Posted on 04/27/2008 2:00:26 AM PDT by Antonio C
You’re right — I haven’t disagreed with you. The way France withdrew from Algeria was stupid, and it resulted in rebellion amongst an entire branch of the Foreign Legion. And it has proven problematic ever since. De Gaulle was always an idiot.
> what’s being contemplated now with the illegals in the USA is the same kind of god awful fuzzing of nationalities which promises no end of trouble down the road.
Un-fuzzing the nationalities would be the first sensible step: Foreign Legion volunteers would have to become legally, temporarily landed during their term of service. If they finish their term of service and take out US Citizenship, fine: you’ve had three-to-five years to make good Americans out of them (this isn’t happening now). If they don’t take out their Citizenship, back to Mexico they go, family and all.
> the real issue is how do you make Mexico into a first class country. so they don’t need no stinkin americans.
NAFTA was intended to help do that, as I recall. It didn’t because the US Borders were too porous, and remain so. Why should Mexico invest in their social structures when it is easier to free-load of the US instead?
As matters stand right now, the US would probably be better off annexing Mexico outright: you already own all the problems and have none of their resources contributing toward solving them.
For some inexplicable reason, securing your borders does not seem politically appealing. Dunno why not, but it isn’t. So somehow you are stuck with a bunch of Mexicans who won’t go away...
Don’t they teach classical history at West Point and Annapolis? Rome was destroyed becuase of the Goth invasions, and the turning points were the crossing of the Danube and the decision to traine and hire Goths in the army.
“And there doesn’t seem to be much political will to get rid of them.”
That’s changing. Oklahoma just recently passed legislation that will pretty much drive out all the illegals; several other states are taking steps to follow Oklahoma’s example. What’s more, the American people themselves are more than fed up with the illegals, and we are seeing more and more backlashes. The illegals are set to piss us off even more on May 1, as they plan another nationwide march through our streets. They will not get a friendly reception. Far from it, in fact.
The Flying Tigers was a private military organization created by Claire Chennault. The Chinese government approached Chennault to train the Chinese Air Force and he contracted with China to utilize his Flying Tigers as a combat air group, under the ultimate command of the Chinese military. That fits the definition of a mercenary, and FDR’s going along with it doesn’t change that. In fact, the Flying Tigers generated some uncomfotable feelings among several American politicians, as they feared such a force would be seen as an American military unit, thus having the US seen as being a combatant in the Sino-Japanese War (remember, the Flying Tigers contracted with China several months before Pearl Harbor, though they flew their first publicized combat action shortly after Pearl Harbor).
> That fits the definition of a mercenary,
Actually, no it doesn’t. Not by the Laws of War, and not even by the laws that you Americans observe. In fact they prevented pilots who had fought as Mercenaries in the Spanish Civil War from joining the Flying Tigers, for that very reason.
They may have styled themselves as “mercenaries” but they were not. Remember, all of 47.2a thru 47.2e MUST APPLY if one is to be deemed a Mercenary by the Geneva Convention. And similar coverage is given (in a different manner) in American Law.
> The illegals are set to piss us off even more on May 1, as they plan another nationwide march through our streets. They will not get a friendly reception. Far from it, in fact.
I hope you are right: the illegal alien situation in the US is a very serious threat to your homeland security. I look forward to reading of an improved situation in three days time.
I make a prediction, tho’ — only a few Americans will pay any attention to the illegals marching. Their march will go virtually unopposed. That is what apathy does.
Maybe you better reread history —the Americans defeated the Vietcong and the N Vietnam Army decisively in every engagement
The war was lost in the WH and the MSM
Yeah right The French really did a job on Germany and the Brits invaded the continent right after they defeated the Japs in the pacific —I must have missed all that
Not to mention all the military equipment that Britain and Russia had to provide the USA with in WWII in addition to defeating the German UBoat threat that was bringing the USA to its knees by preventing all those supplies from reaching our shores
They really do teach history differently in the US. Here’s how the rest of the world learns it:
1) America lost the Vietnam war, by way of attrition.
2) America played hooky for the first half of WW-II. The Russian Winter halted Hitler’s advance in the East, and the Battle of Britain halted Hitler’s advance in the west. The Battle of the Atlantic was won by Sonar and Radar, and superior convoying strategies (all British innovations). Hitler was stopped in North Africa and Italy by the British and New Zealanders. The Eastern Front collapsed under the sheer weight of the Soviet advance. The Japanese advance to the South was stopped by Australian troops in New Guinea. The Japanese advance in the West was halted by the British and the Indians. America helped out at Normandie and in what remained of the European Theater, and did an admirable job fighting the Japanese.
Yup — it’s like I said. They really do teach History differently in the US. And when you stop and think about it, that may well account for why the rest of the world sometimes seems to be out-of-step with or “ungrateful” to the United States.
In this example, the rest of the world perceives that the US thinks it won WW-I and WW-II and saved the world all by itself, and the US perceives that the rest of the world isn’t particularly grateful for its late showing in both events, after the worst of the fighting was done. Whereas the truth probably rests somewhere in between.
And in the case of Vietnam, the US believes it actually won but was cheated out of victory by traitors within. And the rest of the world perceives that the US fared no better in Indochina than did the French, whom the US for some reason despises. The truth probably rests somewhere in between.
There, that’s the best I can do with reconciling the two viewpoints.
“...only a few Americans will pay any attention to the illegals marching. Their march will go virtually unopposed. That is what apathy does.”
No, that’s what working does. I don’t know many employers who would let American citizens skip work to go protest.
> No, that’s what working does. I don’t know many employers who would let American citizens skip work to go protest.
I guess your employers don’t give you annual leave, ay. Or time-in-lieu. Geez, that sucks. You need a Union.
I seem to recall that Romans recruited and trained some of the barbarians that eventually destroyed them...
This is NOT a good idea, except maybe if they do it French Foreign Legion style...
Here is an example of what I mean by loyalty to our servicemen from our leaders and government. This sort of thing should be a badge of shame:
Dad’s Video of Army Barracks Filth Gets Results
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2008483/posts
While liberals ignore this, they are apoplectic that their constituency might be limited to one vote per person because of the audacity of requiring voter identification.
“I guess your employers don’t give you annual leave, ay. Or time-in-lieu. Geez, that sucks. You need a Union.”
Of course we get time off, but it’s called vacation or PTO (Paid Time Off). But they’re not going to let their employees take off work for four hours to go raise a stink, unless the employee put in for the time off before hand, and takes the time off as a half day vacation. My point was that American employers are not going to allow their offices or shops to empty out for a few hours so their employees can go out to the street and yell at illegals.
> My point was that American employers are not going to allow their offices or shops to empty out for a few hours so their employees can go out to the street and yell at illegals.
Depending upon the cause, many of our employers would, and have. Like for example, when NZ won the Americas Cup, and then successfully defended it, business pretty much shut down because everyone was on Queens Street — including the business owners. Similarly, when the Springbok tour was being protested back in the 1980’s.
A couple hours off never hurt any business, so long as it isn’t often and the occasion is important enough. Businesses that don’t do that are apathetic.
And in lieu of that, if the cause is important enough to the individual, it is probably worth a half day’s leave. People who don’t do that either don’t have the leave entitlement, or the cause really isn’t important enough to them. Apathy again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.