Poll Shows Slump in Trust between French, Americans

[sabra]

<<SNIP>>
http://en.chinabroadcast.cn/2239/2005-6-18/[e-mail]

Poll Shows Slump in Trust between French, Americans

2005-6-18 1:05:32 Reuters

Trust between the French and Americans has slumped to its lowest level in 17 years, more than two years after a bitter feud over the Iraq war, an opinion poll showed on Friday.

The TNS-Sofres survey of 1,000 people in each country showed only 31 percent of French people have any "sympathy" for Americans, down from 39 percent in 2002.

Only 35 percent of Americans like the French, a drop from 50 percent in 2002, according to the poll, published in the Le Monde newspaper.

French President Jacques Chirac infuriated Washington and helped create anti-French feeling by his opposition to the Iraq war and his advocacy of a world in which the European Union would counterbalance U.S. power.

Americans retaliated by renaming French fries "freedom fries" and some even stopped buying French wine.

<</SNIP>>

[UCLA Dem]

1. Geeee....freedom fries wouldn't have anything to do with it, would they?

[Igel]

9. No. n/t

[Double T]

2. George Bush et al winning the hearts and minds of everyone ...

throughout the world. It must have been hard work. Great job!!!

[bluestateguy]

3. People resent that France was right

Can the French be somewhat snobbish sometimes? Absolutley. But the French are far from cowards. France was the first ally this country ever had in 1781. They helped to bring us victory at Yorktown.

While America may have saved France in both of the world wars, the French people fought valiantly for the country. It's not like they were wimps who hid behind the Americans.

France assisted the US in Kosovo and Afghanistan and their opposition to the Iraq War was no different than mainstream world opinion.

[Igel]

11. Sometimes they fought valiantly for this country, sometimes

they didn't.

So did the Poles, and I don't hear them being lauded for it.

The French weren't helpful to the North during the Civil War. Not mostly. Not in their interests.

Their motives for "being right" in Iraq weren't necessarily humanitarian in nature. Maybe. Hard to judge: oil contracts and banking arrangements vs. social conscience. I'm out of the judging business for the day.

Mixed bag. No devils, no angels, as far as I can see.

[daleo]

12. France also fought in the 1991 Gulf War

The one that was sanctioned by the U.N., and was more or less justifiable (although it now looks like Bush I suckered Saddam into invading Kuwait).

For the record, Canada and Britain also were heavily involved in saving France in both world wars. Canada actually lost more soldiers than the U.S. in WWI (66,655 vs 57,476). Some sources give 126,000 for U.S. deaths in WWI, but that seems to include disease and other causes. I don't think the 66,000 figure for Canada includes other causes, but I can't be sure. Either way, the scale of casualties are remarkably similar, due to the late entry into the war of the U.S. The British Empire deaths are about 900,000. After subtracting out the colonial casualties, that would still leave a huge number of British deaths (certainly well over half a million, perhaps closer to three quarters of a million).

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWusadeaths.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I#Casualties

[blackhorse]

16. France in 1944-45

This is an amplifying comment to your post, bluestateguy (by way of clarification)

The liberation of France by the Allies, (and mostly U.S. troops) in 1944-45 was a great endeavor. No doubt, the U.S. Army performed mostly quite well and garnered well-earned glory in the process. But the overwhelming success of the campaign in NW Europe in 1944-45 hides a less-spoken truth.

This truth is that the French in 44-45 could have shouldered more of the burden of liberating their own country; that is, * had the U.S. seen fit to provide them the necessary weapons, uniforms, and equipment. *

Several French divisions *were* equipped by U.S. aid (and subsequently fought very effectively). Initially, only these divisions and their supporting logistics troops were all that was feasible, since the manpower was coming (mainly) from French North Africa (as the French mainland was still under occupation.)

But this changed in August 1944. The bulk of France was swiftly liberated after the breakout from Normandy and plenty of French manpower was available. The French asked for more equipment and arms to regularize the organization of their Résistance units. The equipment was not forthcoming and the gear had to be scrounged from captured German arms, World War One surplus, etc.

All this background is to point out that it was not precisely necessary for the U.S. to lose as many troops as it did in NW Europe after August 1944. We *could* have let the French shoulder a greater burden -- and the French army was eager to do so. We *chose* not to do so.

The 'why' for this apparently strange decision is that the U.S. did not want France to have any real influence in Europe after the war. Strangely, the U.S. imagined that postwar continental Europe would have no real power bases other than the presence of U.S., British, and Soviet troops. (Churchill was wiser and realized a strong France would be very useful in postwar Europe).

So, in order to limit French postwar influence, the U.S. chose to inadequately man the front during the harsh fall and winter of the campaign. The Germans exploited this condition with large offensives into the Ardennes and Alsace. The Ardennes might have happened in any case -- but had the French army been allowed field more regularly equipped units, the U.S. would likely have lost far fewer men in the bitter battles for the Alsatian plains in 1945.

Yeah, the Franco-American relationship in WWII is not as straightforward as common "history" makes it out to be. For my part, I think it would have been better to allow the French to shoulder a larger burden. De Gaulle was savvy enough to get an occupation zone in Germany in any case, which makes one wonder what the U.S. gained from its peculiar strategy of limiting equipment supplies to the French army.

Oh, the final irony is that after WWII, when the Russians started scaring us, the U.S. practically gave away tons of military surplus to France in order to rapidly strengthen the French army.

Not much chance that the voting public could grasp the subtle ironies here, though, eh?

Cheers

BlackHorse

[leftofcool]

4. Vive la France

Think I'll go get me some French fries then pour me a glass of deep red French wine of the inexpensive persuasion.

Left of Cool

[LynnTheDem]

5. France was correct. France tried to warn America.

America should be asking France for forgiveness.

[mikita]

6. not only ask France for forgiveness,

but the rest of the planet, Mother Nature, and the animals, IMHO.

[confludemocrat]

7. France is flooded with fat American folks seein' the sites

Your common garden variety 'murcan is there in droves, buying up the souvenirs, eating in the rstauarants, wandering Monmartre, and they don't seem to be brie-eating liberal types either, more like that Chuck Close sculpture. So what's the deal?

[Village Idiot]

8. What seems really funny here is the Statue of Liberty...

given to the US by the French, the full name of the statue is:

Get this...

"Liberty Enlightening the World!"


heeheeheeheehohohohohohohohohohohohohohohohhaahaahaahaahaahaaahaaaaaa......
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!

[VegasWolf]

10. Hell, I trust them more! They had the balls to stand up to this evil

bush administration. England I trust less. And Poland, well Poland
seems to deserve its reputation.

[Brundle_Fly]

13. FAILURE FRIES (n/t)

[ananda]

14. drat

I like the French. I like every person from every country that opposes Bushco and the wars.

Sue

[DiverDave]

15. And this poll surprises who?

Look, the French bashing was disgusting and now they were proved to be right, along with thousands of us here.
I got no problem with the french...especially this one
VIVA LE FRANCE:

[getmeouttahere]

18. Who is that gorgeous creature???

Vive Le France!!!

[Laughing Mirror]

20. It's Sophie Marceau, French actress

Appears in Hollywood movies too, from time to time.

[Iowa]

17. French don't trust America?

Hell, most Americans don't trust America. This isn't just the French.

[getmeouttahere]

19. Amen, Iowa...

if things don't start turning in our direction soon, we will be in a full-fledged depression, IMO. All the signs are pointing to it.

[Voltaire99]

21. Bought some French wine today, in fact.

Delicious, too!

Then I went to a play at the Theatre de la Jeune Lune, and oh, did I love it!

Vive la France!

[NeoConsSuck]

22. Speaking of losing trust..

I'm proud of my French heritage. I'm also proud of my German heritage.

I can't say I'm proud to be an american.