French Presidential Elections 2012 [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

French Presidential Elections 2012

Echoes
02-06-2012, 07:39 PM
2.5 months to go before the first round ...


As intro, I'd like to quote one of the greatest French historians and demographer, Emmanuel Todd:


"If common Euro tariffs are not possible, then the best solution would be to get out of the Euro. And hence, the tragedy is that among the 'big' candidates, Marine Le Pen would be the only one to propose a viable economic programme." :D


There Will Be Blood ! :angel:


Discuss

Jimnik
02-06-2012, 08:09 PM
I doubt any candidate will exit the euro, except the extreme right.

Socialists will win unfortunately.

Stensland
02-06-2012, 09:12 PM
if the socialist party wins, the euro is doomed. hollande is not gonna put up with the kind of steps merkel is trying to implement. actually i doubt he'd even come close to implementing any austerity rules for his own country (which desperately needs them).

hollande will piss off merkel, merkel will retaliate by cutting agricultural subsidies. hollande will form a coalition to block germanic (ger+ned+fin+aus+slo+baltics) economic policies, the euro will cease to exist.

so yeah, in a nutshell, bring on hollande! :)

Har-Tru
02-06-2012, 09:20 PM
Come up with a new name Rainer, more than half of those countries are not Germanic. :lol:

I hope Hollande wins for a variety of reasons, but I'm skeptic. I don't think he's charismatic enough.

Stensland
02-06-2012, 09:26 PM
okay, call it "nordic" then. you get my point.

Har-Tru
02-06-2012, 09:50 PM
okay, call it "nordic" then. you get my point.

Why not call it "coalition of governments from responsible countries that know the meaning of the word accountability"?

I'm allowed to say that you see. :D

Stensland
02-06-2012, 10:06 PM
yeah to some extent you're better off than me, wording-wise. ;)

but anyways, like i said, i don't believe the southern european countries' lack of accountability, if you will, is what got them into the current mess. artificially low interest rates did. with the economic history of fringe countries like greece or portugal in mind, why did ANYONE believe they would all of a sudden come to their "northern european" senses? they've never acted responsibly, from a german or dutch point of view. from their own point of view, they always have - as the possibility of a self-inflicted develuation had been obvious the back-up plan. it's been a political move since ages, widely respected even among economists.

well, within the emu, that major remedy is gone for good. so i guess in the end the demise of that terrible straitjacket has virtually no downside, for no country, no part of the continent, apart from maybe a short-term liquidity crisis.

Har-Tru
02-06-2012, 10:16 PM
yeah to some extent you're better off than me, wording-wise. ;)

but anyways, like i said, i don't believe the southern european countries' lack of accountability, if you will, is what got them into the current mess. artificially low interest rates did. with the economic history of fringe countries like greece or portugal in mind, why did ANYONE believe they would all of a sudden come to their "northern european" senses? they've never acted responsible, from a german or dutch point of view. from their own point of view, they always have - as the possibility of a self-inflicted develuation had been obvious the back-up plan. it's been a political move since ages, widely respected even among economists.

well, within the emu, that major remedy is gone for good. so i guess in the end the demise of that terrible straitjacket has virtually no downside, for no country, no part of the continent, apart from maybe a short-term liquidity crisis.

The fact that southern european countries have been switching on the print-a-thon every time they've found themselves unable to pay their debts does not mean it is the best way to go. The northern european way is better. Analysis, hindsight, austerity, competitiveness. The first three are structural, and the last one is dependent on them.

The emu was, from the get go, a challenge to the southern economies: either you wake the fuck up, or you're not going to be able to keep up. I fear they might have realised too late. Some might say things couldn't have gone any other way, that cultural values are too deeply ingrained and that that's the way it has to be. But look at countries like Slovakia, or Estonia. They have managed to hold their own precisely by implementing strict austerity policies and being smart in their decision making.

Stensland
02-06-2012, 10:49 PM
weren't countries like spain or portugal catching up big time in the 90s - without the euro? i don't know how greece or italy were doing but i guess the picture wasn't any different. the south used to come to terms with their structural currency woes over centuries, why not keep it that way?

Har-Tru
02-06-2012, 11:24 PM
weren't countries like spain or portugal catching up big time in the 90s - without the euro? i don't know how greece or italy were doing but i guess the picture wasn't any different. the south used to come to terms with their structural currency woes over centuries, why not keep it that way?

Spain had 24% unemployment in 1995 (even higher than now!). There might have been some comparative progress, but the gap was always there. And the gap is conspicuous and significant, too significant to be ignored or to accept it as the satisfying status quo.

Stensland
02-06-2012, 11:38 PM
still, you're not gonna get that kind of economic revolution by force. it's just not going to happen, that much is clear as of now.

and back on topic, france, under socialist rule, will definitely veto any pro-austerity legislation that comes out of brussels and directly impacts sovereign policy-making. for some reason sarkozy (i mean the real sarkozy) is laying low for the time being, but chances are holland will not go down without a hell of a fight. anyone can rile up the greeks, the italians and the spanish in the current political climate, basically merkel has been the odd man out since 08.

and then what? there's just no way the euro can survive such a perfect storm. neither merkel and her silent supporters up north nor the southern fringe is gonna step back.

Gagsquet
02-07-2012, 12:32 AM
Weakest field of all time. New low for French politics. White vote is the right vote.

Jimnik
02-07-2012, 04:03 AM
It seems like a weak field because Sarkozy has been acting like a socialist. So now the socialists don't know how to oppose him. They probably agreed with most of the decisions he made.

Har-Tru
02-07-2012, 08:51 AM
still, you're not gonna get that kind of economic revolution by force. it's just not going to happen, that much is clear as of now.

Certainly. That's why I want the Euro and the EU as it is to end.

and back on topic, france, under socialist rule, will definitely veto any pro-austerity legislation that comes out of brussels and directly impacts sovereign policy-making. for some reason sarkozy (i mean the real sarkozy) is laying low for the time being, but chances are holland will not go down without a hell of a fight. anyone can rile up the greeks, the italians and the spanish in the current political climate, basically merkel has been the odd man out since 08.

I'm not so sure Hollande will put up such a fight... something tells me he'll cooperate.

and then what? there's just no way the euro can survive such a perfect storm. neither merkel and her silent supporters up north nor the southern fringe is gonna step back.[/QUOTE]

It seems like a weak field because Sarkozy has been acting like a socialist. So now the socialists don't know how to oppose him. They probably agreed with most of the decisions he made.

This is true. And I suspect it wasn't an unconscious move by Sarkozy.

Stensland
02-07-2012, 01:05 PM
Certainly. That's why I want the Euro and the EU as it is to end.

you want the european union to end as well? :eek:

to me, that's probably the best cooperation agreement europe has come up with ever. the euro sux and is gonna keep dividing nations, but the union used to work properly over the last decades. you might wanna mix it up a bit, swoop in and reform a few programs or policies, but still, i'm very much in favor of the union.

Har-Tru
02-07-2012, 01:38 PM
you want the european union to end as well? :eek:

to me, that's probably the best cooperation agreement europe has come up with ever. the euro sux and is gonna keep dividing nations, but the union used to work properly over the last decades. you might wanna mix it up a bit, swoop in and reform a few programs or policies, but still, i'm very much in favor of the union.

I wholeheartedly agree, that's why I said the EU as it is. :cool:

The freedom of trade and movement the EU has implemented is the cornerstone on which Europe has the potential to unite and progress.

But, as I said in other threads, I believe the whole problem about the European project is that it has largely been done top-down, instead of bottom-up. That is why the whole EU bureaucracy has to be thrown into the bin. The EU needs structural reforms, and it needs them now.

Stensland
02-07-2012, 02:34 PM
like what? the dissolution of the parliament in its current form? at least that's what i understood from your posts in other threads ("bureaucracy" etc.). what kind of bottom-up approach could be viable in reality? there's just no way around somebody being in the upper echelon trying to organise the huge bunch of different mentalities that is europe.

i think reforming actual policies should be the top priority.

Har-Tru
02-07-2012, 05:00 PM
like what? the dissolution of the parliament in its current form? at least that's what i understood from your posts in other threads ("bureaucracy" etc.). what kind of bottom-up approach could be viable in reality? there's just no way around somebody being in the upper echelon trying to organise the huge bunch of different mentalities that is europe.

i think reforming actual policies should be the top priority.

The whole representative system needs to be torn down and built again from scratch.

Begin by creating single lists for the European Parliament for the whole EU, instead of the current system, where every country votes for their national lists from their national parties, which then get together with affine parties from other countries and form a parliamentary group. Create common European parties/lists and common European candidates.

Make the EU Commission, or however we'd like to call the reformed executive branch, directly elected. This of course problematic, since dual elections are typical of presidentialist or semi-presidentialist systems and the most common system in Europe is the parliamentary one. If my first suggestion is fully undertaken, we can let this one go.

The European citizens cannot feel attached to nor feel they are accountable for the decisions made in Europe and Strasbourg if they don't feel like they have elected the people who are supposed to represent them.

In short, make the EU a European Union with a European agenda, not a gathering of national sides with national agendas playing give and take.

Echoes
02-07-2012, 06:22 PM
I doubt any candidate will exit the euro, except the extreme right.

Socialists will win unfortunately.

My prediction is that "extreme right" candidate Marine Le Pen will make it to the second round but then the theatrical "Fascist" thread will make her opponent (whoever it'll be) win.

I even doubt either Hollande or Sarkozy will make it to the second round. There's a great political despair in the French population.

But I agree the next President won't exit the euro and that's their tragedy. Once Greece and Portugal had exited it, euro'll be far too high for the French and that will be a disaster.


Actually the French don't just need to exit the Euro but also the EU. Every decision they have to make goes against the Maastricht Treaty and the EU general rules. Concerning their public services, their agriculture, their industry, their foreign policy, their immigration policy, etc. But no candidate suggests that, except very unknown ones.

That's the Gaullist in me speaking. :angel:

Gagsquet
02-07-2012, 06:32 PM
People advocating the exit of the euro (for France) are not serious and even quite dangerous. Backlashes of this decision would be terrible for France.

Black Adam
02-07-2012, 08:57 PM
Won't be shocked to see LePen in second round, some of her positions are appealing to folks who have had enough.


I wonder if Villepin will get his revenge on Sarko and run for the top job.

Jimnik
02-08-2012, 06:23 PM
The whole representative system needs to be torn down and built again from scratch.

Begin by creating single lists for the European Parliament for the whole EU, instead of the current system, where every country votes for their national lists from their national parties, which then get together with affine parties from other countries and form a parliamentary group. Create common European parties/lists and common European candidates.

Make the EU Commission, or however we'd like to call the reformed executive branch, directly elected. This of course problematic, since dual elections are typical of presidentialist or semi-presidentialist systems and the most common system in Europe is the parliamentary one. If my first suggestion is fully undertaken, we can let this one go.

The European citizens cannot feel attached to nor feel they are accountable for the decisions made in Europe and Strasbourg if they don't feel like they have elected the people who are supposed to represent them.

In short, make the EU a European Union with a European agenda, not a gathering of national sides with national agendas playing give and take.
The EU's biggest flaw is the lack of accountability. The unelected European commission has more power than the elected European Parliament. The easiest solution would be to transfer power from the commission to the parliament so voters can be held responsible for their choices.

Regarding common European parties, they do exist but nobody votes for them. People will always prioritize their family and local surroundings over the common good. There's a reason even national elections consist of many local parties.

In any case, the point of the EU should be free trade and dialogue between neigbouring states, not the creation of a Federal Europe.

Echoes
02-08-2012, 07:15 PM
People advocating the exit of the euro (for France) are not serious and even quite dangerous. Backlashes of this decision would be terrible for France.

Euro is dead anyway. Apparently Germany's reprinting marks. They might be the first to exit.

And the situation now is not terrible? 400 suicide a year among farmers, isn't that terrible?




I wonder if Villepin will get his revenge on Sarko and run for the top job.

He will. 1% according to the latest polls.


The EU's biggest flaw is the lack of accountability. The unelected European commission has more power than the elected European Parliament. The easiest solution would be to transfer power from the commission to the parliament so voters can be held responsible for their choices.

Euro MP's voted the "Six-Pack" last September, which means they agreed about sanctioning (0.1% of GDP, which means 2 billion € for France) a member state of the Euro zone that does not implement the measures that had been recommended by the Commission.

They're disqualified !

Har-Tru
02-08-2012, 08:08 PM
I think this is the right place to talk about this.

The French Minister of the Interior telling it like it is. :worship:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/not-civilisations-equal-french-minister-says-024343461.html

Not all civilisations equal, French minister says

abraxas21
02-09-2012, 01:26 AM
I think this is the right place to talk about this.

The French Minister of the Interior telling it like it is. :worship:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/not-civilisations-equal-french-minister-says-024343461.html

indeed. the type of speech that only idiots, racists or hypocrites could love

Har-Tru
02-09-2012, 05:34 PM
indeed. the type of speech that only idiots, racists or hypocrites could love

Ever so classy.

Monsieur Gueant is not only right, he is obviously right.

Using the example we all have in mind, it is obviously right that the Western civilisation is better than the Muslim one. Not just different, better. Obviously. One need only take the Declaration of Human Rights and do a double-check on all basic rights and freedoms, comparing, since we're at it, France and Saudi Arabia: freedom of speech, freedom of thought and opinion, freedom of religion, freedom of press, democracy and political freedom, equality of all regardless of gender (that's half the human species right there) or sexual orientation. Sexual freedom, rights of minorities, freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, right to have an attorney and a fair trial, abortion rights, right to health care...

Do I need to finish my point? Truth should never be held hostage by modern political correctness or by fear of being labeled racist, or xenophobic, or fascist, or anything else. The truth (the obvious truth) is that civilisations, cultures and societies are not only different, sometimes they are better or worse than others. And if we want to make something to improve the standards of living of human beings we'd be best advised to acknowledge the truth as soon as possible, instead of masking it.

Gagsquet
02-09-2012, 05:55 PM
You are confusing cultures and civilizations Har-Tru. Same error than Guéant did. Some cultures are better than others. Civilizations are different but none is better than an other.

Har-Tru
02-09-2012, 06:03 PM
You are confusing cultures and civilizations Har-Tru. Same error than Guéant did. Some cultures are better than others. Civilizations are different but none is better than an other.

Define civilisation and culture and I have a feeling we'll be holding the same view.

There is a reason why I narrowed down the comparison to two concrete societies.

Stensland
02-09-2012, 06:20 PM
culture is when i chop your head off and turn your skull into a beautiful vase. civilisation is when i go to jail for it.

Gagsquet
02-09-2012, 06:22 PM
Culture is a part of the civilization. People, the whole society, the history is part of the civilization. We can't say that a civilization is better than an other one. Culture is a set of values ​​and beliefs of behaviors that define of a society in a specific moment.

LawrenceOfTennis
02-09-2012, 06:24 PM
Allez Sarkozy. Great sense for politics, for foreign policy as well.

Har-Tru
02-09-2012, 06:26 PM
Culture is a part of the civilization. People, the whole society, the history is part of the civilization. We can't say that a civilization is better than an other one. Culture is a set of values ​​and beliefs of behaviors that define of a society in a specific moment.

Yes, you're using civilisation in the older sense of the word. I'm using it in the sense the Oxford Dictionary of English defines as follows:

the society, culture, and way of life of a particular area

LawrenceOfTennis
02-09-2012, 06:26 PM
It seems like a weak field because Sarkozy has been acting like a socialist. So now the socialists don't know how to oppose him. They probably agreed with most of the decisions he made.

Disagree. Sarkozy has always had is own approach to certain things and policies, but calling it a socialist way is not right in my opinion. We can very well call it a good tactical move though.

Har-Tru
02-09-2012, 06:27 PM
culture is when i chop your head off and turn your skull into a beautiful vase. civilisation is when i go to jail for it.

And that's the third sense of the word. :D

Echoes
02-09-2012, 11:09 PM
Great sense for politics, for foreign policy as well.

I don't think it can be said about you, though.

fast_clay
02-10-2012, 12:48 AM
australian system isn't bad, have had independent's swinging votes for power and not only bargaining good deals for their own electorate but also making sure money spent meant every other person enjoyed the same privilege as the best electorate...

abraxas21
02-10-2012, 01:48 AM
Ever so classy.

Monsieur Gueant is not only right, he is obviously right.

Using the example we all have in mind, it is obviously right that the Western civilisation is better than the Muslim one. Not just different, better. Obviously. One need only take the Declaration of Human Rights and do a double-check on all basic rights and freedoms, comparing, since we're at it, France and Saudi Arabia: freedom of speech, freedom of thought and opinion, freedom of religion, freedom of press, democracy and political freedom, equality of all regardless of gender (that's half the human species right there) or sexual orientation. Sexual freedom, rights of minorities, freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, right to have an attorney and a fair trial, abortion rights, right to health care...

all subjective

you're so soaked up in your own bubble that you are unable to realize that people think differently. consider these points for starters:

1- as much as it might surprise you, not all people prefer the western way of life.

2- democracy, freedom of thought (whatever that means), speech and religion aren't truly that free in all countries. it just happens that some are more hipocritical than others. isn't it ilegal in tolerant france to wear burqhas? isn't bradley manning imprisoned with no prospect of release in the free USA just for divulging dirty gvt. information? didn't free spain condemned arnaldo otegi to 1 year of prison for criticizing the king?

3- what boogles my mind the most is the fact that rich western countries have consistently sacked up poor nations in order to build their own wealth. then hey have the audacity to presume it and what they think is their superior civilization in the faces of the ones they've coerced. it's ridiculous.

if anything, france should be apologizing for their colonial past and present instead of boasting about miscalled principles.

Har-Tru
02-10-2012, 03:24 PM
all subjective

[QUOTE]you're so soaked up in your own bubble that you are unable to realize that people think differently. consider these points for starters:

1- as much as it might surprise you, not all people prefer the western way of life.

2- democracy, freedom of thought (whatever that means), speech and religion aren't truly that free in all countries. it just happens that some are more hipocritical than others. isn't it ilegal in tolerant france to wear burqhas? isn't bradley manning imprisoned with no prospect of release in the free USA just for divulging dirty gvt. information? didn't free spain condemned arnaldo otegi to 1 year of prison for criticizing the king?

3- what boogles my mind the most is the fact that rich western countries have consistently sacked up poor nations in order to build their own wealth. then hey have the audacity to presume it and what they think is their superior civilization in the faces of the ones they've coerced. it's ridiculous.

if anything, france should be apologizing for their colonial past and present instead of boasting about miscalled principles.

I should have stopped reading right there.

Yes, those rights are at times violated in Western countries. Does that mean they are not overall overwhelmingly more respected in them than in Saudi Arabia? Can you possibly be this blind??

abraxas21
02-12-2012, 03:17 AM
[QUOTE=abraxas21;11726662]all subjective



I should have stopped reading right there.

Yes, those rights are at times violated in Western countries. Does that mean they are not overall overwhelmingly more respected in them than in Saudi Arabia?

and when did i ever say that?

furthermore, not only you've wrongly interpreted one of my points, you completely ignored the other 2.


Can you possibly be this blind??

any mirrors in your house?

buddyholly
02-12-2012, 04:45 AM
[QUOTE=Har-Tru;11727702]

and when did i ever say that?








No you never mentioned it by name. But your post implied that western civilisation (culture, whatever) is inferior to other civilizations. And then when someone mentions another civilization you scream, ''not that one, I never said that one, you misinterpreted my post, blah, blah, blah''.

So, man up, give examples.

Manning voluntarily joined the military. He then committed treason. And you will use that as an example to show how hypocritical the US is compared to Saudi Arabia that hunts down and probably kills, people who express their personal thoughts about religion? Or how hypocritical the US is compared to Iran that executes gays? Oh wait, you didn't actually say Saudi Arabia or Iran....... As a matter of fact you didn't give any examples at all.

buddyholly
02-12-2012, 05:01 AM
any mirrors in your house?

Are you seriously asking someone to look in a mirror to see how blind he is?

buddyholly
02-12-2012, 05:25 AM
indeed. the type of speech that only idiots, racists or hypocrites could love

This is the type of speech that only leftists believe constitutes a valid argument. To wit, when somebody says something you don't like, just call them names and and at all costs ignore what they actually said. Just like lawyers in court should never ask a question they don't already have the answer to, leftists should never actually address someone's actual statement.

Har-Tru
02-12-2012, 09:50 AM
and when did i ever say that?

furthermore, not only you've wrongly interpreted one of my points, you completely ignored the other 2.

Ah the good old "oh but I didn't mean it that way, you're completely misinterpreting me..." mumbo jumbo. By all means be clear about what you actually meant, then.

I should think your other two points answer themselves, but oh well... You say not everyone prefers the Western way of life. Does that mean it isn't better? Who are you referring to anyway? The millions of people who leave everything behind in their home countries and travel for hundreds and thousands of miles in search for a better future in Western nations? The people back in those countries, who tend to gradually adopt Western technology, science and even political systems? Or, going back to my example, do you mean the people back in Saudi Arabia, the brilliantly educated, properly informed and not at all religiously indoctrinated citizens of Mecca, Jeddah, etc.?

You also mention the Western nations' colonial past, certainly reprehensible in many of his forms and methods. But again, you deviate from our original example. How is the West to blame for Saudi Arabia's disregard for freedom and human rights? Exactly when was that country colonised by France, or indeed any Western nation?

Go find other excuses.

any mirrors in your house?

Nice fail. :lol:

ssin
02-12-2012, 10:47 AM
In a broader view , (I am rarely into daily political life anywhere in the world) if we look at the list of the 5th Republic presidents we can conclude 2 things:
Historically, the French favor someone from the right as President, some sort of a character, a statesman, a leader. Even if coming from the left such as Mitterand. Second thing, such leaders are no more it seems. Or I am the only one to see the interesting tendency with each successive French president:

Charles de Gaulle
Georges Pompidou
Giscard d'Estaing
François Mitterrand
Jacques Chirac
Nicolas Sarkozy

We stopped living in a world of heroes, honor and sacrifice a long time ago. We live in a world of celebrities and media induced paranoia. I am not saying it's bad, even if I might not like it, it's just the way it is. And there is a creeping fear of "them", strangers coming from other countries that cannot be trusted and must be contained somehow. Mix all that, and you know why Le Pen was relatively successful, it took moderate left and right to join forces when Chirac was elected. In the long run, like it or not, the historically important position of president in France will lose potency and relevance, whoever wins. And Sarkozy has had a major role in the process, imo. President from the left is more probable now than ever, not even digging scandals about the opponents will help.

Echoes
02-13-2012, 05:22 PM
The difference between General de Gaulle and his successors is that he had a great sense for patriotism in the economic, the military and the political domain.

Of course, what he did in Algeria was ugly but he knew what the Independance of his country meant. Independance from the Nazis, from the Allied, from the EEC (ex EU), from bankers, from NATO, etc.

His speeches gathered hundreds of thousands of people (Phnom Penh Speech). He put Quebec on the map, in less than 24 hours.

Had he but not negotiated with the FLN and abandoned the Harkis, he could be in contention for greatest statesman of all time. I still have great admiration for him though.


How on earth can Sarkozy be compared to him? The guy who made up a Treaty that his own people rejected two years before ?? The guy who got back to military commannd while De Gaulle had so much trouble getting out of ?? The guy responsible for the death of 82 French soldiers in Afghanistan while Villepin was preparing their return. The guy who signed an agreement with the Brits for military nuke !

He should've long been removed !

ssin
02-13-2012, 06:23 PM
Echoes, are you French, are you going to vote? we are anonymous here, so no reason not to talk about such things openly. But sorry if I'm too curious.

You are right, but it's all about change. It's not Sarkozy's fault (quite a character isn't he, taken straight from a comic book) that times have changed drastically, so much that de Gaulle and Sarkozy seem to come from different planets, and yet both of them are presidents of one country, within one lifetime. Truly amazing, can it be right? No more heroes and there is hardly anything worth of sacrifice (if there ever was such a thing). So much soldier cemeteries and monuments.. for what... I don't know who was/is right, just saying what I see, trying to make something out of it.

Jimnik
02-13-2012, 06:23 PM
The difference between General de Gaulle and his successors is that he had a great sense for patriotism in the economic, the military and the political domain.

Of course, what he did in Algeria was ugly but he knew what the Independance of his country meant. Independance from the Nazis, from the Allied, from the EEC (ex EU), from bankers, from NATO, etc.

His speeches gathered hundreds of thousands of people (Phnom Penh Speech). He put Quebec on the map, in less than 24 hours.

Had he but not negotiated with the FLN and abandoned the Harkis, he could be in contention for greatest statesman of all time. I still have great admiration for him though.


How on earth can Sarkozy be compared to him? The guy who made up a Treaty that his own people rejected two years before ?? The guy who got back to military commannd while De Gaulle had so much trouble getting out of ?? The guy responsible for the death of 82 French soldiers in Afghanistan while Villepin was preparing their return. The guy who signed an agreement with the Brits for military nuke !

He should've long been removed !
CdG deserves credit for the role he played freeing France in WW2, certainly a great patriot. But unfortunately, much of this attitude spread into the peace time where it didn't belong. He became a little paranoid of foreign influence in France, trying to snub both America and the Soviets. But it's understandable growing up with Americans, British and Germans fighting each other in your own backyard. It simply needs to be kept in context.

Obviously Sarkozy didn't have to lead France out of a German occupation so the situations are totally incomparable. Peace-time leadership doesn't test strength of character in the same way as war leadership. In Britain you have to go back to Churchill to find a leader everyone respected. No-one ever gives credit to peace-time leaders.

Echoes
02-13-2012, 07:38 PM
Echoes, are you French, are you going to vote? we are anonymous here, so no reason not to talk about such things openly. But sorry if I'm too curious.

I'm not French. I'm a Belgian but French-speaking, so I'm quite interested and informed about French politics. I don't think I would vote if I were French (perhaps for Dupont-Aignan if he gets the 500 signatures, and yet). I don't vote in my country.


You are right, but it's all about change. It's not Sarkozy's fault (quite a character isn't he, taken straight from a comic book) that times have changed drastically, so much that de Gaulle and Sarkozy seem to come from different planets, and yet both of them are presidents of one country, [I]within one lifetime. Truly amazing, can it be right? No more heroes and there is hardly anything worth of sacrifice (if there ever was such a thing). [B]So much soldier cemeteries and monuments.. for what... I don't know who was/is right, just saying what I see, trying to make something out of it.

De Gaulle was President in peace time: 1958-1969 (Only had to deal with the Algerian War and I'm the first to say he did bad things there).

Soldiers fought WWII for Independance and Freedoms. The Conseil national de la Résistance had a great political programme. But France is no longer independant and no longer free (EU, NATO). Though it's not Greece yet but is bound to be.

CdG deserves credit for the role he played freeing France in WW2, certainly a great patriot. But unfortunately, much of this attitude spread into the peace time where it didn't belong. He became a little paranoid of foreign influence in France, trying to snub both America and the Soviets. But it's understandable growing up with Americans, British and Germans fighting each other in your own backyard. It simply needs to be kept in context.

Obviously Sarkozy didn't have to lead France out of a German occupation so the situations are totally incomparable. Peace-time leadership doesn't test strength of character in the same way as war leadership. In Britain you have to go back to Churchill to find a leader everyone respected. No-one ever gives credit to peace-time leaders.

Sarkozy had to lead France out of EU occupation, which he didn't do, quite on the contrary. He's a Vichyst/collaborationist.

De Gaulle knew all too well that the US financed the project of a supranational Europe (he constantly talked about the external federator), which is now imposing its views on each member state against their own free will. He was right to get out of Nato internal command. He remained in the alliance only because of the Cold War context. He thought France should completely get out of it when Warzaw Pact disappeared. Of course his successors didn't do that at all. Quite on the contrary they want a CSDP, subordinated to NATO. Had the CSDP existed in 2003, I would have countrymen in the Iraqi mudbath !!



Peace time conflicts ARE the same as war time conflicts.

Gagsquet
02-13-2012, 07:41 PM
(perhaps for Dupont-Aignan if he gets the 500 signatures)

:haha:

This guy is a living joke, you can't be serious.

Echoes
02-13-2012, 07:50 PM
For want of a better candidate, of course. Asselineau won't get the 500.

But from a guy who fears backlashes of the exit of Euro, nothing serious can come out. :lol:

Gagsquet
02-13-2012, 08:08 PM
For want of a better candidate, of course. Asselineau won't get the 500.

But from a guy who fears backlashes of the exit of Euro, nothing serious can come out. :lol:

:confused: Are you so disconnected from the reality for believing that the exit of the euro would be a good thing? Exiting the eurozone would increase considerably the cost of our debt, and would lead to a competitive devaluation war in Europe. Give up euro is plain nonsense.
And don't act like if you were in the majority about this subject because you're in the minority.

ssin
02-13-2012, 09:28 PM
I'm not French. I'm a Belgian but French-speaking, so I'm quite interested and informed about French politics. I don't think I would vote if I were French (perhaps for Dupont-Aignan if he gets the 500 signatures, and yet). I don't vote in my country.

OK, thanks. I was in Brussels 2 weeks ago, btw. Went to Delirium club mostly, drinking Belgian beer, what else, like any other visitor, total cliche, but it was enjoyable and successful visit ;) Shame I don't speak French at all.

@Grassquet, are you going to vote?

Jimnik
02-14-2012, 12:09 AM
Sarkozy had to lead France out of EU occupation, which he didn't do, quite on the contrary. He's a Vichyst/collaborationist.

De Gaulle knew all too well that the US financed the project of a supranational Europe (he constantly talked about the external federator), which is now imposing its views on each member state against their own free will. He was right to get out of Nato internal command. He remained in the alliance only because of the Cold War context. He thought France should completely get out of it when Warzaw Pact disappeared. Of course his successors didn't do that at all. Quite on the contrary they want a CSDP, subordinated to NATO. Had the CSDP existed in 2003, I would have countrymen in the Iraqi mudbath !!


Peace time conflicts ARE the same as war time conflicts.
Are you seriously comparing Nazi occupation to so-called "EU occupation"? I thought you were one of the more sane people on here.

CdG's fight for nuclear independence and rejection of NATO was purely a matter of national pride. From an economic and defensive standpoint it made little sense. The US drove Germans out of France and funded much of France's post war infrastructure. From a moral standpoint it made even less sense.

Gagsquet
02-14-2012, 11:16 AM
@Grassquet, are you going to vote?

Yes

Echoes
02-14-2012, 05:30 PM
:confused: Are you so disconnected from the reality for believing that the exit of the euro would be a good thing? Exiting the eurozone would increase considerably the cost of our debt, and would lead to a competitive devaluation war in Europe. Give up euro is plain nonsense.

Are you so obtuse no to see that euro is the factor of debt increase and not the reverse. The devaluation for France would be reasonable. Euro was a catastrophic mistake. Plurinational currencies have never worked, in history. EU is also a big mistake. Why has EU never been a model for other parts of the World?

Exiting the euro, the EU and NATO is the only way out. Greece will get out, it's certain. Germany too, very likely. All France can do is anticipating.



And don't act like if you were in the majority about this subject because you're in the minority.

Could you remind me what the French and the Dutch voted for, in 2005? And the Irish in 2008?

Economists are on my side.

OK, thanks. I was in Brussels 2 weeks ago, btw. Went to Delirium club mostly, drinking Belgian beer, what else, like any other visitor, total cliche, but it was enjoyable and successful visit Shame I don't speak French at all.

Which is your favourite? I love Kasteel Red. ;)

Are you seriously comparing Nazi occupation to so-called "EU occupation"? I thought you were one of the more sane people on here.

Yes. If it doesn't sound too insane to you, I see supranationality in both cases, which IS a comparable aspect. There has always been Empires, throughout the European history. Hitler already referred to the "Historical year of the great grouping of Europe" (in 1941) You had that year a great exhibition in Paris called "La France européenne" (with the phrase 'Construction de l'Europe' - Europe Building, written on the folder) with the Nazi authorities and Vichy representatives. In this exhibition you had maps showing the broken up Europe of the past democracies and the new united Nazi Europe without borders, where we could have a big common market, etc.

History is only repeating itself.


CdG's fight for nuclear independence and rejection of NATO was purely a matter of national pride. From an economic and defensive standpoint it made little sense. The US drove Germans out of France and funded much of France's post war infrastructure. From a moral standpoint it made even less sense.

You realize that the nuclear independence that General de Gaulle gave France allowed for Villepin's speech at the UN and allowed France to stay out of the Iraqi disaster. Sarkozy would've sent troop to Iraq.

If we are to talk about WWII, then we've got to say everything. For example, that Roosevelt never wished to recognize De Gaulle and would rather negotiate with Darlan who had just refuelled the Afrikakorps and allowed the Luftwaffe to use airports in Syria. Roosevelt had great plans for Europe. He wanted to break my country up and instal a proconsular government in every occupied countries. De Gaulle prevented that.

But most of all, American oil and car industries were in bed with Hitler. It's, for example, now admitted that had Standard Oil not transferred hydrogenation patents and technology to IG Farben there would have been no war.

I think we have no moral debt towards the US. Also culturally, we paid the "debt" by diffusing American films in cinema 3 weeks a month (Blum-Byrnes Agreement).

Jimnik
02-15-2012, 01:01 AM
Yes. If it doesn't sound too insane to you, I see supranationality in both cases, which IS a comparable aspect. There has always been Empires, throughout the European history. Hitler already referred to the "Historical year of the great grouping of Europe" (in 1941) You had that year a great exhibition in Paris called "La France européenne" (with the phrase 'Construction de l'Europe' - Europe Building, written on the folder) with the Nazi authorities and Vichy representatives. In this exhibition you had maps showing the broken up Europe of the past democracies and the new united Nazi Europe without borders, where we could have a big common market, etc.

History is only repeating itself.
You remind me of certain nostalgic Germans who think Hitler's ideas were good in theory. I'm not even a fan of the EU; I think it's undemocratic, bureaucratic, inefficient and corrupt. But comparing it to a dictatorial regime brought on by force, ruled by terror, plagued with racism and human rights violations... It's not even worth a rational argument.


You realize that the nuclear independence that General de Gaulle gave France allowed for Villepin's speech at the UN and allowed France to stay out of the Iraqi disaster. Sarkozy would've sent troop to Iraq.

If we are to talk about WWII, then we've got to say everything. For example, that Roosevelt never wished to recognize De Gaulle and would rather negotiate with Darlan who had just refuelled the Afrikakorps and allowed the Luftwaffe to use airports in Syria. Roosevelt had great plans for Europe. He wanted to break my country up and instal a proconsular government in every occupied countries. De Gaulle prevented that.

But most of all, American oil and car industries were in bed with Hitler. It's, for example, now admitted that had Standard Oil not transferred hydrogenation patents and technology to IG Farben there would have been no war.

I think we have no moral debt towards the US. Also culturally, we paid the "debt" by diffusing American films in cinema 3 weeks a month (Blum-Byrnes Agreement).
You're so obsessed with France staying out of Iraq that you're ignoring the real benefits of nuclear independence. Western Europe has been at peace for the longest time in history thanks to deterrence. Now instead of fighting over petty arguments the continent has come together in economic union. Staying out of NATO conflicts in the middle-east is minor in comparison.

Roosevelt was not America. He was the most power hungry president the US had ever seen who wanted dictatorial control over his own country and possibly the entire world. The real American citizens risked their lives to support their European allies and then came home to pay heavy taxes to reconstruct Europe. Of course CdG and France were too proud to notice.

ssin
02-15-2012, 09:05 AM
Which is your favourite? I love Kasteel Red. ;)

I don't have a favorite Belgian beer yet, everything I tasted was great, my friends suggested Rochefort so I drank that, I tried also Delirium Tremens because I liked the name, and a few of others but I forgot the names :D there were dozens of them, difficult to choose, I would need a couple of moths to determine the winner :)


the topic: Roosevelt was a populist because of the difficult times and the global economic crisis, the same one that put Hitler in power. And the Americans wanted some figure that can rule and unite the nation that was disoriented during the economic turmoil lasted for more than a decade.

Truth to be told, without WW2 the US would not have the fantastic economic recovery they had. No nation in history had such spectacular economic growth as the US during the WW2. After the war the US was both economically recovered and a political giant. The US did help Europe to rebuild, but also placed a foot on it that will not disappear any time soon. There is no free lunch. And it's good because people in Europe showed many times that they cannot agree and then they start some shit. The Europeans themselves got exactly what they asked for, and it's up to them to see what they really want in the future.

Echoes
02-15-2012, 07:46 PM
You remind me of certain nostalgic Germans who think Hitler's ideas were good in theory. I'm not even a fan of the EU; I think it's undemocratic, bureaucratic, inefficient and corrupt. But comparing it to a dictatorial regime brought on by force, ruled by terror, plagued with racism and human rights violations... It's not even worth a rational argument.

This first sentence is outrageous. I can't even believe you said that! :eek:

All I was referring to is that the French (like every nation state of EU) have to fight for their independence against an external "federator" whose right has pre-eminence and which is as you say undemocratic.

EU is what I call an empire. I can compare it to the IIIrd Reich because it was also an empire. The French also have their share of Empire building (Buonaparte, colonization, Charles the Great, etc.). USSR also was an Empire. Rome was an empire. And so forth and so on.

All these empires have differences, doesn't change the fact that they were empires. I'll always side the nations against empires. So saying that I'm a Nazi while my reasoning just shows otherwise is really outrageous. Sad to read.


You're so obsessed with France staying out of Iraq that you're ignoring the real benefits of nuclear independence. Western Europe has been at peace for the longest time in history thanks to deterrence.

I'm not ignoring that. And this is however nice to read because it shows how wrong Euro-federalists are when they claim EEC/UE was the main factor of peace in Europe, while WWII ended in 1945 and EEC was created in 1957. M.A.D. is the reason for peace in Europe.



Roosevelt was not America. He was the most power hungry president the US had ever seen who wanted dictatorial control over his own country and possibly the entire world.

He could not control Wall Street, though. Even after Pearl Harbour, the likes of Sloan and Ford were still in bed with the Nazis.



The real American citizens risked their lives to support their European allies and then came home to pay heavy taxes to reconstruct Europe. Of course CdG and France were too proud to notice.

Myth building.

European countries had already been rebuilt by 1948. Economic growth started much earlier. Milton Friedman argued that the Marshall Plan did not help boosting Europe's economic growth but on the contrary slowed it down.

And De Gaulle's duty (like every statesman) was to serve France's and the French's interests, not American citizens' interests. And overall he did it quite well.

Jimnik
02-16-2012, 07:53 AM
First you say this:
This first sentence is outrageous. I can't even believe you said that! :eek:
Then this:
EU is what I call an empire. I can compare it to the IIIrd Reich because it was also an empire.
You're digging your own hole, mate.


All these empires have differences, doesn't change the fact that they were empires. I'll always side the nations against empires. So saying that I'm a Nazi while my reasoning just shows otherwise is really outrageous. Sad to read.
Comparing EU to the 3rd Reich is the only thing that's outrageous here.


He could not control Wall Street, though. Even after Pearl Harbour, the likes of Sloan and Ford were still in bed with the Nazis.
Right, Sloan and Ford sleeping with Hitler. You're gay porno image is interesting but if you can't stick to facts then you're just another member of the crazy MTF mob. Show me evidence that this was the case and then you can make lazy bullshit political statements like this.

Roosevelt would have certainly loved to control Wall Street, like everything else. The fact he didn't succeed is the greatest blessing.


Myth building.

European countries had already been rebuilt by 1948. Economic growth started much earlier. Milton Friedman argued that the Marshall Plan did not help boosting Europe's economic growth but on the contrary slowed it down.
Building myths of your own.

European countries weren't rebuilt until 1960. 1948-1960 France and Italy's economies doubled; Germany's tripled.


And De Gaulle's duty (like every statesman) was to serve France's and the French's interests, not American citizens' interests.
When did I say it wasn't? How does snubbing your allies serve your country?

Echoes
02-16-2012, 04:51 PM
You called me a Nazi (without any argument, by the way) and don't even seem to regret it.


Then the discussion is over. There's nothing to say after that ! It's called Godwin's Law.

Jimnik
02-16-2012, 06:11 PM
You called me a Nazi (without any argument, by the way) and don't even seem to regret it.
Here's an Echo for you Echoes:

You accused me of calling you a Nazi (without any argument, by the way) and don't even seem to regret it.

Echoes
02-19-2012, 06:21 PM
Cameron endorses Sarkozy.

Of course, a weak France under euro dictatorship is in his favour (he can devaluate the Pound and create jobs) + the joint nuclear programme which is a policy of renunciation.


This should be food for thought for French right-wingers. But they've become so anti-patriotic, they'll rather welcome this endorsement with open arms.

Echoes
03-07-2012, 06:11 PM
This clip shows that the EU believes in the clash of civilizations: http://www.24heures.ch/monde/europe/Un-clip-de-l-Union-europeenne-retire-pour-offense-raciste/story/13368560


Hence the comparison that I made above is legit. :p

duchuy89
05-08-2012, 02:45 AM
I love Francois Hollande!

Topspindoctor
05-08-2012, 02:48 AM
A Communist president surely bodes well for France... that was sarcasm by the way.

abraxas21
05-08-2012, 03:34 AM
topspindoctor once again showing his proud clown credentials. that wasn't sarcasm by the way

Topspindoctor
05-08-2012, 03:38 AM
topspindoctor once again showing his proud clown credentials. that wasn't sarcasm by the way

I actually couldn't care less for France and for the rest of Europe to be honest. They already ruined themselves with their immigration policies as far as I am concerned. I am just sitting here, laughing as they are ruined from paying the lazy and the worthless as the normal, hard working middle class gets taxed more and more with every passing day. It's not gonna last, by the way. Sooner or later the normal, hard working population will be fed up with that shit. And I shudder to imagine what will happen when it does.

abraxas21
05-08-2012, 03:40 AM
They already ruined themselves with their immigration policies as far as I am concerned.

please tell me more

Topspindoctor
05-08-2012, 03:48 AM
please tell me more

I am not sure what more I can tell you :shrug:

I think it's pretty obvious what I meant, even for a dullard like you, yes?

abraxas21
05-08-2012, 04:19 AM
I am not sure what more I can tell you :shrug:

I think it's pretty obvious what I meant, even for a dullard like you, yes?

well, it has always been fairly obvious you're a racist right wing who deep down is nostalgic about the white australia days...

my only question is: to what degree...

Topspindoctor
05-08-2012, 04:31 AM
well, it has always been fairly obvious you're a racist right wing who deep down is nostalgic about the white australia days...

my only question is: to what degree...

I am not racist in the least -- In fact I consider racism quite stupid, actually. I am more concerned about governments of various 1st world countries accepting trash into thier countries that is only interested in crime, loot, **** and sitting on the the wellfare provided by normal working middle class people like myself. Sorry if that offends your sensibilities :hug:

Governments will always try to tax those who work, because lazy bitches who sit on the couch and smoke pot --- you can't take anything from them. Always funny to see advanced countries, including Australia, trying to kill off the working middle class to cater to social garbage. I am not angry at this point. I am just laughing and waiting for the apocalypse brought about by failing democratic system catering to minorities.