If there was a Civil War II, would the French get involved?

[PatriotGames]

I wonder if there was another civil war in this country. Would the French, or perhaps the Germans or Russians, get involved?

I am not advocating a civil war, but I know a lot of people think about the possibility of one someday...

[Frodo]

1. No

During the original Civil War, neither side had the ability to attack accross the ocean (at least not significantly).

Obviously that is no longer the case.

[DenverDem]

2. They would, on our side, the Patriotic American Democratic Army.

Against the anti-American corporate globalist terrorists.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

3. Nope. Nobody would want to help any side in such a potential....

...conflict. They would simply let us tear ourselves to pieces.

[sniffa]

4. yes - they'd start acting snooty towards americans

[Frodo]

6. How would we ever tell the difference?

[GalleryGod]

5. In a Word....Nope!

They'd let the Brits win and then submit an offer to develop 'Murica in a Joint Venture!:bounce:

[LibLabUK]

33. Hold on a second there!

"They'd let the Brits win "

How'd we get drawn into it?

[HarveyBriggs]

7. It's a horrible possibility, but ...

We can agree that there are those in the neo-con ranks that are itching for such a battle, "The South will rise again" and all.

I believe most of the entire world would join in the battle against the new Confedaracy -- we would have a long line of vlounteers.

Yeah, we all saw what "God's terrible swift sword" did the last time those folks got full of themselves.

More and more, though, with Dixiecrats formally becoming Republicans I'm hoping that the American public will see through the cheesecloth disguising these creeps, understand what is going on and abandon the dixie/neo-con pact with Satan.

Harvey Briggs

[Media_Lies_Daily]

10. Why do you think a potential 2nd civil war would be a "north-south"....

....affair?

Look around you....each state is pretty evenly divided as far as the mix of GOPers and Democrats. Why wouldn't a new American civil war be one that would take place within every single community in America, winner take all?

[HarveyBriggs]

24. I see it as a continuation of the past civil war.

Most of the issues of this new conflict have basis in the old ones. Their movement, their heritage of belligerence hatred, and their history of lies and revisions is all rooted in the mechanisms of post-civil war southern behavior.

To your point, there were "copperheads" in the north, back then, too. And some migration has occurred to bolster copperhead ideals in the north. But this is still a battle against the false values of the south.

All in all, had the south been dealt with properly -- that is all rebels and their supporters hanged for treason, their property confiscated as spoils of their crimes, and the former slaves compensated for back wages, then many of the problems we face now would have been taken care of then.

In return for Lincoln's magnanimity toward the south, the southerners killed him. Very modern-day pharisee of them. They continue to disgrace that act of forgiveness with their hate flags, neo-confederate programs and continued hatred of any and all who have served in combat under the banner of Old Glory and fought for this nation's freedoms.

Their programs even intend to infect non-southern states with their lies and insinuations.

Today, neo-cons are attempting to re-create an antebellum-like society, replacing slavery with modern corporate wage slavery -- and eliminating constitutional rights by giving corporations government-like power over their employees.

True "Blue" states remain so because of their basic good faith in a true God, instead of the Southern God of Avarice and Vengeance, and a firm adherance to the principles set forth in the Constitution of the United States of America.

Gut the key states from which the new confederacy is arising, and you gut the movement.

Harvey Briggs

[fudge stripe cookays]

50. Ironic isn't it?

Since the French were helping the Confederacy last time.

[theboss]

8. The French would get involved

They would send a rusted Destroyer carrying 14 soldiers and two WWI-circa cannons.

[Mistress Quickly]

9. The Destroyer's in the shop I thought n/t

[MercutioATC]

11. ...and would they give us another big copper lady when it was over?

...enquiring minds want to know...

[Jacobin]

12. At the time of the American Revolution

The French got involved to diminish Britain as a world power....their nemesis for hundreds of years.

[TO Kid]

13. Sure they would

They'd surrender on the first day.

[Dhalgren]

15. I know that it is acceptable to joke about "France surrendering".

I am not sure why, but it is. I have to make a statement, however, that the joke is ill founded. If you have even a remote sense of history, you would never accuse the French of being either cowards or lacking in a bellicose spirit. The joke is just stupid. I am sorry if you or any others take offense, but the joke is stupid.

[calico1]

17. I wonder if some of these people ever

heard of the French Resistance of WWII? Some of the bravest people that ever lived.

[RivetJoint]

20. It is marginally offensive to those of us with a French heritage,

but the Germans DID kick their asses in three wars in 70 yrs. That's why we see all the jokes about the French lack of military prowess. Where are you Napoleon!

[Screaming Lord Byron]

25. Actually, it's just offensive, regardless of rationalizing.

And it's just not funny.

[RivetJoint]

26. Sorry, but it is

a bit funny to me, and many others. You get your butts handed to you three times in 70 years, people tend to tease you about it. It's not a big deal, though. The French can handle it.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

28. That's OK. I've got several great Vietnam jokes coming up.

Wanna hear?

[RivetJoint]

34. Sure

Are they funny?

[fudge stripe cookays]

55. The government had a hand in that both times.

No one could ever say that the French people are not heroic. the poster above that discussed the Resistance was spot on.

They're NOT funny. The fact that you find them funny says a lot about your character.

[RivetJoint]

65. Who said they were not heroic?

They were and are.

[NoPasaran]

29. The French won WW 1

You weren't home schooled, were you?

[Screaming Lord Byron]

30. Christ, I never noticed that.

Anyway, let's just all be thankful none of our countries had a land border with Nazi Germany in 1940. I don't know if we would've done much better, sadly.

[knight_of_the_star]

32. Exactly

Nazi Germany in 1940 almost beat the UK as well, and the last time the British Isles were successfully invaded was in 1066!

[Screaming Lord Byron]

36. I reckon we should all be thankful for the 22 miles of water between

Calais and Dover.

[RivetJoint]

35. Actually

They got their asses handed to them until the US bailed them out. Frame it anyway you'd like, they got punked by the Germans.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

37. Actually, with all due respect that's bollocks.

The French held. Google Verdun. Google the Battle of the Marne.
And there was the small matter of the huge British Army in France.

[RivetJoint]

39. How far inside of France was the German army?

[Screaming Lord Byron]

40. So what? The war had developed into a stalemate.

Thankfully, the US broke the stalemate, but the Germans were badly stalled. You don't take Paris, you don't beat France.

[RivetJoint]

41. The Germans

Occupied part of France, not vice-versa. Thank God the French had allies.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

42. Nevertheless, the Germans did not kick France's ass.

You can't spin that. France won.

[RivetJoint]

43. The Germans

Rolled all over France. The US and the UK (along with other allies --thanks to Canada, Aus, and NZ and others) bailed them out. Three times in 70 years, the Germans rolled right into France and either forced their surrender (Franco-Prussian and WII) or occupied part of their country. That's getting your ass kicked, no matter how YOU spin it. I never claimed the Germans WON the war. I said they kicked France's ass.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

44. Whatever. There is really no point in arguing this any further.

So you don't like the French. Big deal.

[RivetJoint]

45. I DO like the French

I'm of French heritage. The fact the Germans had a better army doesn't make me any less proud of that heritage...why should it?

[PatriotGames]

46. This is way off topic. I merely asked if the French might get invloved

if there was a civil war here. I think they might.

[RivetJoint]

47. Why do you think that?

How would they even GET here?

[PatriotGames]

51. They DO have a navy and air force...

And they do have more military capability than they are given credit for.

[RivetJoint]

54. Yes, they do,

but no real strat lift capability. They can't even get here.

[Dhalgren]

67. I think you had better hit the books again.

In WWI the Germans never made it very far into France. The French "dug in" and trench warfare insued - 4 years of it. Flanders Field is in Northern France and the Germans didn't get much farther. There is no way to "spin" WW! as anything but a French victory. The US didn't even come into until the final year of the war and by then the Germans were already beaten. THis is a ridiculous argument.

[RivetJoint]

68. LMAO

You are not even close. The Germans were ony beaten by the addition of over 1 million fresh troops and the additional industrial capacity of the US. Go back to your history books. The Germans OCUPPIED part of Northern France. The French didn't occupy any part of Germany.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RivetJoint]

70. Why so?

Enlighten me. See if you can add something besides name-calling.

[Donkeyboy75]

48. The Germans did occupy Paris.

But they didn't win the city due to brute strength or lack of French courage. The French just miscalculated where the German offensive would come from. They expected it through Belgium, and instead it came through the Ardennes.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

49. In 1940 though. We were arguing over 1914.

[RivetJoint]

52. SLB

We were discussing. You seem far too nice to argue with. We just have a difference of opinion on this. No raised voices at all!

[Screaming Lord Byron]

58. Forget about it.

I already have.
(in a good way, not in some passive-agressive way - OK? OK? OK?!!!!!)

[Donkeyboy75]

56. Ah. How did I miss that transition?

Or actually, I read a WWII thing later in the thread and applied it here. Nothing to see here. Carry on...

:dunce:

[Kellanved]

53. Not in WW1

"Battle of the Marne" did stop it.

And FWIW in WW2 Germany broke pretty much all international treaties and laws - unexpected and unheard of at the time.

[trogdor]

61. It's not because they refused to defend themselves.

It's because the army they were up against were technologically and tactically superior. Any one army (including ours) couldn't defeat the Wehrmacht; it took the combined effort of the REST OF THE WORLD to beat Hitler.

I am positive the combined military forces of the REST OF THE WORLD could kick our asses back to the Stone Age today if they had to.

I don't like to attack people, but I sometimes get this close to making exceptions for people who spout off with ignorant bigoted shit like that. DU'ers are supposed to be better than that.

[RivetJoint]

63. It's not ignorant

NOR bigoted. It's a fact. If you don't like it, take it up with the historians.

[uncle ray]

74. well said

the logic some people use, they must be real happy we kicked all that Iraqi ass! them lazy Iraqi surrender monkeys! i mean, we DID occupy their country for a year, that's victory, right?

[knight_of_the_star]

31. Sorry, but

Read your history. When France surrendered in WWII to the Nazis the world was rocked back on its heels. France had NEVER surrendered to ANYONE since the days of the Vikings up until Hitler walked over them. Remember, the guys that made France surrender were the same guys that almost knocked over Russia as well, something that had only successfully been done by the Mongols. Also remember that in every war the US has fought in the only three that it could actually be considered a struggle would be the Civil War, the War of 1812, and WWII. Every single other one we were fighting someone who was vastly outweighed by us (the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War) or against someone who was already exhausted by a protracted struggle (WWI).

[RivetJoint]

38. Really,

So the Franco-Prussian war (in which the French ceded the most of the Alsace and Lorriane) was just a dream?

[theboss]

14. Sniff

This thread is reminding me of the good old days, when all Americans regardless of race, religion, creed or economic backgroud could join together and make fun of the French.

I sometimes wonder if my main reasons for disliking Bush is that he has so often put me in a position of defending the French. I'm not happy about that turn of events over the past four years.

[annabanana]

77. lol!

[Screaming Lord Byron]

16. Well, seeing as they weren't involved in the original. No.

Incidentally, France rocks.

[PatriotGames]

19. There was a chance that European nations could have gotten involved...

Read this link. There are some pretty interesting things in it.

http://www.civilwarhome.com/europeandcivilwar.htm

[TheRovingGourmet]

79. France and England were very active in ours, for a time.

[Guy_Montag]

18. No-one would get overtly involved...

it would be too dangerous. I have no doubt most Europeans would back whichever government appears more legitimate.

Remember during the Civil War, America was a fairly small, backward nation. The involvement of the Great Powers in the American Civil War is no different to the involvement of the Superpowers in every war in the second half of the 20th century.

[PatriotGames]

23. But now, the outcome might determine the fat eof the world... n/t

[YellowRubberDuckie]

21. No

"Ah, the ignorant, fat Americans are fighting amongst themselves again. Bring on the wine." And then they'd eat and drink and laugh at us. I love the French and wouldn't blame them for telling us to bugger off.
Duckie

[depakid]

22. Do you really think anyone would fight succession again?

I doubt the Northern and Western States would do anything other than say good riddance and enjoy your theocracy. With the money we save from subsidizing your backward states, we'll be able to provide universal healthcare for all our citizens!

[PatriotGames]

27. I don't think there would be a North/South thing this time.

[Butterflyeffect]

57. Why is there going to be a Civil War

Do you know something I don't

[PatriotGames]

60. welcome Butterflyeffect. No, I don't know anything, but the

political climate today is not unlike what preceded the first civil war. We are deeply polarized nation.

[Donkeyboy75]

59. Perhaps I'm being small-minded, but I don't see a logical breakdown

of how a civil war would be fought here. There's no obvious geographical division, which is nearly a certainty for a war.

I think foreign involvement would ultimately depend on how the sides were comprised.

[PatriotGames]

64. I think that it is possible, but unlikely too.

[Fleshdancer]

62. We're talking about the fall of a great superpower.....

I don't know if other countries would get involved. I can't imagine what a civil war in the US would mean for the global economy. Interesting question.

[PatriotGames]

66. Perhaps the rebirth of a greater superpower, run by progressives?

One that truly projects peace and freedom worldwide?

[hughee99]

71. Some people have said that France would get involved on our side...

For those people, I ask, Wasn't Iraq an "internal matter" where we praised France for resisting the call for military action? How would an internal revolution in the US be any different? Is it okay if a country intervenes in another countries internal matters as long as they're doing it to support the progressive agenda rather than the conservatives? To be honest, I'd lose some respect for France if they intervened in an internal matter.

[PatriotGames]

76. I don't think Iraq was an internal matter at all...

[DivinBreuvage]

72. The French DID want to get involved the first time -- for the CONFEDERACY!

Both the French and British aristocracies feared the United States as a developing economic and political competitor and didn't like its hot-headed expansionist republicanism (republican in the sense of government by representative democracy rather than monarchy). They were both hoping the Confederacy would slay this double threat and began to provide covert aid to the South until such time as it could prove it had a real shot to win the war, at which time the French and British would come in openly. Some of the British especially were just itching to throw their own weight into the military equation, which I think probably would have come under the form of naval power to lift the US blockade or a ground invasion from Canada.

Fortunately for the Union, however, when the likelihood of foreign intervention was at its peak McClellan managed to avoid a total thrashing at the hands of Robert E. Lee; and Lincoln exploited this dubious victory as an excuse to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, which put the British in the difficult political position of supporting a slave power against those who would liberate the slaves. From this point, although the Confederacy continued to fight and win victories, the overall window of conditions under which the British and French would be willing to intervene grew smaller and smaller until it finally closed altogether.

France was really the weak sister in this game. Napoleon III was an insipid shadow of his grandfather and didn't dare stick his nose in unless the British went first; and toward the close of the war he became very careful not to offend the United States lest they decide to send some of their battle-hardened troops to cause trouble for his puppet emperor Maximilian whom he had propped on the throne of Mexico (Mexican patriots overthrew and executed Maximilian in 1867). The hapless Napoleon went on to declare war on Prussia in 1870; the war was a disaster for the French and Napoleon himself was captured and deposed, dying in exile two years later.

[TheRovingGourmet]

73. They are excavating one of the blockade runners out in the

Gulf of Mexico now.

[PatriotGames]

75. I knew I came across that in my readings but wasn't sure

where I saw it, so didn't post it. Thanks!

[TheRovingGourmet]

78. No problem. :) There are a few pictures online now. If I can

remember the name of the ship I will pull them. The ship was scuttled so I don't think there was any cargo on board though but it will still be a great source of artifacts. I can't wait to go see the Hunley when it is done.

[TheRovingGourmet]

80. Here is one of the excavations that I was thinking of.

Summary page here"
http://www.fastq.com/~cstover/skipdenbigh.html

Lots of info and picture here:
http://nautarch.tamu.edu/projects/denbigh/denbigh.html