name and nobody asked us," he said while attending the Athens Olympics.

from here.

Posted by Canute at August 25, 2004 10:37 AM

Speaking for myself, Canute (and ignoring the general nonsensical nature of your post), I wouldn't consider never having the Olympics in the US any great tragedy. In fact, if it were really a result of our foreign policy, I'd consider that a feature, not a bug.

Posted by Rand Simberg at August 25, 2004 10:48 AM

In order for the US to have a good reputation in Europe or much of the rest of the world we would have to abandon the practices, ideas and institutions that have made us successful and adopt the those that are failing miserably at this very moment in Europe.

So Tacitus, How is it that Arabs ended up outside the Arabian Peninsula? Wasn't it a result of Islamic Arab imperialism? How did the Turks end up in Asia Minor? Wasn't it a result of Turkish imperialism? I find it interesting that a tiny enclave of Jews on the western Mediterranean bothers you tremendously but it is OK for these other peoples to be spread far and wide. Very interesting indeed.

Clearly the time has come for the Europeans to prove to the world and themselves that they are capable of maintaining peaceful relations among themselves for the first time in their history without the United States providing a comforting presence.

I'm not too confident about this happening given the arrogant, domineering attitude of France. But I'm willing to maintain an open mind. People have a way of surprising you...

Posted by phil at August 25, 2004 02:47 PM

I have a feeling that the mere mention of the USA would be "excessively jingoistic" to Canut.

And if our reputation in the entire world has been ruined due to liberating 50 million people, that's not our problem. It's the world's.

Posted by Jim C. at August 25, 2004 09:32 PM

Respect in the world is connected to strenght, success, victory and assertiveness. Israelis were respected in 1967 after having crushed their nice neighbors, but they are despised now because, while they go on beatinf the Palestinian intifada, they think too much of the world's sensitivity.
For a while immediately after the Afghans and Iraqi victories the anti-American frenzy died down. Much of the lack of respect for Israel and the US around the world has as its "root-cause" the very lack of respect for the US and Israel at home, by people whose job is to smear their own countries.
You'll not find anything similar either in continental Europe or the Arab world. Try to play an anti-French Chomsky in France or a Michael Moore in Egypt to see what happens: in the first case you'll lose your job and, in the second, your head.
In short, the more democratic a society is, the more it admits dissent, the less respected it is outside its borders. Still, I'd rather live in such societies than in those that used to be loved and respected everywhere like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia.

Posted by lafontaine at August 26, 2004 02:28 AM

"I'm not too confident about this happening given the arrogant, domineering attitude of France. But I'm willing to maintain an open mind. People have a way of surprising you..."

Surprising words from people who support the idea of imposing "freedom" at gunpoint to the rest of the world.

(the idea is rather ludicrous if you think about it, and has more in common with Napoleon that Edmund Burke, who is no doubt another neocon "bogeyman"

And please spare me the 'poor little israel, stop picking on the jews' arguement. We didnt' fund the turk or the arab. Yes it does bother me, by the way, that jews think they are the sole propritors of the most holy place in christdom. Please tell me why or how jewish claims to Jerusalem superseed muslim and christian ones.

Posted by tacitus at August 26, 2004 07:11 AM

"Respect in the world is connected to strenght, success, victory and assertiveness. Israelis were respected in 1967 after having crushed their nice neighbors,"

Really? starting a war to seize land, breaking the cease fire to sieze more land, and attacking a US http://www.ussliberty.org ship earns you respect?

Posted by tacitus at August 26, 2004 10:13 AM

Why is there no mention of the horrendous casualties (5000 men in the first hour of the Normandy invasion) the incompetent leadership, the war crimes committed at the highest level? Where was the weapon of "Mass destruction" that Hitler was supposedly building? Yes, he may have gone "too far" in some instances, but look at the over reaction of the "allies"! If only Kerry was president at that time! SAM

Posted by SAM at August 26, 2004 11:33 AM

Why is there no mention of the horrendous casualties (5000 men in the first hour of the Normandy invasion) the incompetent leadership, the war crimes committed at the highest level? Where was the weapon of "Mass destruction" that Hitler was supposedly building? Yes, he may have gone "too far" in some instances, but look at the over reaction of the "allies"! If only Kerry was president at that time! SAM

Posted by SAM at August 26, 2004 11:33 AM

Why is there no mention of the horrendous casualties (5000 men in the first hour of the Normandy invasion) the incompetent leadership, the war crimes committed at the highest level? Where was the weapon of "Mass destruction" that Hitler was supposedly building? Yes, he may have gone "too far" in some instances, but look at the over reaction of the "allies"! If only Kerry was president at that time! SAM

Posted by SAM at August 26, 2004 11:33 AM

THAR BE TROLLS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Yeesh. Take some prozac, people, and go somewhere else.

Posted by VR at August 26, 2004 04:30 PM

Since the `palestinians`, through the Mufti of Jerusalem sent 10,000 jew kids to the Aushwitz chambers, and that these same kids would have resulted in about at least 80,000 jews by now, and at the weighted average of 10 Arabs to one Jew. there is an outstanding blood debt of 800,000 `palestinian` which is yet to be paid.

Posted by hutchrun at August 28, 2004 05:28 AM

Rand,

You forgot to add that Europe is still awash in bloody civil wars [cf, Basque, N. Ireland, Cyprus, former Yugo] and that US troops are still having to provide basic security servies to the failed nations.

Something witty about Rumsfeld's planned rolldown in Germany and elsewhere would also be appropriate.

Posted by Ursus at June 6, 2005 09:15 PM

IEDs (improvised eclair devices) continue to plague occupation tourist forces. Two tourists perished yesterday of heart disease incurred due to a fatty diet of rich sauces and force-fed ducks. This brings the death toll to 40,000 since the president declared 'major combat operations' complete.

Posted by Chirac at June 6, 2005 09:57 PM

a mere century after the close of america's unresolved civil war, the union states have been vanquished by the retrograde, inbred forces of the conservative southern states. the union president, a turncoat silver spoon yankee, has handed the reigns of power to slaveholding yokels in the name of "freedum, lib'ty and dale earnhardt jr."

Posted by sherman at June 6, 2005 11:04 PM

Ethnic cleansing in 1948? I believe 200,000 Arabs were driven out or fled. They still live in camps, but number a million.

In 1945, with the blessings of the US and England, about 15 million Germans were ethnically cleansed in Europe.

There are no camps teeming with ignorant, brain washed, fundamentalist, and violent Germans along the Polish and Czech borders, numbering 75 millions.

How many Arabs have won a Nobel prize in the last 50 years?

Do you think Arab society needs to grow up? At least get out of its Dark Age? Maybe stop blaming Israel for their backwardness? Accept a situation which is not ideal but instead work for the future, and not to waste generations of young people to redress some past grievance?

Posted by joel at June 7, 2005 03:14 AM

Joel asks: "How many Arabs have won a Nobel prize in the last 50 years?"

Not a fair question! You are failing to respect their cultural tradition of cousin marriages, and so it's racist to point out the inbreeding depression in Arab IQ.

Besides, some of the top terrorists have won Nobel Peace Prizes. Orwell would love that institution.

Posted by Kevin R.C. O'Brien at June 7, 2005 07:59 AM

One slight inaccuracy is that it mentions communism where the enemy in that war was the nazis. Aside from that, it's pretty accurate.

Posted by Jim Lindley at June 8, 2005 05:23 AM


Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?