Two Shoes

[knight66]

I am with Lis and Tasos. In terms of what seemed to have happened to this man and how he views what happened to his country; it was a very apt political comment. It said more than many long paragraphs of analysis It was not so much the intent to get rid of Saddam, it was the hopeless planning of what to do once the shock and awe had been successful. Tony Blair ought also to have been lined up in the shooting gallery.

I am disappointed that he seems to have been beaten up and his family told it will be eight days until he can be seen by them, presumably to allow some of the bruising to subside. While it is dangerous suggesting that a head of state might be insulted with impunity and although he represents in a way all those US military dead or injured in the attempt to make things better in Iraq; he was responsible for the plan that was so inadequate that the country almost disintigrated. He is probably therefore responsible for a lot of the subsequent US deaths and I see no reason to be polite to him frankly.

Mike

[Brünnhilde forever]

Wouldn't it be a laudable move by our President to publicly forgive the reporter his personal expression of disapproval of the US government's actions in his country?

Wasn't there a Pope - - - - ?

[orbital]

I am with Lis and Tasos. In terms of what seemed to have happened to this man and how he views what happened to his country; it was a very apt political comment.

In theory, yes. If, for example, he had taken his shoes off and shaken them at Bush (which basically is the same insult in the Middle Eastern tradition -without the actual physical assault) it would be a very meaningful act. But throwing a hard object at someone carries the intent to physically harm.
What if the shoe hit Bush in the forehead knocking him unconscious?

Law is the law. However, were I the judge presiding over the case, I'd gladly grant him temporary insanity, but that's another matter.

[knight66]

Up to a point, I take your point. But I really don't think there is the chance of much damage from throwing a trainer any distance at all. Shaking the shoe at him would not in my opinion have been remotely as effective.

If having a shoe thrown at you is the worst that befalls someone, they are lucky. For sure we will all be lucky if it is as bad as it gets for Obama.

Mike

[Andante]

If someone's actions and orders lead directly to the throwing of bombs at innocent civilians, resulting in their being killed or maimed, he is exonerated of any responsibility by "reason of state".
Dura lex, sed lex. 

I would say that depends upon the state involved, take Germany for example after WW2, The Nuremberg Trials, and to a more up to date event how about Ireland. it really is a farcical event where on earth has our sense of humour gone, really just a pair of stinky shoes only thrown in frustation.

[drogulus]

     Half the population of France (roughly) didn't want to be liberated in 1944-5. They were on the other side. Many of them would have thrown something more lethal than a shoe if Roosevelt or Churchill had shown up, or that puppet DeGaulle for that matter. Should we have been impressed by the fact that our enemies didn't want to be "rescued" by us? I don't think so.

     Switching gears, the way this works is that this reporter is a real Iraqi and the ones who do want us there are fake Iraqis with false Westernized values. All real Iraqis therefore throw shoes at American Presidents when they are not busy cutting off heads of hostages or blowing up schools or setting off car bombs in crowded marketplaces. It's these fine fellows who are the authentic representatives of the Iraqi nation and we must learn from them, and not try to impose our values on either them or their victims. It's way too imperialist which is out of date and wrong.

     Now at last I can say that I've conformed my opinion to that of the GMG majority, and I feel better! _0:)

[Andante]

Drogulus I like you humour when you changed gear   but would take a bit of issue with your first statement:
I do not know where you get your figures from but all indications that I have seen, on original film, archive material and historical docos would suggest otherwise, but you may be right perhaps it was all propaganda, The Germans sure had a rough old time during the occupation. As did a lot of the citizens.

[knight66]

An almost terminally facetious post from Drogulus. I can't be bothered arguing about such bilge. If there was a serious point buried there, it was a wrongheaded one.

Mike

[Renfield]

I know I am not a moderator. However, may I still please ask everyone to cool down, slightly?

This is the second thread in the past few days to exhibit a number of very crass exchanges that not even the context of internet forum discourse serves to justify. If puerility is so much to be derided, I wonder what genuine aggression would deserve.

And coming from the perspective of someone with extensive online forum experience, over quite a few years and many genres of "forum": either collectively concede to lower standards than those claimed, or reconsider what these standards represent.

Either way, end of digression; as I am not currently a contributor, I will not pursue the issue further. But I wished to raise this point.

[drogulus]

Drogulus I like you humour when you changed gear   but would take a bit of issue with your first statement:
I do not know where you get your figures from but all indications that I have seen, on original film, archive material and historical docos would suggest otherwise, but you may be right perhaps it was all propaganda, The Germans sure had a rough old time during the occupation. As did a lot of the citizens.

    I don't know the exact numbers. Also, people lie, and by now everybody was in the Resistence. That's utter bullshit.

    The Germans greatly enjoyed their time in Paris until just before the end when the soon-to-be "liberated" Parisians switched sides.

    Yeah, Bush did not invent wartime propaganda. And Casablanca was a movie, folks...a propaganda movie.

   

An almost terminally facetious post from Drogulus. I can't be bothered arguing about such bilge. If there was a serious point buried there, it was a wrongheaded one.

Mike

     That's nice, Mike, that you bothered at least this much. I always want to know who or what is wrong and not a bit about why or how. Thanks.

     

     

[Andante]

Hey Drugulus get your own Sig       leave mine alone

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Half the population of France (roughly) didn't want to be liberated in 1944-5.

But the French were pining for liberation up until 1944-5, right? So, what, did they get spoiled by all that occupation? Good thing the Nazis were there to save them from themselves!!

How ridiculous!

They were on the other side. Many of them would have thrown something more lethal than a shoe if Roosevelt or Churchill had shown up, or that puppet DeGaulle for that matter. Should we have been impressed by the fact that our enemies didn't want to be "rescued" by us? I don't think so.

You've sprung a leak, drog...make that a gusher.

Switching gears, the way this works is that this reporter is a real Iraqi and the ones who do want us there are fake Iraqis with false Westernized values. All real Iraqis therefore throw shoes at American Presidents when they are not busy cutting off heads of hostages or blowing up schools or setting off car bombs in crowded marketplaces. It's these fine fellows who are the authentic representatives of the Iraqi nation and we must learn from them, and not try to impose our values on either them or their victims. It's way too imperialist which is out of date and wrong.

"Switching gears"??

[drogulus]

But the French were pining for liberation up until 1944-5, right? So, what, did they get spoiled by all that occupation? Good thing the Nazis were there to save them from themselves!!

     So you believe the myth that the French people were united in opposition to German occupation? No, they weren't. Probably the rule of thirds applies, just like the American Revolution: One third on each side and one third just wanted it all to go away. But if it suits you to believe everyone was a hero and only a few were collaborators then that's OK. The French will like you. They've been trying to rewrite this sorry chapter in history for a long time. You give them hope.

     Whatever the people thought, there was a French government, a declared enemy of the Allies. It was headquartered in the town of Vichy, the capital of unoccupied France. The Germans only occupied the parts they were worried about (Paris and the northern area where the invasion routes were located) trusting their French allies to govern the rest. That trust was rewarded. It was the French government and French police who arranged the transportation of Jewish citizens to the death camps.

    Perhaps these policeman later joined the Resistance. That would make them our heroic allies, right?

    Oh, this history stuff, it's so confusing! Why does everything have to be so complicated?? 

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Oh, this history stuff, it's so confusing! Why does everything have to be so complicated?? 

Complication is in the mind of the beholder. 

Like for instance, you, for whom the realities of WWII seem to come from a comic book.

But I do appreciate the laughs!

[Lethevich]

This argument could be helped a lot by producing some sources - unless the myth is so pervasive that only drog is aware of it

[Andante]

This argument could be helped a lot by producing some sources - unless the myth is so pervasive that only drog is aware of it

I agree, but even the experts can't come up with one accepted answer http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6655 and History books are sometimes one sided and get re written, even if we could speak to some one that was there it would be their version

[drogulus]

Hey Drugulus get your own Sig       leave mine alone

    I wasn't trying to offend you, I was just admiring it.

   

[Andante]

    I wasn't trying to offend you, I was just admiring it.

   

That's OK, no offence taken but I am surprised how easy it is to copy/paste from profile, perhaps a bit more secrity in this area would not go amis

[drogulus]

This argument could be helped a lot by producing some sources - unless the myth is so pervasive that only drog is aware of it

     For the sake of brevity we might start with a film. That OK with everyone? The documentary by Marcel Carne The Sorrow and the Pity (Le Chagrin et la pitié) tells the story of the Resistance and the collaborators. Louis Malle made a slightly fictionalized treatment of the French roundup of Jews (schoolchildren), Au revoir les enfants.

     

     Here you see members of the 33. Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS Charlemagne (französische Nr. 1). They were volunteers. There was no draft for the German army in France.

     For books this looks good, but I haven't read it.

     

     I'm at a slight disadvantage with recommending books since my knowledge comes from a lifetime fascination with the Second World War rather than some earth-shaking revelation recently encountered. I'm one of those sons of fathers who witnessed history and participated in it. Anyway people who know about that period in history know what I'm talking about. For most of you I might as well be talking about the Wars of the Roses, I guess. Anyway the info is there if you want it. Then you can come back and dispute my interpretation. Of course by then you'll know better.

[Andante]

The French surrended to the Germans while England kept fighting, The English and French have allways distrusted each other and even to day there is little love lost this is a map of France under occupation