The Bobcat Nation

I thought Chirac's speech was interesting. I can't help wondering, though, what his response would have been if Bush had explicitly threatened a nuclear response to 9/11 -- I can't help thinking that France would have condemned such a threat coming from the U.S.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2006_pg4_4

Grizlaw wrote:I thought Chirac's speech was interesting. I can't help wondering, though, what his response would have been if Bush had explicitly threatened a nuclear response to 9/11 -- I can't help thinking that France would have condemned such a threat coming from the U.S.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2006_pg4_4

[quote = "article"]French experts also agreed that Chirac’s speech on Thursday did not mark a fundamental policy shift but rather a refinement of current nuclear doctrine. [/quote]

Grizlaw wrote:I thought Chirac's speech was interesting. I can't help wondering, though, what his response would have been if Bush had explicitly threatened a nuclear response to 9/11 -- I can't help thinking that France would have condemned such a threat coming from the U.S.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2006_pg4_4

Must have taken his viagra pill before that speech...big talk, for traditionally soft Nation. I don't think France would nuke anyone under any circumstances.

Bleedinbluengold wrote:

Grizlaw wrote:I thought Chirac's speech was interesting. I can't help wondering, though, what his response would have been if Bush had explicitly threatened a nuclear response to 9/11 -- I can't help thinking that France would have condemned such a threat coming from the U.S.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2006_pg4_4

Must have taken his viagra pill before that speech...big talk, for traditionally soft Nation. I don't think France would nuke anyone under any circumstances.

They might nuke themselves in a preemptive attack

Bleedinbluengold wrote:
Grizlaw wrote:
I thought Chirac's speech was interesting. I can't help wondering, though, what his response would have been if Bush had explicitly threatened a nuclear response to 9/11 -- I can't help thinking that France would have condemned such a threat coming from the U.S.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2006_pg4_4


Must have taken his viagra pill before that speech...big talk, for traditionally soft Nation. I don't think France would nuke anyone under any circumstances.

They might nuke themselves in a preemptive attack

This is from the Robin Williams Live on Broadway Special. (It's absolutely hilarious if you haven't seen it, but it's not for the little ones.) You have to read it with a French accent to get the humor.

Ze French have ze bomb. But where do zey test it? In ze desert? No, in paradise. Why? Because we are French. (smoke cigarette here) I'm a badass, am I not?

I don't think the French would drop the bomb, but they have them and Monsieur Chirac, le président de la République Française, wants the world to know that they have the bomb and if Iran really did threaten France directly, they might use it.

Did you know that the French are changing their national flag?

The new one will be solid white in color.

On another humorous point about France, the flag of France was completely white before the French Revolution. It was the flag of the Bourbon dynasty. Strangely enough, it would fit again at some point...

"Cheese eating surrender monkeys."

Homer Simpson

I love the Miller Lite commercial, something along the lines of "you've got to wonder about a country that you have to bail out of two consecutive world wars. But then, they gave us Mayo. Way to go Frenchie!!!" I didn't see it more than a few times.....

But, I digress.

I think if we'd have threatened nuclear retaliation, our "cowboy" would have never heard the end of it. We are not allowed, as Americans, to say things that other countried not only think, but say.

Of course, when France says something like that, the rest of the world is bound to sit up and take notice, and their words might lead to results. They don't have a recent history of being illogically aggressive, so they have some crediblity.

If we were to say something like that, given the fact that we have recently invaded a country based on what the rest of the world percieves to be bad or dishonest information, our threats would be taken differently. It would be "here we go again," and a rolling of eyes.

So yes, we are now in a position where our words are limited because we have lost a lot of credibility for applying the correct level of force with the appropriate level of threats in the past. Nothing would surprise people anymore. At the same time, nobody is going to take even the slightest hint of military force from us lightly. It's the Nuke Lalouche (sp?) thing from Bull Durham. If we throw a pitch at the mascot, every country in the world will fear that the next one is coming at their head.