Whats a "danish"? All's we've got are Roses of the Prophet Muhammad...

Come on, there are no receipts on biological weapons.

 

haha...SensesFail, I think you're missing one key thing in your original analysis.

The french were not ridiculed for not going to war with us. There were many countries that chose not to go to war, and didn't get nearly the same treatment, including countries that we bailed out previously (I mention this solely to stop the "but Americans think France owes them everything").

The reason the french were ridiculed was the way their populous reacted to the war. Rather than peaceful protests and dissent like in Germany, the french citizenry practically revolted. They spraypainted American GIs graves, broke headstones, threw rocks through storefronts and signs that referenced America, etc. The lack of respect for years of history was appalling.

 

Nothing new, here in Britain "German Biscuits" were renamed "Empire Biscuits" at the outbreak of the First World War.

 

We also renamed our royals

 

LOL true

 

During WW1, in many countries, saurkraut was renamed victory cabbage, and hamburgers were renamed Liberty Sadwiches.

Just another fact I found interesting

 

Turnabout = fair play.

((And by the way, I highly suggest The Bomb in my Garden, by Mahdi Obeidi. It's a great look into Saddam's nuclear program.))

 

Yes, but you have to consider that a large part of the French city populations are Middle-Eastern and Nothern African emigrants --all with a considerable grudge against the Western world and the US in particular, and very little sense of loyalty based on a World War that had little to do with them; if anything, they resented the colonials for living --and fighting out their battles-- in their country.

That is not to condone their actions, but the years of history you are expecting them to respect are totally different for them than they are for the indigenous French. After the French, Belgians and Dutch were freed from oppressive German occupation, they blithely went to their respective colonies to continue doing there what the Germans had done to them. Make no mistake: World War Two was a white man's fight.

 

In many ways the downfall of colonialisim as much as the cold war between the superpowers defined the post-war period. The best example of this is of course Vietnam. At the end of WW2 the Americans were seen as liberators, fighting along side the Vietnameese to oust the Japaneese. Once the war was over, the French moved right back in to take over the role of colonial power. At this time the French were of course being supplied, and indeed propped up, by the US. In fact, the Americans still in Indo-China at that time were warned by the Vietnameese insurgents to dress distinctively because they could not be told from French troops in US uniforms with US equipment driving US vehicles.

The leader of the Vietnameese nationlist movement was of course Ho Chi Minh, who identified himself as a communist. Why? Because when he began his careed in politics in Paris in 1918 the communists were the only ones interested in ending colonial exploitation. In 1946 Ho tried to work with the US forces to gain independence for Vietnam, and was told "We're with the French. Shut up and do what you're told". He then turned to the Russians (remember, the Chineese were still in the middle of a civil war of their own) who were at least conceptually supportive of the concept, but not really in the mood to wade into another way. The first decade of the fight for Vietnameese independence was basically a homegrown struggle without any real outside support. The rest, as they say is hostory.

That same story was repeated throughout Africa, especially in Algeria where many of the the French Muslims immigrated from. Their cultural history of the end of World War 2 is not one of liberation by the Americans, but one of the violent re-imposition of colonial rule.

Is it any wonder that they object to the US acting as an imperial power and creating a virtual colony in Iraq?

 

(tangent)

It was the Chinese. Japan had nothing to do with Vietnam. Also, when the war started, it was entirely a civil war between north and south Vietnamese. The Chinese (another Communist power) began to support the North Vietnamese, while the USA, following the "domino effect" doctrine (if one nation falls to Communism, it increases the odds of the next one falling to Communism, and etc), moved in to support the South Vietnamese.

(/tangent)

 

Incorrect, I'm afraid. In 1940 Japan occupied Vietnam in agreement with the French Vichy government, thus joining the Axis powers Germany and Italy, and used it as a base to launch attacks against the rest of Indochina and India. When the war ended, France attempted to re-establish control but failed, after they were defeated at Dien Bien Phu. The Geneva Accords subsequently divided the country into North Vietnam and South Vietnam, separated by a demilitarized zone.

During the Cold War, the North was supported by China and the Soviet Union while the South was supported by United States.

 

The Geneva accords also called for a vote by the South Vietnameese on reunification, but when it became appearent that the vast majority of South Vietnameese would vote to join an independent North rather than a US aligned South the US cancelled the elections.

You can see why so many nations question the US devotion to democracy.