Ravenwood - 02/14/03 12:28 PM
Someone sent me this recently. I have posted only an excerpt on the weblog, but you can read the full text by clicking here.
A COMPLETE MILITARY HISTORY OF FRANCE
Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.
Hundred Years War - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman."
Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.
American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when America does most of the fighting."
French Revolution - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.
The Franco-Prussian War - Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.
World War I - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.
World War II - Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.
War on Terrorism - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.
UPDATE: A source has been found. What I thought was just another email forward was actually crafted by BigWig at Silflay Hraka just last month. (Thanks Lair.)
Who was behind the infamous blog/email/usenet troll known as "The Complete Military History of France" ?
The so-called Complete Military History of France seems to have been first written by the bloggers from "Silflay Hraka" on 19th January 2003. Silflay Hraka is a North Carolina Site run by a trio with nicknames like Bigwig, Kehaar and Woundwort. Two of these bloggers seem to be tech/support staff at a local NC newspaper and UNC, the third is a professor at a local christian university in Elon North Carolina.
The appearance of this document on usenet did not happen until a Florida teacher, once a former US army officer, posted an abridged document on a website on February 6th 2003. The post was then copied and forwarded by someone named Rinaldi at Michigan University to seattle.politics. In the next number of days, the document was cross posted to hundreds of other usenet groups. Since then the document has been copied to hundreds of blogs.
The question none has bothered to ask, is where did this document really come from?
All of these bloggers reside in an area that is a short drive away from Fort Bragg, home of the 4th Psychological Unit, but that is probably only a coincidence...
Posted by: miquelon at August 22, 2003 11:59 PMIf you take the average American perception of the entire France-Bashing affaire, boil it down and and reduce it to its most basic form, you will probably find the following :
1. France backstabbed the USA
2. Chirac was pro-Hussein
All of the above were common wisdom because, as evidence detailed on this web site shows us, a group of people ranging from nationalistic radio hosts to a compliant and docile Congress decided this was the perfect side show to the truth about Iraq.
29 199 bombs and missiles, half a million rounds of ammunition, 32 million leaflets later, it turns out the White House and Downing Street may have lied to us ...
On the first account, History will prove that the US and British governments lied to its citizens and to the world, and that France knew otherwise and opposed the war on Iraq because the motives were neither factual nor honest.
On account number two, this fallacy can only be entertained by a deeply manichaestic view of the world. George W. Bush has repeated again and again, « you’re either with us or against us », but beyond that simplistic take on world issues, there are people who believe in a more nuanced approach.
The issues here are truth and motivation, evidence will clearly show that war crimes were committed in the name of falsehoods, thousands of Iraqis and hundreds of honest american troops will have been sacrificed for all the wrong reasons. Hussein was a despot, but removing him by violating international principles, sidelining the world community, threatening and blackmailing governments on the security council was not justified.
So to all you France-Bashers out there, I ask this : why the sudden silence? Could you have been wrong? Vive la France !
Posted by: miquelon at August 23, 2003 12:15 AMI quite clearly attributed the post to the authors of Silflay Hraka. As far as I know, they are the original authors.
"...evidence will clearly show that war crimes were committed in the name of falsehoods, thousands of Iraqis and hundreds of honest american troops will have been sacrificed for all the wrong reasons. Hussein was a despot, but removing him by violating international principles, sidelining the world community, threatening and blackmailing governments on the security council was not justified."
I have yet to see evidence of any of the claims you make. No international priciples were violated. A Congressional vote, along with a unanimous UN security council, authorized the use of force in Iraq.
Posted by: Ravenwood at August 23, 2003 12:34 AM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
