Need an explanation

[Lazy-Hamish]

Can someone please explain to me why i constantly see on TV french and americans hating one another's countries, is it just because of Iraq? since france helped the US many times they even gave them a flipping big statue (i think) and aided you in some wars. Shouldn't both countries actually combine their hatred towards my country, the UK since that is who historically they were against often

[Salem1]

''Hating''? oh I get it, this is another one of those occassions when words are misused. It's just teasing I'd bet.

[Lazy-Hamish]

ok hating is a bit strong, it just seems to be that they now dislike each other, maybe thats a better word

[Farnan]

Its been that way since WWII. I hear some of it from WWII veterans. Its not a hate per say its mostly just banter and jokes than anything.

[hellheaven1987]

Well, the US-France relationship was going sour after Suez Crisis, when American government warned EU3 (France, Britain and Germany) did not try to do something crazy. It was after that French government lost their trust on US and tried to dependant more on themselves.

I have read that DeGaulle once ordered all Americans "left France" in 1960s, and was forced to abandon that plan when US government asked "do we have to take those American died on France during WWII??"

However after 70s French realized they could not stop USSR alone, so they somehow back to alliance again (like agree to adopt same type of ammo of NATO).

[UnitedIreland]

Actually on a political level, Franco-American relation are good and improving.

"Relations between France and the United States have become more friendly after the pro-American politician Nicolas Sarkozy was elected President of France in 2007.
In 2007, Sarkozy delivered a speech before the U.S. Congress which was a strong affirmation of French-American friendship. During his visit he met with President Bush as well as senators McCain and Obama. This visit took place before the two were voted as nominees. Both met with Sarkozy in Paris after securing their respective nominations in 2008; after receiving Obama in July, Sarkozy was quoted saying "Obama? C'est mon copain", which means "Obama? He's my buddy." Because of Obama's and Sarkozy's history, relations between the two countries are expected to improve further."

[Theseus1234]

Well, from a layman's (my) standpoint, it seems people make fun of the French for surrendering in every single war ever (except 2, according to this list) and the French probably make fun of Americans for being insensitive, ignorant pricks

[ThiudareiksGunthigg]

Well, from a layman's (my) standpoint, it seems people make fun of the French for surrendering in every single war ever (except 2, according to this list)

According to that very silly, biased joke list. A rather better analysis of French military successes and failures can be found here.

I've always thought that the french should perhaps not be grateful but at least keep in mind that the US saved their country not that long ago

A bit like the way you'd think Americans would at least keep in mind that it was French military might that helped the US come into being in the first place?

[Theseus1234]

According to that very silly, biased joke list. A rather better analysis of French military successes and failures can be found here.

Yeah but that ruins the joke! I know the French have done much in terms of war and fighting and whatnot, but I do occasionally drop a "France surrendering" joke here and there

[Comrade the Colonel]

According to that very silly, biased joke list. A rather better analysis of French military successes and failures can be found here.



A bit like the way you'd think Americans would at least keep in mind that it was French military might that helped the US come into being in the first place?

we Americans dont have an attitude towards the french. Its the other way around. I think they are just stuck up.

[Comrade the Colonel]

Shouldn't both countries actually combine their hatred towards my country, the UK since that is who historically they were against often

oh i wish...

just kiddin. Its quite funny how the USA and France were both against britain, but now we are all like best buds.

[CobraStallone]

I've always thought that the french should perhaps not be grateful but at least keep in mind that the US saved their country not that long ago

[Comrade the Colonel]

twice that is.

[Blarni]

I think it's a purely 'Anglo-Saxon' inheritance. The French were always the epitomy of everything foreign, effete, totalitarian and evil in the English mind from the medieval period onwards (an attitude returned in kind), and that attitude appeared to be well-planted in America and exacerbated by the French-Indian War. French soldiers in the American revolution were shocked by how much they were reviled by the colonials, to the point where French soldiers and sailors were mobbed and murdered, even though they were bailing them out. And that attitude has never fully faded away.

[BasileII]

In Canada, we have the same kind of stories about USA:


1775 (USA invade Lower Canada. Montreal surrender, Quebec repulse the Americans): Americans completely destroyed. They say it was the canadian winter, but in fact they were surrounded by our trained beavers and raccoons.

1812 (USA and British at war because British want some americans boys to do dirty job on their ships. Which dirty job? If you ever look an english woman, you know why British men are always on the seas...): USA invade Canada. This time, they have a new defense against beavers and winter: they're sending only fat men to fight, and train all their population for this purpose. Still, they are utterly beaten. Quebeckers burn and pee on the ashes of the White House.

1861: USA, desperate to invade Canada, decide to go the other way, to manage some territory to escape in case some mooses cross the border and destroy Vermont and Maine. 600000 deaths, but they finally have somewhere to go in case Canadians do not accept to let them live anymore.

1917: Canada, having conquered the famous Vimy Hill, says to USA: You're next. USA declare war upon Germany in order to get french protection against Canadians.

1942: Japan, decided to hurt the british empire in its most powerful component (Canada, of course), atack the Aleoutians in order to strike at Vancouver and Yukon just after. To lure the Canadians, they send their fleet against Americans, who destroy 3 whales-boat and call them carriers.

2002: Americans manage to get to Olympic hockey final (they probably paid some skates to the Russians in exchange of a victory in semi-finals). As usual, they are arrogant. And utterly defeated by Team Canada, of which the best player, Mario Lemieux, is a retired NHL hockey player. Canada do not send its best sons against pathetic ennemies.

[IndianPrince]

In Canada, we have the same kind of stories about USA:


1775 (USA invade Lower Canada. Montreal surrender, Quebec repulse the Americans): Americans completely destroyed. They say it was the canadian winter, but in fact they were surrounded by our trained beavers and raccoons.

1812 (USA and British at war because British want some americans boys to do dirty job on their ships. Which dirty job? If you ever look an english woman, you know why British men are always on the seas...): USA invade Canada. This time, they have a new defense against beavers and winter: they're sending only fat men to fight, and train all their population for this purpose. Still, they are utterly beaten. Quebeckers burn and pee on the ashes of the White House.

1861: USA, desperate to invade Canada, decide to go the other way, to manage some territory to escape in case some mooses cross the border and destroy Vermont and Maine. 600000 deaths, but they finally have somewhere to go in case Canadians do not accept to let them live anymore.

1917: Canada, having conquered the famous Vimy Hill, says to USA: You're next. USA declare war upon Germany in order to get french protection against Canadians.

1942: Japan, decided to hurt the british empire in its most powerful component (Canada, of course), atack the Aleoutians in order to strike at Vancouver and Yukon just after. To lure the Canadians, they send their fleet against Americans, who destroy 3 whales-boat and call them carriers.

2002: Americans manage to get to Olympic hockey final (they probably paid some skates to the Russians in exchange of a victory in semi-finals). As usual, they are arrogant. And utterly defeated by Team Canada, of which the best player, Mario Lemieux, is a retired NHL hockey player. Canada do not send its best sons against pathetic ennemies.

LMAO ! WOOT ! GO CANADA !



Prince

[Delta228]

its because there is the common conception in America that we always come to Europe and save everyone's asses from somebody.

Plus, the French have not really....won... a war in quite a while. Even Napoleon, in their greatest hour never fully "won".

Napoleon: Won for a while, then lost.

Franko-Prussian War: S-T-E-A-M-R-O-L-L-E-D

WW1: fought bravely, but stalemate until USA

WW2: Fought bravely, but still..... S-T-E-A-M-R-O-L-L-E-D and saved by USA.

Vietnam: as Dubya would say "cut n' run"

I would say that the animosity between France and the US has less to do with French military failures than the US omnipresent attempt to control Europe during the Cold War, which the French resented. Plus, they are kinda pissed because their empire fell apart and they are not considered a really powerful nation anymore.

[ThiudareiksGunthigg]

WW1: fought bravely, but stalemate until USA.

The French did a lot more than just "fight bravely" - they bore the brunt of the war on the Western Front for years. And this American idea that the war was a "stalemate" until they entered is wrong as well. The Germans had run out of steam already and the British use of combined arms tactics was swinging the upper hand very much in their favour long before substantial numbers of American troops joined the fight. Their massive numbers made the final Allied victory inevitable, but the thing that broke the deadlock was smarter British tactics, not masses of green (and often pretty useless) American doughboys.

[BasileII]

Napoleon won war after war. He losed two wars. But it took everyone in Europe to finally beat him.

Well, in fact, French won some wars after Napoleon. They conquered most Africa and Indochina, they fought the Austrians and helped Italians winning their independance...

Napoleon won war after war. He losed two wars. But it took everyone in Europe to finally beat him.

You could say these are not real wars. But then, you would have to think: which 'real war' did the USA won after 1945? Korea? Will you dare say it was a victory? Vietnam? Koweït? Iraq?

[Delta228]

Napoleon won war after war. He losed two wars. But it took everyone in Europe to finally beat him.

Well, in fact, French won some wars after Napoleon. They conquered most Africa and Indochina, they fought the Austrians and helped Italians winning their independance...

Napoleon won war after war. He losed two wars. But it took everyone in Europe to finally beat him.

You could say these are not real wars. But then, you would have to think: which 'real war' did the USA won after 1945? Korea? Will you dare say it was a victory? Vietnam? Koweït? Iraq?

I wasn't trying to comment on the US's military record after WWII. And yes, I would say Korea was a victory, because the US accomplished its mission. A South Korea still exists because of US intervention. Granted, we got the kicked out of us when China sneak attacked, but we still fought them back to the 38th Parallel.

Vietnam, hell no, not a victory. Not for the French, not for the Americans.

Gulf War? are you serious? how could that not be called a victory. If you assume that it wasn't a victory because Sadam was still in power, then take a look at what started the war, and what the US objectives were. Kuwait still exists because of US intervention, and the Iraqi army was destroyed almost completely.

Modern Iraq? Too soon to tell. Just because everything hasn't gone to plan does not mean it was a failure. A political failure, definitely, but a military one? We can restart this debate once we have pulled out, and if a free, democratic Iraqi democracy does not exist, then you can tell me it was a failure.