french military victories <cough>

[Sharma]

Wonder what France does when it has to teach its military history to its students?

 

[old.LandShark]

What do you expect it to do, Sharma?

Silverhood - yeah, unfortunately so. Went to a grammar school down in Kent.
Gah, if I wasn't being picked up within 10 minutes I'd start typing a rant about how fundamentally flawed the British education system is

Also, Landshark in french = RequinDeTerre. Dunno, seems to me like it rolls off the tongue ;D
Then again it's also quite fierce-sounding in dutch, Grondhaai

 

[SilverHood]

heh, I come from Denmark (best schooling system in europe), and I had to spend my time in a british secondary school


Quite a shock going from a modern school to a place with uniforms and adressing teachers as "sir" or "miss".


And being told to "go home" by other students always amused me

Hmm, atleast French military history is exciting... what I remember of english history has to do with the grand trunk network (of canals) and the industrial revolution.

learning about napoleon sounds a lot more fun

 

[old.Dillinja]

Originally posted by SilverHood
heh, I come from Denmark (best schooling system in europe), and I had to spend my time in a british secondary school


Quite a shock going from a modern school to a place with uniforms and adressing teachers as "sir" or "miss".


And being told to "go home" by other students always amused me

Hmm, atleast French military history is exciting... what I remember of english history has to do with the grand trunk network (of canals) and the industrial revolution.

learning about napoleon sounds a lot more fun

Teaching the British Empire in schools isn't politically correct. They only teach you the part about slavery, the rest of it isn't in the interests of the ethnic minorities and therefore is not taught.

 

[SilverHood]

Originally posted by old.Dillinja
Teaching the British Empire in schools isn't politically correct. They only teach you the part about slavery, the rest of it isn't in the interests of the ethnic minorities and therefore is not taught.

yeah, like the holocaust is also ignored in English history lessons, but it was taught as part of religious studies at my school

history shouldn't be based on whats politically correct and what isn't

it is afterall, in the past

 

[old.LandShark]

Originally posted by SilverHood
And being told to "go home" by other students always amused me

I've never been able to shrug that kind of thing off. I can stop myself reacting and I don't actually get annoyed at 'lol omg french sux' stuff, but it just drives me insane that you can't make the pricks understand it's retarded to find it funny.

 

[SilverHood]

Originally posted by old.LandShark
I've never been able to shrug that kind of thing off. I can stop myself reacting and I don't actually get annoyed at 'lol omg french sux' stuff, but it just drives me insane that you can't make the pricks understand it's retarded to find it funny.

yeah, it's probably one of the worst things that can happen to someone living in a foreign country, but the school I was in had about 30% non english people, so I was ok, but still retarded that people say things like that.

didn't help that my english was better than theirs after 3 years of speaking it..... when they did the Peter Schmiecel (spg?) danish bacon adverts over here, it got really bad... danish bacon being shouted at me where ever i went... helped I was skinny and had vertially 0 body fat on me at the time though, so i just shrugged it off.... and when denmark lost to england in footie... didnt feel like coming in at all

though if Denmark had won, I'd not have come in anyway... (health risk and all that)

 

[Sibanac]

Originally posted by Sharma
Wonder what France does when it has to teach its military history to its students?

They tell em how france helped the yanks kick the british out of the states

 

[old.job]

when they did the Peter Schmiecel (spg?) danish bacon adverts over here, it got really bad... danish bacon being shouted at me where ever i went...

Would seem your fellow schoolmates were a little lacking in the wit department. I myself am constantly amazed by people who are amused by the most cretinous remarks.

If your going to make a joke, make it funny please, is a good retort.

 

[ning]

Originally posted by Sharma
Wonder what France does when it has to teach its military history to its students?

the truth.

Just 4 things.
1) There is no longer war in Europe. And with the European Union there will never be a new war in Europe.
2) Most of the European country haven't any army.
3) We can't make a war against terrorism because terrorism isn't a country.
4) An european union army is being creating.

So why spend money in an army today ? Government should spend money in economy, school , etc.

I wonder what are the british military victories ???

 

[old.ivan]

Hehe , off the topic somewhat, but errr i really doubt British have a right to say that They won the WWII. I may be mistaken but the prime minister himself said that if the Eastern front falls, they be buggered big time

 

[old.job]

The chances of war in Europe are very high.

Er Bosnia, Greece, Turkey, in fact all of the Caucasians.

War is unlikely amongst the big powers because England and France have Nuclear weapons, we got fooked over by the Germans twice and aren't about to let it happen again.

And don't think just because it's 2003 these things wont happen, that was exactly the same thinking in 1939.
The forces that push people to war haven't gone away, they are just subdued by prosperity and better communication, but hey will raise their ugly head again, it is our nature.

 

[ning]

Originally posted by old.job
The chances of war in Europe are very high.

Er Bosnia, Greece, Turkey, in fact all of the Caucasians.

War is unlikely amongst the big powers because England and France have Nuclear weapons, we got fooked over by the Germans twice and aren't about to let it happen again.

And don't think just because it's 2003 these things wont happen, that was exactly the same thinking in 1939.
The forces that push people to war haven't gone away, they are just subdued by prosperity and better communication, but hey will raise their ugly head again, it is our nature.

sorry i was speaking about the European Union (not the whole Europe). Today, the probality of a war between 2 EU states is the same than between 2 US states (Today : same money, nearly the same laws, no border since 1992, european firms like Airbus, etc. Tomorrow (next 1/2 years) : 1 EU president, the beggining of an united army (60000 solders) , etc .)

PS : Greece is in the EU and didn't make a war since WWII. You have an old view of the Europe

 

[old.job]

Well yes, but history ALWAYS repeats itself eventually.

The expression '"how can it happen in this day an age?" is based on the ludicrous assumption, that technological advancements make us less of the animals we are.
Our moral base is actually declining not increasing.

 

[old.ivan]

Originally posted by ning
the beggining of an united army (60000 solders) , etc .)

60000 soldiers teeeheee

 

[ning]

Originally posted by old.ivan
60000 soldiers teeeheee

"the beggining"

 

[old.ivan]

It will still be rather hard, some countries within the EU employ 'conscript drafts' <or something> ie do not have established professional army units, thus it will be hard to unify the system and will cost mucho dinhero.

 

[ning]

Originally posted by old.ivan
It will still be rather hard, some countries within the EU employ 'conscript drafts' <or something> ie do not have established professional army units, thus it will be hard to unify the system and will cost mucho dinhero.

On 20 November 2000, European Union Defence Ministers met in Brussels and agreed to the creation of a EU Rapid Reaction Force through the Military Capabilities Commitment. The force will consist of up to 60,000 troops which will deploy on peacekeeping operations on the behalf of the EU.

More : http://www.european-defence.co.uk/article9.html

 

[old.ivan]

Originally posted by ning
On 20 November 2000, European Union Defence Ministers met in Brussels and agreed to the creation of a EU Rapid Reaction Force through the Military Capabilities Commitment. The force will consist of up to 60,000 troops which will deploy on peacekeeping operations on the behalf of the EU.

More : http://www.european-defence.co.uk/article9.html

Off-topic:
Heh, but thats the same as saying: "German and French troops will act as peacekeepers in bla bla bla" aint it.... just another reason to spend money imo, totally unnecessary. But hey i dont live in EU so i wont be paying for that through the nose Not the way to spend some more tax money, should improve literacy percentage in say Portugal first or try to decrease corruption in Greece... theres a good number of issues to be resolved.

Back on : i did say it will be costly , didnt say it wasnt possible just not economically feasible and necessary imo. Defense ministers can agree on anything they like, its the tax payers that "suffer". European taxpayers see threat from USA because of their aggro actions lately, not from some minor state outside the EU, which is dealt fine by UN.
Sponsoring the training of 60000 men on top of existing army expenses, furthermore, making them mobile will cost alot of hard cash.
Tis all matter of opinion.

 

[old.Dillinja]

Originally posted by old.job
The chances of war in Europe are very high.

Er Bosnia, Greece, Turkey, in fact all of the Caucasians.

War is unlikely amongst the big powers because England and France have Nuclear weapons, we got fooked over by the Germans twice and aren't about to let it happen again.

And don't think just because it's 2003 these things wont happen, that was exactly the same thinking in 1939.
The forces that push people to war haven't gone away, they are just subdued by prosperity and better communication, but hey will raise their ugly head again, it is our nature.

You are saying there will be a nuclear war in our lifetimes? I'm not saying you are wrong, its just a pretty darn scary thought. :\

I've thought about it a lot recently, how one deranged maniac could get in control of a nuclear weapon/s and by launching one at a specific target could lead us to the destruction of our own planet.

The nuclear/hydrogen/atom bomb is a perfect example of humans being too intelligent for their own good, we are nature's mistake imo.

 

[old.LandShark]

Originally posted by old.Dillinja
You are saying there will be a nuclear war in our lifetimes? I'm not saying you are wrong, its just a pretty darn scary thought. :\

I've thought about it a lot recently, how one deranged maniac could get in control of a nuclear weapon/s and by launching one at a specific target could lead us to the destruction of our own planet.

The nuclear/hydrogen/atom bomb is a perfect example of humans being too intelligent for their own good, we are nature's mistake imo.

lol
Hate people who say that kind of thing. Nature's mistake? What the fuck does that mean, nature is chaos. The rest of the Earth biosphere should count itself lucky we're wierd enough an animal not to just crush everything else given that we could.
Deranged maniacs in control of nukes? Seriously, do you think it's even remotely likely outside of Hollywood?
North Korea, now that might be worth worrying about. I do however have enough faith in the intelligence agencies of all G3 nations combined to warn the world if they actually get their nuclear program off the ground.
They've missed, at the last count, 4 of their self-announced dates for nuclear weapons tests.

As for too intelligent for our own good - only two have ever been used. We could wipe each other out just as easily with conventional weaponry you know, and, well... sickeningly callous though it is of me to say it, Little Boy and Fat Man did do one positive thing - they made sure that mutually-assured nuclear destruction actually works as a deterrent, whereas conventional weaponry just isn't scary enough to do so.
What you might consider fearing if you feel you need something to fear is the Nagasaki/Hiroshima of bio/chemical weapons.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Nuclear facts: The US has only 36k of nukes left since they took out 4k. Ain't that sweet. Now they can destroy the world "only" 200 times. As in blow up the globe.

Russia has around 20k of nukes left from the cold war. It is "researched" that if somebody there pressed "ze button" that half of these nukes wouldn't even ignite and would stay grounded, the other half...wanna guess? Would fly all over the place with no guidance at all. Due to lack of resources for maintenence.

Also a fun fact about nukes. When they tested the first nuke, half of the scientists said it wouldn't work, the other half said it would cause a chainreaction that would destory the whole world....and the buggers tested it anyway!

 

[old.job]

Of course we will use them one day, we used them as soon as they were invented.
And if you're interested, do some research on the plan America very nearly put into action, to carpet bomb China and Russia with nuclear weapons, straight after they bombed Japan, to create a new world order.

 

[old.LandShark]

Originally posted by old.Tohtori
Also a fun fact about nukes. When they tested the first nuke, half of the scientists said it wouldn't work, the other half said it would cause a chainreaction that would destory the whole world....and the buggers tested it anyway!

A much misquoted fact; this predicted chain reaction was political/military in nature, not an actual nuke-causes-earth's-crust-to-implode kind of thing.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Originally posted by old.LandShark
A much misquoted fact; this predicted chain reaction was political/military in nature, not an actual nuke-causes-earth's-crust-to-implode kind of thing.

Aww. You pooped on my fun fact

 

[old.Dillinja]

When they were first testing the nukes on those little islands in the pacific or in the water or wherever, they supposedly didn't know about the radiation and fallout the nuke would release. The guy's watching it had no protective clothing whatsoever and the fallout got all over their skin and anywhere it wanted to really, lungs etc. Not a nice thought what happened to those guys afterwards.

 

[old.Dillinja]

Landshark : I'm not sure about you but I'd much rather a dictator who used soldiers and guns to take over land than one who can just level his enemies if he chooses to do so.

 

[Serbitar]

Originally posted by old.LandShark
Deranged maniacs in control of nukes? Seriously, do you think it's even remotely likely outside of Hollywood?

You forgot George W. Bush ^^ although if he's on holiday in hollywood i spose he could kinda be considered in that

 

[Serbitar]

Originally posted by ning
I wonder what are the british military victories ???

all the wars we've taken part in since 1066 i think... not 100% sure though there may be a few defeats in there but nothing that you get taught about in school in fact i seem to remember most of my childhood being taught about how we got the crap kicked out of us in 1066 by the normans (weird how an entire race all has the same name) but thats ok because after centuries of breeding with them we are pretty much all now part-norman now anyway the rest of the so-called 'history' lessons were filled with WWII. admittedly i didnt do history GCSE so i dont know what you got taught then but before that i never got taught about WWI, falklands, crusades, somalia, vietnam (admittedly some USofA there - but the lesson is called 'history' not 'british history')

got distracted by manager asking me to do some work and completely lost train of thought... TBC (probably)

 

[Driwen]

serbitar you lost the war versus the americans.
you also lost atleast two sea wars versus the dutch.
England in the end lost the hundred year war.