171:
>The French chose not to support a war (that as it turns out, was waged on the >premise that IRAQ had weapons of mass destruction, which have yet to be found) >that they did not agree with. So did Canada, so did Russia, so did Germany, so did >most of the western world. Everyone but Britain pretty much said "thanks, but no," >as is their rights as independent and sovereign nations.
Australia? Poland? Spain? Italy? Japan? Qatar? Kuwait? Denmark? Croatia? The Czech Republic? All these countries supported the US in various ways. Don't they count?
Of course it was France's right to oppose US policy; no one is suggesting we invade France as punishment. But we do have a right to react to the fact that France is no longer a friend and ally. Some react is childish ways ("Freedom Fries"); obviously, the vast majority of Americans realized how silly that was. McDonalds (which has some grievances of its own...), by far the largest purveyor of French Fries, didn't rename them, and I don't know others which did.
> Here in Canada, we are facing unofficial trade sanctions.
I wouldn't call softwwod, etc., "sanctions", but you're right - US trade policy is indefensible.
> We know how the average American treats the French.
The average American doesn't treat the French at all...
> We chose not to support an unjust and unilateral war, which is our right, and the > Americans are shitting their pants over it, like they always do.
Actually, I don't think the average American cared much about whether Canada supported liberating Iraq (although I did). (BTW, I don't think the average American is aware of the significant contribution of Canada in Afghanistan (not to mention WWI, WWII, and Korea), either.)
> French take down the flag?
> Well, good sir, its the end of the world.
> Never mind the fact that their is no obligation to keep it flying...
I don't know if they did or not, if the picture was doctored or not (although JPEG compression is not fixed at 3x3 pixels), if the flag should have been there or not. However, if is was there a year (or two or ten years) ago, "there" is an obligation not to deny the past, especially at a museum.
> Plane flies into a building?
> Well, good sir, its the end of the world.
> Never mind the fact that Europe has had to deal with terrorism on far larger a scale.
> Ireland?
No; besides being an intra-Europe affair, that was over a period of decades, AND still killed fewer (and far fewer civilians) than the recent terrorist attacks against the US.
> (Please note, I am not disrespecting the deaths of any of the 3,000-5,000 people
> who died in the attack, merely stating the fact that America over reacts to
> everything)
America does have a tendency to overreact - but hasn't in this case - not even close. A significant portion of the world declared war on the US (long before 9/11), and we finally were roused to real (many would say belated) action by the attacks. Among the results (by no means all positive) are two countries much freer than they were before the attacks.