Though it was nice of Americans to offer their support to the French after ISIS’ terrorist attacks against Paris last week, surely Parisians remember that, not so recently, Americans were deriding them as “cheese-eating surrender monkeys” and renaming French fries “freedom fries” merely because they were smart enough not to join our invasion of Iraq?
Love, American-Style
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication, WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a frequent contributor to The Wall Street Journal, a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "The Stringer."
16 Comments. Leave new
> surely Parisians remember
Irrelevant. The only important part is whether the American Sheeple remember.
Americans don’t need to remember because they have their governing media to tell them what and when they need to think and feel.
This latest Paris incident is so contrived and the BS media / social media remonstrating only makes it more obvious that there is much more to this than what appears on the surface. Cui bono, anyone?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-paris-terrorist-attacks-and-the-official-story-the-matrix-extends-its-reach/5489014
Too bad ISIL claimed credit for the attacks the same day as that article was published.
This latest post is such contrived BS that it only makes it more obvious the author is a shill. Well, that and posting the exact same comment in two places. Did you forget you’d already hit Rall.com while you were cutting & pasting it into multiple discussion sites?
There are few who agree with the Commie Rall.
One I follow is this one: http://bill-purkayastha.blogspot.in/2015/11/the-marketing-of-isis-as-global-brand.html
He is probably in Congress, and was probably born in the Boston part of Assam (but it’s no longer part of Assam, it split when he was about two years old).
The French have been fighting the Daesh in Mali, and the Daesh managed an attack on very soft targets in Paris as retaliation. If they could find a very soft target in the US, I’m sure they’d try to do the same.
But soft targets in the US of A are hard to find these days.
“…merely because they were smart enough not to join our invasion of Iraq?”
And what good did that get them?
> what good did that get them?
Fewer dead citizens and less squandered wealth … duh?
What did attacking get them?
More dead citizens and more squandered wealth … duh?
And yet the muslims hate them just as much as they do the USA. And this is a country that bends over backwards to accommodate them.
We’ve slaughtered hundreds of thousands in the War on Terra. That’s some pretty harsh accommodation there.
“this” meaning France…
Same diff – they’re targeted because they participated in some of the war crimes in the ME.
Being nice to people rarely makes them into enemies.
France is a founding member of NATO. Currently, NATO is competing with the United States to see just how many collateral war crimes it can commit against a non-NATO, commonly non-Caucasian population. Paris is NATO’s collateral damage because France is a collateral member of the NATO war-crimes syndicate.
DanD
He-he, the last time I was over in France, I saw not one American castigating a Frenchman for failing to be militant. The Frog-population will protest with rocks and bottles and Molotov Cocktails at the mere drop of a croissant! By comparison? When it comes to political activism, Americans are abject cowards.
You got it wrong Ted, you won’t find any “Ugly-Americans” acting ugly in France to any French people, because they’d rightfully see their chicken-shit asses getting kicked.
DanD
Aside from the non-issue that this cartoon “exposes”, the real thing I take away from it is how the US can blast hospitals, wedding parties, non-combatants and other “collateral damage” constantly (probably happening as I type), throughout the Middle East, and there is little outcry in comparison to the 120+ that were killed in Paris.
Of course, although most Americans pretend their nation is somehow “above” the barbaric practices of the other side, the truth is that their are an overwhelming number of historic examples where US forces did things just as bad, including domestic internment camps, torture and goshdarn!, carpet bombing and nuking entire city populations. So, knowing that this happens in War, and is entirely normal for War, then it should be no quick leap to the US carpet bombing oil fields, etc. to shut off the economic drivers in these lands and even flattening entire districts where groups of ISIS or other terrorists exist. Yes – I understand that the US and other Western nations are responsible for facilitating the rise of these groups and the general hatred they have engendered, but now we are left with having to deal with this, and once again I return to the analogy of enraged bees and broken hives. I think that we have only 2 choices – either back away, remove most, if not all our forces, and stop the constant stirring up of the bees – or go in and flatten huge areas to exterminate the crazies, along with tons of collateral damage – as we have done over and over again in the past. And as far as the tide of refugees? Lifeboat ethics. Our lifeboat is taking on water already, and since we have proven we can’t take care of our own people very well anymore, then I can’t support taking on more people, especially because even if only a small percentage of them are “African-ized “bees”, then it’s way too dangerous.
Now Ted, let’s be fair about this. “Cheese eating surrender monkeys” was a term first coined by Montgomery C. Burns. Who is well known for saying highly inappropriate things. So coming from him, it’s almost like a compliment!
Allow me, Ted, to paraphrase the good Henry Temple :
«… I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of [the United States] We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow. ..»
The problem, of course is who gets to determine just what those «eternal and perpetual» interests happen to be….
Henri