Montesquiou wrote:
> "The Black Monk" <ch.mon@hotmail.com> a $(D??(Bcrit dans le message de news:
> 1153233134.351080.193380@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Delila wrote:
> >> "TXZZ" <superoutland@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1153183608.956659.183800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > and if so, then why do americans hate french so much?
> >>
> >>
> >> Maybe that's why. What American can afford the luxury to regularly take
> >> two-hour leisurly lunches that include red wine?
> >
> > Most Americans do not enjoy red wine anyways, and wouldn't know what to
> > do with two hours of free time.  That's why they work 60 hours per week
> > and when not working seek to distract themselves with constant
> > television, video games, etc.  Typical  Americans would never want to
> > live like the French.  They dislike the French not out of envy but for
> > historical reasons.  During America's formative stages the French were
> > the enemies for their Catholicism and were perceived as plotting with
> > Indians to kill settlers, sneaky and dirty.  The unconscious
> > perceptions still remain. Amerca is the heirs of Britain after all, and
> > unlike the Brits the Americans never experienced two world wars with
> > 100,000s of casualties on both sides together.  Instead of fighting
> > together, the American experience of those wars was of saving French
> > (and British) asses,
>
> This is the usual arrogant, self centered and nationalistic US claim :
>
> The Americans never came for to "save the French".

They came because of Wilson's stupid ideas.  Bush is his heir.  But the
American *perception* is that they saved French asses.  And, indeed,
whether or not this was their intention, they did.  France was worn out
by World War I and would have succumbed to the last German offensive if
not for the frsh American soldiers.

> In 1940 they were on the Nazi side.

They were more on the British side, although the Bush family made some
money working with the NAzis.

> In 1944 they wanted to put France under protectorat
>
> http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/2003/05/LACROIX_RIZ/10168

Would you have preferred a German or Soviet protectorate (the
inevitable consequence of no American involvement)?

BM

>
>
> and afterward Paris was seen as another Saigon or
> > Bangkok or Tijuana by American servicemen getting, er, serviced.
> >
> > Thus the French were never redeemed in American eyes as they were in
> > British eyes.  Recent current evetns spun by the corporate media both
> > play on and perpetuate such feelings.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > BM
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> D.
> >