Vive le Quebecois...

[California Joe]

QUEBEC CITY—André Boisclair swept to victory on the first ballot last night, winning the Parti Québécois leadership race with almost 54 per cent of the vote.

Pauline Marois, his closest competitor, captured only 30.5 per cent of members' votes, while the six other candidates trailed far behind.

At 39, Boisclair becomes the youngest Quebec party leader since Robert Bourassa was elected in 1970 — and the first openly gay political party leader in Canadian history.

He also admitted to using cocaine usage while being a cabinet member. Nice. The French are even more liberal than the Liberals. A young, gay, cokehead... all the qualities I look for in a government leader. Heh. Think this guy will be enough to get Quebec to separate?

Evan, I bet you could get a position in his administration if you play your cards right.

[Count Lippe]

Berlin's mayor and head of the federal state Berlin is also gay.

BTW, it's Les Quebequois... ;)

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Ah, to be a young, gay, French speaking coke head in a position to determine national policy. >sigh< It must be dreamy. I have a feeling he'll be giving new meaning to "backdoor deals" in his drug-fueled negotiation sessions...

"'Sacre bleu! I'll tich you to increas your tariffs on timber! Touch your toes!"
"noooooo!"








If you've enjoyed this politically incorrect thread, you may like to view some of CJ's other fine works, such as "Oh lordy, look at that broad's rack" or "I ran screaming from a bear, like a sissy girl!"

[nognig]

Quebec is a very unique society in Canada. They don't even compare to the liberals in Ontario. I remember reading there was a poll done to determine Quebecer's opinions of racial issues. The antisemitism in Quebec was incredibly high, something like 2/3 specifically blamed Jews for various problems.

NN

[California Joe]

Thank you for plugging my other masterpieces 2Sheds.

Actually I could give a rats ass about his orientation but it still cracks me up. Here you have to blow all the Christian conservatives while being an economist and a war hero but against other wars and have a Dad that's wicked rich and can cover your screw ups while you find Jesus AGAIN and marry a vapid bitch that won't make waves.

P.S. I never ran from that bear. That's a dirty lie.

[Macs.]

Berlin's mayor and head of the federal state Berlin is also gay.

BTW, it's Les Quebequois... ;)

Yes, and he did a TERRIBLE Job.
I have the impression that all he does is going to partys/shows and presenting himself to the media.


Have fun Quebec...

[roland]

Paris mayor too is gay.
But hey those are not **** movies actors so the partners they chose should NOT have much influence on there job.
Still I would feel pissed if a politician presented himself as gay as if it was relevant.

Vive le Quebec libre ;)

[sir-chimp]

Admitted coke head? Hey maybe Obama and he could get together and party.

[p$ycho+log!cal]

boisclair is ok.
hes a good voice for young people
i dont care if hes gay, as long as he dont look like one
+ he help young teens to get out of the street by creating Carrefour-Jeunesse ( a place that help them to get out of the drugs and start working n all that stuff )
a great guy.

Marois SUCK and that other guy was a child abuser so its better with boisclair

[Deuterium]

http://www.deuteriumox.com/raven/mb1.jpg

[Laworkerbee]

Thank you for plugging my other masterpieces 2Sheds.

Actually I could give a rats ass about his orientation but it still cracks me up. Here you have to blow all the Christian conservatives while being an economist and a war hero but against other wars and have a Dad that's wicked rich and can cover your screw ups while you find Jesus AGAIN and marry a vapid bitch that won't make waves.

P.S. I never ran from that bear. That's a dirty lie.

Thats not how the bear tells it.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Who cares wether the dudes a fudge packer and smokes crack in his spare time.

If he can do the job and do it well that is all that should matter.

[Deuterium]

http://www.deuteriumox.com/raven/mb2.jpg

[cut]

bloody hell CJ, I never knew you were so narrow minded, what the hell is wrong with being a cokehead?

[Laworkerbee]

http://www.deuteriumox.com/raven/mb2.jpg


rofl oh man thats fantastic! rofl

[EvanL]

Another thing us guys across the border can tease Quebec about.
I don't care. I think Quebec is a great province, and provides me with many great moments of laughter.
So the guys a nancy...WHo cares? Atleast he'll dress with some style.
On the white powder issue, i don't care what he did in his past, as long as it doesn't come out when he's in this position of authority.
Hell, GWB was a cokehead for a while. I guess thats not saying too much though.

[sir-chimp]

Who cares wether the dudes a fudge packer and smokes crack in his spare time.

If he can do the job and do it well that is all that should matter.


thats the spirit

[Kingswat]

who gives a ****, we all know that province is ****ed up, let them seperate, see who pays for their welfare system then.

[morkev]

A lot of us out here in Western Canada are happy that he won. We are hopefull that he will be the one that finally gets Quebec to separate

[ArmedPacifist]

Seperatists now add a whole new generation to their ranks.

This guy is really popular with the younger voters and he has been very interested in putting the seperation from Canada vote on the table...AGAIN.


So this would be vote attempt number, has to be at least 3 by now to vote on this very same issue which has been voted against so many times before.

Even if they do succeed with a vote, I don't see how it would have any legality as it has already been defeated twice.

It would be like voting on the Abortion issue and having it pass twice, only a few people didn't like it so they decided to vote again until they win.

[Mr.K]

PQ is now to be called Pederasts and Queers.
And no one is going to separate "you need us and we need you"

[Berkut]

Winston Churchill smoked opium in his youth...

[Rammy]

Freaging queer bag. I hate the PQ. Go Jean Charest and the unity of Canada :)

[Kingswat]

Exactly, they will seperate but withing 5 or 6 hours of no welfare checks coming in and every corperation from the usa and other parts of canada that have their head office in quebec starts to pull out they will realize the mistake and beg to be let back in to canada. To which the land mass will be broken off from north america, floated out to sea and sunk with all frenchmen onboard.

[morkev]

And then we can start again and get it right this time!

[Otsoa]

They can try to seperate but they will be a little cranky when the natives up around James Bay and those further south state that they are staying with Canada (this issue was brought up in the last referendum) ;)

[Paracaidista]

I think I'm moving to BC :|

[roland]

I think this is going to make everybody happy:

* For France
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Flag_of_France.svg/125px-Flag_of_France.svg.png
Quebec
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0c/Quebec_flag.png/130px-Quebec_flag.png
:D

* For United Kingdom
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
Ontario
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/30/Flagofontario.png/130px-Flagofontario.png


* Joined sovereignty between France and United Kingdom
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Flag_of_France.svg/125px-Flag_of_France.svg.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
Acadia
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Acadia_flag.png/180px-Acadia_flag.png
That means
- Nouvelle Ecosse/Nova Scotia
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/07/Nova_Scotia_Flag.gif/130px-Nova_Scotia_Flag.gif
- Nouveau-Brunswick/New Brunswick
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/Flag_of_New_Brunswick.svg/130px-Flag_of_New_Brunswick.svg.png
- Île Saint-Jean/Prince Edward Island
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f1/Ca-pe.png/130px-Ca-pe.png
- Terre-Neuve et Labrador/Newfoundland and Labrador
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7c/Ca-nf.PNG/130px-Ca-nf.PNG



....
* For USA
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Flag_of_the_United_States.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png


... All the rest ....
:D


still waiting for the British green light though ....




oops I forgot:
* For Denmark
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/National_Flag_of_Denmark.svg/125px-National_Flag_of_Denmark.svg.png
Hans island (sorry no flag)
;)

[Paracaidista]

There's an old joke of: "Why God made the Quebeçois? To let the French have somebody to bash" :)

It's mainly the language they complain about. But now they may also share/complain about who's the most "liberal".

[Durandal]

Thank you for plugging my other masterpieces 2Sheds.

Actually I could give a rats ass about his orientation but it still cracks me up. Here you have to blow all the Christian conservatives while being an economist and a war hero but against other wars and have a Dad that's wicked rich and can cover your screw ups while you find Jesus AGAIN and marry a vapid bitch that won't make waves.

P.S. I never ran from that bear. That's a dirty lie.


rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl

[FlightSergeantRose]

Dont discount the possibility of Quebec separation. In 1980 the vote was about 40% in favour of separation. In 1995 it was 49.6%. Polls have shown that younger Quebecers are more likely to vote in favour of separation, since younger people are more inclined to take risk's. The PQ government has made French the overwhelmingly dominant language now, except in the Montreal region. As well, people living in Quebec more often think of themselves as 'Quebecois', instead of French-Canadians. Anyone who thinks the separation of Quebec is a good thing for Canada had better take a closer look at the consequences of such a scenario.

The basis for separation is more governmental control, so they should probably be given somemore control, although now it is probably too late. Even though the PQ want their own country, they still intend to use the Canadian dollar, as well as keeping their Canadian citizenship. There are many other Canadian institutions that they intend of keeping after separation, which begs the question, why bother separating if they are going to keep almost everything Canadian except their government?

Then you have the Cree situation in Northern Quebec. They control about 2/3's of Quebecs landmass. They have repeatly stated that they will not be part of a new separate Quebec. Very little attention has been paid to this huge issue by the PQ and their supporters, or the fact that separation would probably destroy their economy for at least 5 years, as well as hurting the rest of Canada economically. The PQ suppress anyone warning of the serious consequences of separation. The runner up to Boisclair, Pauline Marois was harshly criticised by her party after suggesting that for 5 years after separation, economic hardship for Quebec would likely ensue. In fact, it is guaranteed Quebec's economy will take at least a modest nose dive.

Pray that there isn't another vote because the YES side is going to win.

[Sharp]

nothing more different than a Parisian who will call himself Parisian before be "French" , or Breton, or Alsacian...

They just call himself Quebecois from Canada... like i call myself Niçois from France...

but sure the difference of the language between the two parts don't help them to be united...

[roland]

Very little attention has been paid to this huge issue by the PQ and their supporters, or the fact that separation would probably destroy their economy for at least 5 years, as well as hurting the rest of Canada economically.


Why would Quebec suffer from separation ? It's not as if Quebec was a piss poor province subsidized by the rest of Canada.
They proven very strong so far, resisting the Anglo oppression then building the second stronguest economy of Canada. That's impressive and deserve respect. Is there so much to worry ?

[FlightSergeantRose]

A big issue would be the withdrawl of capital from the province. Because of the possible turmoil that might ensue, big companies and indeed small ones as well will not invest any money into the region. In the 1995 referendum, all major banks took all their money out of the province. The military flew out some of their important hardware, like the CF-18's. Comsumer confidence was shaken and investment into the province sufferred.

Then you have all the treaties that Canada has signed over the years. Quebec would have to start from scratch. NATO, NAFTA, WTO etc. Noone is going to invest in Quebec if there is political turmoil. This is just a few examples of many as to how separation would destabilize things.

[EvanL]

Why would Quebec suffer from separation ? It's not as if Quebec was a piss poor province subsidized by the rest of Canada.
They proven very strong so far, resisting the Anglo oppression then building the second stronguest economy of Canada. That's impressive and deserve respect. Is there so much to worry ?
Second strongest economy in Canada my arse. Alberta is.
Quebec isn't going to seperate. There is way too much pressure from the Natives who have already caused havoc in the James Bay and Oka areas.

[Olybrius]

Second strongest economy in Canada my arse. Alberta is.
Quebec isn't going to seperate. There is way too much pressure from the Natives who have already caused havoc in the James Bay and Oka areas.

Second strongest , Roland is right

GDP 2003 $ million
1) Ontario : 456,822
2) Quebec : 232,611
3) British Columbia :130,914
4) Alberta : 128,490

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/040428/d040428a.htm

[morkev]

I'm actually surprised that Quebec streets are not paved in gold. Just look at the money that gets filtered to Quebec by Liberal Governments (lead by francos).

And all that evil anglo oppression those poor people have to put up with. Shocking.

Well heres a better idea. Lets have the rest of Canada have a referendum on if we want them to stay or not. It will never happen though.
We all know the out come.

[p$ycho+log!cal]

I'm actually surprised that Quebec streets are not paved in gold. Just look at the money that gets filtered to Quebec by Liberal Governments (lead by francos).

And all that evil anglo oppression those poor people have to put up with. Shocking.

Well heres a better idea. Lets have the rest of Canada have a referendum on if we want them to stay or not. It will never happen though.
We all know the out come.
Quebec is all french except montreal(half french half english+many other languages), as for racism, quebecois are not racist...WE ARE THE MINORITY up in montreal.

[EvanL]

Quebec is all french except montreal(half french half english+many other languages), as for racism, quebecois are not racist...WE ARE THE MINORITY up in montreal.
Quebekers not racist?
You kidding me?
Who used to throw bananas on the ice when the black players would skate on? That only happened in Quebec and it happened as recently as when Kevin Weeks skated onto the ice in Montreal 2years back.
About only Montreal being french. Im from Eastern Ontario. And the whole area from Gatineau to Montreal is Anglo.

[DE_Six]

Berlin's mayor and head of the federal state Berlin is also gay.

BTW, it's Les Quebequois... ;)

BTW, it's not, it's "quebecois".

[California Joe]

My Dad was born in Notre Dame Du Lac. He moved to the US at age 7. I got mad Quebec skilz.

Now is it true that Je me Souviens means : I Am Soup?









p-)

[EvanL]

My Dad was born in Notre Dame Du Lac. He moved to the US at age 7. I got mad Quebec skilz.

Now is it true that Je me Souviens means : I Am Soup?









p-)
no it means..
I will remember.....to be an asshole ;)
haha

[DE_Six]

Why would Quebec suffer from separation ? It's not as if Quebec was a piss poor province subsidized by the rest of Canada.
They proven very strong so far, resisting the Anglo oppression then building the second stronguest economy of Canada. That's impressive and deserve respect. Is there so much to worry ?

That is past, i'm afraid. Our economy now has more in common with the Maritimes than with Ontario or Alberta (btw, no diss intended to the Maritimes, I love it, my girlfriend's family is in NS).

The numbers above don't tell all. Growth in key sectors of the economy is slow, several large companies are leaving and no new ones are comingin to fill the void.

Our economy's not so great, in large part because of the socialist leanings of the political class and intelligentsia that prevent any questioning of the sacro-sanct state-funded social programs, which have famously mangled our health care and education systems. More to the point, whenever someone propose to revise legislation to make the province more business-friendly, the cocos are up in arms against the "creeping privatization"...Whatever.

That said, we are the US' 7th economic partner. To think that in the event of separation, all US companies would withdraw, thus implying they would choose to side with Canada versus looking after their interests, is naive. If secession occurs, the US will keep doing business with both, and no one can do a damn thing about it.

That said, I hope it doesn't happen. There is simply nothing that justifies it. If independance can allow us to achieve a better condition, then it is plain utopia, because as part of Canada, we have it good. It's purely ideological. I'm for unity and against secession, but reading some of my fellow canucks' comments on here, it's not too hard to understand why some people here feel we have nothing to do with them. Funny enough, back in 1995, when our Liberal government proved utterly useless at keeping the country together, Canadians from all provinces rallied in Montreal to tell us how much they love us....Oh well.

It's a silly game, really. Canada doesn't care until we are on the brink of leaving, and Quebec rattles the cage once in a while when it feels neglected. Do we really want to secede? No, if we did, it would be by more than 50%. Let's face it, 3.5 million quebecers don't want to leave. We should take St-Pierre-Miquelon back from France (what the f*ck are they doing there anyway?), put the separatists on it and tell them to start their own country.

But it could happen, in which case I'll move out, and I'm afraid Boisclair could be the one making it happen (I was hoping somebody else less popular would win the leadership race).

There's a lot to be said about Quebec and it's past, I think the problem is that some people think secession will be the end-all be-all of all our problems, instead of whining incessantly and waiting for the government to fix it with the whopping 50% it takes from our incomes (g-d I hate this place).

About the racist comments: We are racist because a few assholes threw bananas on a hockey rink? Geez, there's people preaching white power south of the border, does that make Americans racist? Does Ralph Klein make Canadians homophobic? Broad generalization, oh so tempting.

[Paracaidista]

My Dad was born in Notre Dame Du Lac. He moved to the US at age 7. I got mad Quebec skilz.
Now is it true that Je me Souviens means : I Am Soup?
p-)

It means "I (will) remember of [insert whatever fact or fiction]". An old joke for femmes "Je me souviens de quand j'étais une vierge" :D

[Paracaidista]

Berlin's mayor and head of the federal state Berlin is also gay.

BTW, it's Les Quebequois... ;)BTW, it's not, it's "quebecois".

Both of you are wrong. In correct English is "Quebecers" or "Quebeckers". In correct French is "Québéçois(e)". In correct Spanish is "Quebecos/Quebecas". Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois) ;)

[DE_Six]

Both of you are wrong. In correct English is "Quebecers" or "Quebeckers". In correct French is "Québéçois(e)". In correct Spanish is "Quebecos/Quebecas". Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois) ;)

The "cedille" (ç) makes the "c" sounds like "s". It's québécois. As in Le "Québécois". (http://www.lequebecois.org/)

Even your link says that.

And by the way, "Je me souviens" is the first part of:

"Je me souviens
Que né sous le lys
Je prête allégeance à la rose"

I remember that, born under the sign of the lily (the french regime), I now swear allegiance to the rose (the british regime).

[Resevoir Hogs]

Why would Quebec suffer from separation ? It's not as if Quebec was a piss poor province subsidized by the rest of Canada.
They proven very strong so far, resisting the Anglo oppression then building the second stronguest economy of Canada. That's impressive and deserve respect. Is there so much to worry ?

Quebec isn't Canada's second largest provincial economy.

Anglo oppression HA, thats pretty funny. Quebec has some of the most stringent language laws in the country. If anything it's Anglophones in Quebec that are oppressed. Just a joke but it has some basis in reality.

There's a large population on Anglophones, Aboriginals and Francophones in Quebec who want to see Quebec stay in Canada. Even if the seperatists won a vote there would still be a large ammount of people who would want it to stay.

That would result in unrest, either in the form of violence, mass relocations and border disputes.

Quebec would suffer from seperation just like Canada would. Sorta the same way Lucien Bouchard suffered from his seperation.

[DE_Six]

Quebec isn't Canada's second largest provincial economy.

Anglo oppression HA, thats pretty funny. Quebec has some of the most stringent language laws in the country. If anything it's Anglophones in Quebec that are oppressed. Just a joke but it has some basis in reality.

There's a large population on Anglophones, Aboriginals and Francophones in Quebec who want to see Quebec stay in Canada. Even if the seperatists won a vote there would still be a large ammount of people who would want it to stay.

That would result in unrest, either in the form of violence, mass relocations and border disputes.

Quebec would suffer from seperation just like Canada would. Sorta the same way Lucien Bouchard suffered from his seperation.

True words.

I'm completely bilingual and can pass for either, but my GF is anglo and chances to be served in english outside Montreal are about as good as being served in french in Alberta.

Separation would be nothing but trouble, I have yet to see an argument in favor that's grounded in today's reality and that makes sense. The fact is, the hardcore separatists refer back to the 60s for most justifications, thus it's really an ideological, and to a point, emotional thing. BS, if you ask me.

We have a very good situation today, nothing justifies independance. Funny enough, back in the 1830s, when British oppression really meant something, the uprising (The Patriots) failed to garner enough support to emulate the american revolution. Now that we are on equal footing with the rest of Canada since the 1960s, there is a resurgence of separatism. Go figure. The way I see it, we had our chance back in 1837 and we didn't take it. FIDO.

I think that no matter how democratic 50% + 1 is, it's not enough to garner legitimacy for separation. Half the province doesn't want to go, they will have their world kicked upside down by a core of dogmatic separatists and a handful of swing voters? F*ck that. I would hope the line was drawn at least on 2/3 majority.

[artistoli]

Why would Quebec suffer from separation ? It's not as if Quebec was a piss poor province subsidized by the rest of Canada.
They proven very strong so far, resisting the Anglo oppression then building the second stronguest economy of Canada. That's impressive and deserve respect. Is there so much to worry ?

'Anglo oppresion'????
You think the French model leads to a strong economy!!???

ARE YOU VIEWING THIS WEB PAGE IN AN INSTITUTION?

Good grief.

[roland]

'Anglo oppresion'????
You think the French model leads to a strong economy!!???

ARE YOU VIEWING THIS WEB PAGE IN AN INSTITUTION?

Good grief.

calm down and learn: Yes. Oppression from the 10 février 1763 to 1960. Since then I was told the anglos are just contemptuous.

[EvanL]

calm down and learn: Yes. Oppression from the 10 février 1763 to 1960. Since then I was told the anglos are just contemptuous.
Quebeckers got over it. Why don't you?

[Resevoir Hogs]

calm down and learn: Yes. Oppression from the 10 février 1763 to 1960. Since then I was told the anglos are just contemptuous.

Look unless you've actually been to visit Canada and the Province of Quebec then you'll just have to stop making assumptions that are dead wrong.

I actually live in the capital so I have Quebec and Ontario to live in on a daily basis. Canada wouldn't be what it is without Quebec. Some of our most famous Canadians come from Quebec.

This is a bilingual country, not a English one oppressing a french minority.

I am however contemptuous of foreigners who know nothing about us and make comments about us as if they have any idea what we are like.

[roland]

Look unless you've actually been to visit Canada and the Province of Quebec then you'll just have to stop making assumptions that are dead wrong.

It's you who is wrong if you assume I've never been in Quebec.
I've been and stayed there a couple of time and traveled more than 5000 Km in the coutryside.
My grand father knew Rene Lévesque quite well and was invited in his home several time.
Now I was replying to artistoli that treated me retard while it's him who was wrong.
ciao

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

If this French tries to seperate. They should send in the Red Coats.

That will **** em.

[Resevoir Hogs]

It's you who is wrong if you assume I've never been in Quebec.
I've been and stayed there a couple of time and traveled more than 5000 Km in the coutryside.
My grand father knew Rene Lévesque quite well and was invited in his home several time.
Now I was replying to artistoli that treated me retard while it's him who was wrong.
ciao

Dude you do act like a retard, sorry but its thr truth.

You really don't have to go on like this, trying to paint Canada in a really messed up way.

But it's you who's made it you're online mission to talk crap about Canada and generally piss off those members here who love this country.

So don't be surprised when people come back and tell you you're out of line.

Oooo you visited here. SO what, I've lived here ALL my life in Quebec and Ontario, so I think I'd know a little bit more about the current state of affairs here than you do.

As for your buddy Rene Levesque, that's nice, that shows us exactly why you do hold the opinions you have. Because they've been shapped by the seperatists. Oh and btw I love the part when he lost the referendum and cried on national television, that just makes the victory ever more sweet.

[goldman]

Roland you would have much more productive day if you masturbate in front of De Gaulle's grave.

[Resevoir Hogs]

Haha Roland what do you think of Mr. Jacques Parizeau?

[DE_Six]

I have to agree with Reservoir Hogs.

As a french Quebecer, I am a little sick of people (especially foreigners) describing us as oppressed, because not only is it untrue, it's breeding a martyr mentality that stands in the way of progress.

I'm sick of hearing that. True, there was a time a hundred years ago when the english (or rather the newly arrived British administrators) were contemptuous of the french canadians. There never was real oppression, as in we have never been enslaved, getthoized, etc. There was a barrier, but it was socioeconomical rather than racial. The only exception would be the Grand Derangement, when Acadians were deported, but this was way before British Canada, it was wartime and both sides committed atrocities (ask the native americans).
Since, the situation has only been ameliorating. We gradually took control of the province, modernized it in the 1960s Revolution Tranquille and been living the good life since, protected by language legislation and Trudeau's minority protective legislation.

The social barriers that once were have nothing to do with oppression, that is a distorted view of our past. There was tension, conflict, a clear divide between us and the rest of Canada, but oppression is too strong a concept to describe it. There were very intense moments, such as the 1837 rebellion, the october 1970 crisis or the notoriously racist Durham report, but today, I'll be damned if we are oppressed. And if we were, it's not exclusively english Canada that is to blame. Until the 1960s, Maurice Duplessis and the catholic clergy did much worse to us than the english Canadians ever did (btw, it is a period referred to as the Great Darkness).

Simply consider how Canada's last 4 prime ministers included 3 Quebecers, and the fouth one is a french Ontarian.

Would you say french Basques and Corsicans are oppressed? How about the populations of your Indian ocean colonies?

Duplessis's Union Nationale's slogan said it best :"Maître chez nous". It's been pretty true ever since.

[Ericsson]

I,m dumbfounded by the amount of Idiots writing about something they know nothing about ??/ Who !! cares if he is Gay. there's more Gay in Canberra Australia then in Quebec ...Who !! cares . the last 3 Canadian prime minister where from Quebec Paul Martin is from Quebec.. the political elite is from there.. "You do what you want in that province"
know body tells you what to do..I have been there and it's the best place in Canada whit British Colombia..--->the girls in Montreal are just the best..

[Resevoir Hogs]

Well said DE6 my thoughts exactly. Quebec is as much my home as Ontario is and I won't have people spreading lies about it if I catch them.

[California Joe]

You know I was kidding when I started this thread in the first place but it seems to have sparked quite a spirited debate.

[EvanL]

You know my Mohawk buddies across the border in Quebec would never let a seperation happen.

[Resevoir Hogs]

You know my Mohawk buddies across the border in Quebec would never let a seperation happen.

Thank the lord for them man. Anyone that the seperatists hate is a friend of mine.

[EvanL]

You stinky cree bastard ;)

[Resevoir Hogs]

Hey I may stink but....well I don't know how to finish that sentence, you have a good point.

[goldman]

Intresting.....

[EvanL]

Hey I may stink but....well I don't know how to finish that sentence, you have a good point.
haha
my ancestors pwned yours.
http://www.snowwowl.com/images/flags/naflag30.jpg

[morkev]

the girls in Montreal are just the best..

The Quebec City girls are no slouches either

[roland]

Roland you would have much more productive day if you masturbate in front of De Gaulle's grave.

he he. I'm not surprised the Quebecquers can't stand the anglos anymore.

Problem easily solved:

* For France
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Flag_of_France.svg/125px-Flag_of_France.svg.png
Quebec
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0c/Quebec_flag.png/130px-Quebec_flag.png
:D

* For United Kingdom
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
Ontario
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/30/Flagofontario.png/130px-Flagofontario.png

* Joined sovereignty between France and United Kingdom
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Flag_of_France.svg/125px-Flag_of_France.svg.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
Acadia
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Acadia_flag.png/180px-Acadia_flag.png
That means
- Nouvelle Ecosse/Nova Scotia
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/07/Nova_Scotia_Flag.gif/130px-Nova_Scotia_Flag.gif
- Nouveau-Brunswick/New Brunswick
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/Flag_of_New_Brunswick.svg/130px-Flag_of_New_Brunswick.svg.png
- Île Saint-Jean/Prince Edward Island
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f1/Ca-pe.png/130px-Ca-pe.png
- Terre-Neuve et Labrador/Newfoundland and Labrador
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7c/Ca-nf.PNG/130px-Ca-nf.PNG



....
* For USA
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Flag_of_the_United_States.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png


... All the rest ....
:D


still waiting for the British green light though ....



...
oops I forgot:
* For Denmark
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/National_Flag_of_Denmark.svg/125px-National_Flag_of_Denmark.svg.png
Hans island (sorry no flag)


happy ? :D

[Paracaidista]

the girls in Montreal are just the best..


I second that! woot

But they are followed by the Eastern Townships' girls very close.

[Resevoir Hogs]

he he. I'm not surprised the Quebecquers can't stand the anglos anymore.

Ummm are you really THAT illiterate?


I do believe that this Quebecer said he couldn't stand you, not anglophones.

just as long as we are all in agreeance to be jackasses I figured I'd point that out.


I have to agree with Reservoir Hogs.

As a french Quebecer, I am a little sick of people (especially foreigners) describing us as oppressed

[Resevoir Hogs]

double post

[Nunavut's sewage]

he he. I'm not surprised the Quebecquers can't stand the anglos anymore.

Problem easily solved:

* For France
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Flag_of_France.svg/125px-Flag_of_France.svg.png
Quebec
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0c/Quebec_flag.png/130px-Quebec_flag.png
:D

* For United Kingdom
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
Ontario
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/30/Flagofontario.png/130px-Flagofontario.png

* Joined sovereignty between France and United Kingdom
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Flag_of_France.svg/125px-Flag_of_France.svg.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
Acadia
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Acadia_flag.png/180px-Acadia_flag.png
That means
- Nouvelle Ecosse/Nova Scotia
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/07/Nova_Scotia_Flag.gif/130px-Nova_Scotia_Flag.gif
- Nouveau-Brunswick/New Brunswick
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/Flag_of_New_Brunswick.svg/130px-Flag_of_New_Brunswick.svg.png
- Île Saint-Jean/Prince Edward Island
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f1/Ca-pe.png/130px-Ca-pe.png
- Terre-Neuve et Labrador/Newfoundland and Labrador
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7c/Ca-nf.PNG/130px-Ca-nf.PNG



....
* For USA
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Flag_of_the_United_States.svg/125px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png


... All the rest ....
:D


still waiting for the British green light though ....



...
oops I forgot:
* For Denmark
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/National_Flag_of_Denmark.svg/125px-National_Flag_of_Denmark.svg.png
Hans island (sorry no flag)


happy ? :D

Ummm I don't know whether you're joking or serious. But I doubt most people find breaking up their home country very funny. Personally I think you're a tool.

[California Joe]

I'm sorry if the perceived animosity amongst french and anglo Canadians doesn't rise to the level of the Serbs and Bosnians or the Turks and the Greeks but it's just something you'll have to live with Roland. And I just checked this morning and no, the US has no plans to annex our brothers to the North. I'm sure that will help you sleep better at night, in France, in your bunker, wearing tinfoil pajamas.

[Resevoir Hogs]

wearing tinfoil pajamas.

They help keep the mind reading satelites from seeing his thoughts about 40 year old sasquatch women.

[roland]

And I just checked this morning and no, the US has no plans to annex our brothers to the North. I'm sure that will help you sleep better at night, in France, in your bunker, wearing tinfoil pajamas.

this you can't know.
Now hey, of course I'm not serious.
But the scenario is just realist enough to be tempting for us and make some anglo Canadian have insomnia if I was them. The best proof is all those bitter reactions. If it were completely crazy like you pretend, they would'nt have reacted that way..
But I'm not them and I see that being original isn't much aprecied by a lot of people.
Better stay away from our touchy anglo Canadians.
ciao

[Resevoir Hogs]

this you can't know.
Now hey, of course I'm not serious.
But the scenario is just realist enough to be tempting for us and make some anglo Canadian have insomnia if I was them. The best proof is all those bitter reactions. If it were completely crazy like you pretend, they would'nt have reacted that way..
But I'm not them and I see that being original isn't much aprecied by a lot of people.
Better stay away from our touchy anglo Canadians.
ciao

Yea and this YOU deffinetly CAN'T know. Gotta love it. Someone in France telling someone in America what the US is going to do.

Oh and you'll be glad to know I sleep very well at night knowing the US is our neighbour and would defend us against any invasion.

There's a difference between being original and being a ass. I only appreciate theories that are based in reality not in your fanciful interpretation of history.

[roland]

Yea and this YOU deffinetly CAN'T know. Gotta love it. Someone in France telling someone in America what the US is going to do.


No I don't know. Did I said the contrary ? hell I 've never said that the US is planning anything. Nevertheless, simple logic say that they should. My logic is based on the usual predatory way of thinking of states that makes Canada, a weak, rich and empty country with a lot of lines of fractures, a tempting prey. Apart all the provocation and jokes I could have made because I got pissed, is it offensive to say that ? It's obvious to any European not too retarded that what I say is true. You don't want to see it ? fine. May be you're right, may be North American people are different. But in the long run, sorry, the human nature being what it is, I doubt it.
End of the story. Give me a break now. You can't complain about my presence and at the same time comment what I said either trying to turn it ridiculous, either showing a great misunderstanding.
No resentment, when I said I respect the innocents I mean it. cheers.

[Resevoir Hogs]

No I don't know. Did I said the contrary ? hell I 've never said that the US is planning anything. Nevertheless, simple logic say that they should. My logic is based on the usual predatory way of thinking

Well then you're logic is FARRR too simplistic as nations are more than just simple entities that consume each other. A nation is vastly more complex than what you seem to make them out to be. You have to consider more variables than your simple view of what human nature is.


of states that makes Canada, a weak, rich and empty country with a lot of lines of fractures, a tempting prey.

I don't really care if you have a negative view of my country. But if all you measure strength by is the military then that is again over simplistic. Canada is by no means a weak country. But if you want to try and offend me by calling us weak well then try coming over here and saying that to a patriotic Canadians face in person. Funny how the internet lets people say whatever they want without getting a face full of fist.

Secondly, whether a country has a large military or not does not matter when you consider a few other factors. Canada and the US have a very close defence, economic and political partnership. The US already has access to resources in Canada as we sell them and trade with them. The US people have a respect for human life just as we do, therefore they would not declare war to swallow up a resource base they already have access to. They wouldn't want to waste the lives of their own soldiers nor those of their neighbours for something they already have access to.


Apart all the provocation and jokes I could have made because I got pissed, is it offensive to say that ?

I think I already made it pretty clear that you advocating the destruction of my country is offensive. Accept it and move on.


It's obvious to any European not too retarded that what I say is true.
So now you're saying any European that disagrees with your viewpoint is retarded? what are you five?


You don't want to see it ? fine. May be you're right, may be North American people are different
I think we already established that thanks.


But in the long run, sorry, the human nature being what it is, I doubt it.
I do not pretend to know what the future will hold, as you do. However, I do know that human nature is FARR more complex than you think it is.



End of the story. Give me a break now. You can't complain about my presence and at the same time comment what I said either trying to turn it ridiculous, either showing a great misunderstanding.

In the other thread I chose to tell you to get out because you were hijacking the discussion of that thread. Here however, the discussion is relevant. Don't complain.



No resentment, when I said I respect the innocents I mean it. cheers.

Unfortunetly I only got half of what you said as I don't understand what you mean by "I respect the innocents", but I think I got the just of it.

Well I find it hard to believe you have no resentment for Canada and Canadians in general when you tell us that you seem to respect the former seperatist leader and make jokes about Canada being weak and how its going to be broken up.

[roland]

..of states that makes Canada, a weak, rich and empty country with a lot of lines of fractures, a tempting prey.

I don't really care if you have a negative view of my country. But if all you measure strength by is the military then that is again over simplistic.
Canada is by no means a weak country. But if you want to try and offend me by calling us weak well then try coming over here and saying that to a patriotic Canadians face in person.
That's here all the misunderstanding comes from: saying that Canada is weak is NOT offensive or having a negative opinion of Canada. You take everything too emotionally I'm affraid.



I think I already made it pretty clear that you advocating the destruction of my country is offensive. Accept it and move on.

I've never advocated the destruction of the country. I advocated the destruction of the current state. I understand that can be hard to hear but I never thought that was a taboo. Okay I'l stop, even I'm afraid that put me in some mod line of fire.



So now you're saying any European that disagrees with your viewpoint is retarded? what are you five?

Yes. Any European that don't know that the strong tend to try to swallow the weak is a retard since all of our history is based on this struggle to survive in a hightly competitive environment.



In the other thread I chose to tell you to get out because you were hijacking the discussion of that thread. Here however, the discussion is relevant. Don't complain.

sorry but my first post was on topic then all what I did was answer off topic posts, most of them offensive or caricatures of what I said. Here ok we can speak.



Well I find it hard to believe you have no resentment for Canada and Canadians in general when you tell us that you seem to respect the former seperatist leader and make jokes about Canada being weak and how its going to be broken up.

Yep. Nevertheless I have absolutelly nothing against Canadian people. All what I see is France's interest in my opinion.

[Resevoir Hogs]

That's here all the misunderstanding comes from: saying that Canada is weak is NOT offensive or having a negative opinion of Canada. You take everything too emotionally I'm affraid.

It has nothing to do with emotions buddy. I disagree with your assertion that we are a weak country. Because I know we are not. period.



I've never advocated the destruction of the country. I advocated the destruction of the current state. I understand that can be hard to hear but I never thought that was a taboo. Okay I'l stop, even I'm afraid that put me in some mod line of fire.

The current state is my country. Without Quebec Canada wouldn't be Canada anymore. Don't mix your words. AS I previously said I find advocating the destruction of my country and state to be offensive. Especially when France owes its existance to Canadian soldiers who helped liberate it.



Yes. Any European that don't know that the strong tend to try to swallow the weak is a retard since all of our history is based on this struggle to survive in a hightly competitive environment.

Incorrect I'm affraid. Although war plays a big role in the history of the world. It cannot account for or explain everything that has happened in history. You look at the current state of affairs of Europe with the EU and you see a trend that is deffinetly not what you are describing. In fact Europe is taking a lesson from the relationship of North American countries on that.

What you are ignoring is the fact that in human society recently the value for human life has become a far more dominant theme ammong not only leaders and voters, but nations as a whole. If you ignore the fact that more people now value stability over the dominance of their nation then the picture one could paint of the future is far different than what you are suggesting.

hundreds of years ago we didn't even have human rights. Thats changed. And thankfully the world has changed since our European ancestors times.



sorry but my first post was on topic then all what I did was answer off topic posts, most of them offensive or caricatures of what I said. Here ok we can speak.

Yes appology accepted. However, when I attempted to point out that a US invasion of Canada is highly speculative and unlikely you responded by ignoring my point so don't be surprised when people make offence to you.




Yep. Nevertheless I have absolutelly nothing against Canadian people. All what I see is France's interest in my opinion.

So its in Frances interest to see the destruction of Canada? Thanks for showing us the hipocricy of your argument. You can't have your cake and eat it to. You're either for the existance of Canada or you're not.

Oh and by the way when you distort history and present day reality by claiming Anglophones are oppressing Francophones, it shows you really do ahve something against us.

[roland]

It has nothing to do with emotions buddy. I disagree with your assertion that we are a weak country. Because I know we are not. period.

sorry but you really felt outraged and didn't gave much argument btw.



The current state is my country. Without Quebec Canada wouldn't be Canada anymore. Don't mix your words. AS I previously said I find advocating the destruction of my country and state to be offensive.
And me I wish Quebec and France reunification. One way, perhaps (there is no hurry) could be through the destruction of Canadian state. Destroying a country for me is the destruction of its building, agriculture and the killing of a lot of its people. The destruction of a state can be no painfull at all, on the contrary. Am I allowed to express this excentric point of vew or do I have to shut up or risk to be banned ?



Especially when France owes its existance to Canadian soldiers who helped liberate it.
Comon, some brave Canadian fought in France that's true and we owe them a lot but saying that France owes its existance to Canada is a litle too much don't you think so ? Even if it was the case (it's NOT) does that mean I have no right to express my opinion ?



Incorrect I'm affraid. Although war plays a big role in the history of the world. It cannot account for or explain everything that has happened in history. You look at the current state of affairs of Europe with the EU and you see a trend that is deffinetly not what you are describing. In fact Europe is taking a lesson from the relationship of North American countries on that.

Balance of power isn't only war. There is also alliances and .. preparation for war. That's why I said that imho Canada should have a guerilla army like Swizerland.
Now I'm quite sure France wouldn't trust any country's benevolent intention for her survival. Hopefully. If Canada believe in that, fine.



What you are ignoring is the fact that in human society recently the value for human life has become a far more dominant theme ammong not only leaders and voters, but nations as a whole. If you ignore the fact that more people now value stability over the dominance of their nation then the picture one could paint of the future is far different than what you are suggesting.

those last 50 years of peace aren't a long period enough to make an opinion about human and state's nature. Personally I predict much more savage times ahead.
Again, if your country think it can rely on those great ideals for its security, fine. As long as mine don't, that's not my problem.



hundreds of years ago we didn't even have human rights. Thats changed. And thankfully the world has changed since our European ancestors times.

I don't believe it one second.



Yes appology accepted. However, when I attempted to point out that a US invasion of Canada is highly speculative and unlikely you responded by ignoring my point so don't be surprised when people make offence to you.

The only argument you gave was your German example witch I countered quite easily.
US invasion of Canada is highly speculative ? of course. So what ? aren't we allowed to speculate ? isn't the definition of the threat highly speculative ?
The problem is that you and a lot of your fellow tried to ridiculize what I said because that disturbed you but my point of vew is perhaps wrong, I'm not conviced, but nevertheless a valid point of vew.



So its in Frances interest to see the destruction of Canada? Thanks for showing us the hipocricy of your argument. You can't have your cake and eat it to. You're either for the existance of Canada or you're not.

yep: that would mean France and Quebec reunification. I say it like I think it. I'm affraid that on the contrary, the problem is that I'm not hypocrit enough for you.
This being said there is the 1763 treaty of Paris and there is not much France can do. That's why it would be better if it was done through America intervention.
but again and again: THIS IS SPECULATION ! a intellectual game if you want. I have fun with that but if that make the anglo Canadian here all upset and sad, I stop.

[FlightSergeantRose]

Whats a foreigner doing debating Quebec/Canada relations with us? I've lived in NWO my whole life and not even I would make such a stink Roland. I think your being a bit of a **** disturber.

[EvanL]

Roland you would do a better job arguing if you didn't have Levesques **** in your mouth.

[Atlantic Friend]

They help keep the mind reading satelites from seeing his thoughts about 40 year old sasquatch women.


Except if Canadian Intelligence sprays you with their special maple syrup, of course ! Oooooh those naughty, naughty Canucks ! p-)

[Atlantic Friend]

It has nothing to do with emotions buddy. I disagree with your assertion that we are a weak country. Because I know we are not. period.

RH, I salute your faith in the possible redemption of human nature, but really I'm afraid you're wasting your time here.


So its in Frances interest to see the destruction of Canada? Thanks for showing us the hipocricy of your argument. You can't have your cake and eat it to. You're either for the existance of Canada or you're not.

Roland just finds it funny to irritate you about the "historical necessity" of reunifying Quebec and France, apparently based on a common language and history. On these bases, I find it funny he doesn't call for the immediate recolonization of French-speaking Africa, an attempt to force a French Anschluss on parts of Switzerland, and the occupation of French-speaking parts of Belgium.

Politically speaking, France and Canada have no beef with each other, they usually see eye to eye in vital issues (global trade, global security, human rights, democracy, environment, etc). For this sin alone they usually are treated the same bad way by the most vocal of US ultra-conservatives, to whom both nations are just living off the security net provided by the US.

[roland]

.. and the occupation of French-speaking parts of Belgium.


Reunification isn't occupation

http://rwf.be/images/RFW-100px.gif
http://rwf.ifrance.com/

Now I'm going to have problem with the Flemish belgian too...

Sorry Atlantic but it seems it's NOT thank to losers like you that France still exist. I guess that with capitulars your lot we would be still occupied by the English and our dear Alsace and Lorraine would still be German.
Now I guess you are ready to surrender Corsica, the West Indies, New Caledonia, Tahiti and so on aren't you ?

[Atlantic Friend]

Reunification isn't occupation

http://rwf.be/images/RFW-100px.gif
http://rwf.ifrance.com/

Now I'm going to have problem with the Flemish belgian too...

Sorry Atlantic but it seems it's NOT thank to losers like you that France still exist. I guess that with capitulars your lot we would be still occupied by the English and our dear Alsace and Lorraine would still be German.
Now I guess you are ready to surrender Corsica, the West Indies, New Caledonia, Tahiti and so on aren't you ?

Roland, the big difference about you and me - let's say the biggest, because I really suspect there are quite a few - is that as see France not as a collection of geographical territories, but as an idea, which cannot live except through the national sentiment of the citizen body. Should we lose this sentiment that France is special, that it's worth living for and dying for, and we'll lose France, whether you still hold your oh-so-precious Paris or not.

With your approach, which is basically to discard the will of the people as utterly irrelevant when compared to the possession of territory, you would rather have followed Pétain instead of de Gaulle in 1940, since Vichy held the most land and appealed to the same hollow nationalistic rhetoric.

You can dream on, Roland, about the French Empire, the 120 Départements of pre-1815 Europe, and go around beating your chest about all that jazz - all you have here is a bunch of hollow dreams, which may or may not make you feel special and make up for whatever dark cloud looms on your horizon. Gone are those days, gone is the Empire, and guess what, France fared better developing her inner capacities than wasting them in tactically brilliant but strategically futile imperial wars.

If I cared about your opinion, which as expressed on this thread has been infantile at best, I'd urge you to crack up a few history books and try to engage your brain instead of your lower regions. I find it extremely funny that when countered by logic, you resort to the very same ad hominems that make you frothy at the mouth when they are used by US neocons.

So, my use of logic makes me a "Capitulard" (surrender-****e people for our non-Francophone friends around here) in your eyes ? My, my, I'm shivering in my boots. And you, o modern Caesar, say France owes nothing to me, suggesting maybe she owes quite a lot more to your kind of people ? Wow, I'm knocked flat !

Guess what, Roland : in MY opinion, France owes neither of us anything. WE owe her quite a lot, and first of all we owe France not to ridicule her by our public behaviour. But that's another one of our many other deep differences, I suppose...

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

If the Empire grants Quebec indepedance (What France wants) can the Empire recieve as compensation 3/4's of France that it ruled in 1300's including Paris?

[Resevoir Hogs]

sorry but you really felt outraged and didn't gave much argument btw.

I do believe that's what I just gave you. It was again that your logic is too simplistic to make assertions about the future of two nations. And that if you were to apply your logic to your own country that it would mean Germany would again invade France, and win.



And me I wish Quebec and France reunification. One way, perhaps (there is no hurry) could be through the destruction of Canadian state. Destroying a country for me is the destruction of its building, agriculture and the killing of a lot of its people. The destruction of a state can be no painfull at all, on the contrary. Am I allowed to express this excentric point of vew or do I have to shut up or risk to be banned ?

You can express any point you want. But you'll have to realise that your particular point of view is offensive to those of us who actually live here in Quebec or Canada. Yes it would be painful because you'd have millions of people displaced from their homes, families and neighbours torn appart, possible rioting and civil unrest, as well as extreme animosity. And btw that I consider people who want Quebec to seperate from Canada to be either traitors or scum. That's my point of view.



Comon, some brave Canadian fought in France that's true and we owe them a lot but saying that France owes its existance to Canada is a litle too much don't you think so ? Even if it was the case (it's NOT) does that mean I have no right to express my opinion ?

If Canada, along with the United States, the British and other nations hadn't invaded and pushed the Nazis out of France then France would no longer exist. So no it isn't too much to say that. And the fact you can't acknowledge that or choose to distort history shows you have little respect for what the Allies did for your country.

It is the case and you should have more respect for one of the nations your country owes its existance to.

(on a side note, during the Iraq war 2. A bunch of French students defaced the tombstones of Canadian WW1 soldiers, thinking they were US tombs.)



Balance of power isn't only war. There is also alliances and .. preparation for war. That's why I said that imho Canada should have a guerilla army like Swizerland.
Now I'm quite sure France wouldn't trust any country's benevolent intention for her survival. Hopefully. If Canada believe in that, fine.

Yea France would NEVER trust another country like that. That's why you've entered into such a close defence relationship with other EU nations and have non french troops stationed within your borders. I.E. German.



those last 50 years of peace aren't a long period enough to make an opinion about human and state's nature. Personally I predict much more savage times ahead.
Again, if your country think it can rely on those great ideals for its security, fine. As long as mine don't, that's not my problem.

The last fifty years weren't of peace. But of cooperation between US and Canda and other NATO nations, the likes of which the world has never seen before. Our country relys on the sacrifice of our soldiers and security forces for our security. Our ideals is what ties us to our allies.



I don't believe it one second.
That's because you choose to ignore modern day facts. Live in your fantasy land, that's fine.



The only argument you gave was your German example witch I countered quite easily.

Saying no you're wrong isn't a counter. All you said certainly Germany would
try to again invade France. Showing us that you completely ignore the allied relationship France and Germany now have.



US invasion of Canada is highly speculative ? of course. So what ? aren't we allowed to speculate ? isn't the definition of the threat highly speculative ?
The problem is that you and a lot of your fellow tried to ridiculize what I said because that disturbed you but my point of vew is perhaps wrong, I'm not conviced, but nevertheless a valid point of vew.

No, we tried to show you how your speculation was wrong, you ignored it and then we ridiculed you. IF you can't defend your logic with facts and examples then that's fine. I gave you examples for why the US and Canada would not go to war, you ignored them.
They were again, that the US has access to our resource base already, and would therefore not need to invade us to gain access to it. Canada has a long history of cooperation and any president suggesting we turn that history on its head would be commiting political suicide. And the American people don't want to see their sons and daughters die or kill for no good reason, and invading Canada for resources they already access, isn't a good reason.



yep: that would mean France and Quebec reunification. I say it like I think it. I'm affraid that on the contrary, the problem is that I'm not hypocrit enough for you.
This being said there is the 1763 treaty of Paris and there is not much France can do. That's why it would be better if it was done through America intervention.
but again and again: THIS IS SPECULATION ! a intellectual game if you want. I have fun with that but if that make the anglo Canadian here all upset and sad, I stop.
Face it America is a farr closer ally to Canada than it is to France. They would never invade a allied country that they ALREADY get vast resources from, just to give a peice of it to France. Speculation is fine, but only speculation that is based on facts and history. Yours obviously isn't, its based on your inner desire to see a bigger French empire. That sort of thinking is outdated ammong western leaders thankfully.

What makes this anglo unhappy is people who talk about the destruction of Canada as if its a joke, and people who ignore facts and substitute their own fiction to make a speculative point.

Try lobbying the US embassy with your invasion plans I'm sure they'll get a good laugh out of that.

[Resevoir Hogs]

Also the only time you actually cite an example in history to back up your speculation is when the US and Canada fought against each other in the 1800s. However, you ignore all the history since that time. You ignore the fact that in the 1900s and up until today. Canadian and American troops have fought along side each other, in Europe, Korea, Afghanistan, the Balkans, and many other theatres. Times have changed since the imperialistic days of napoleon, why don't you?

[Resevoir Hogs]

Roland you are entitled to have your opinion, even wrong opinions based on little fact. However, as soon as your opinion includes the invasion, subversion, or destruction of other nations, especially allied ones, then you had better be prepared to accept that there are going to be a lot of people out there who dislike you. You can talk trash all you want about my country and breaking it up for your own nationalistic selfish needs. That doesn't matter to me, it only makes you look immature. But don't for one second think that I'm just going to sit by and say "fine we disagree but I respect your opinion", because I honestly don't respect your opinion.

[Paracaidista]

I think the France of today does not admit a colonial model anymore. That's why they dropped the African colonies. And mainly for that reason they won't pursuit a reunification with Quebec, unless and even that, Quebec secedes and makes (and wins) another referendum to be with.

Anything else is as much as a "whishful thinking" as the separationists in Quebec.

[roland]

Roland, the big difference about you and me - let's say the biggest, because I really suspect there are quite a few - is that as see France not as a collection of geographical territories, but as an idea, which cannot live except through the national sentiment of the citizen body. Should we lose this sentiment that France is special, that it's worth living for and dying for, and we'll lose France, whether you still hold your oh-so-precious Paris or not.

Right and wrong. Wrong because that's not a difference between us. And no I'm not parisian.



With your approach, which is basically to discard the will of the people as utterly irrelevant when compared to the possession of territory, you would rather have followed Pétain instead of de Gaulle in 1940, since Vichy held the most land and appealed to the same hollow nationalistic rhetoric.


WTF ????
When I say that the Republican ideal is not based on people's consent but on people's Rights, witch is true, you translate it as I consider people's consent as irrelevant. Small surprise your don't understand much then.



You can dream on, Roland, about the French Empire, the 120 Départements of pre-1815 Europe, and go around beating your chest about all that jazz - all you have here is a bunch of hollow dreams, which may or may not make you feel special and make up for whatever dark cloud looms on your horizon. Gone are those days, gone is the Empire, and guess what, France fared better developing her inner capacities than wasting them in tactically brilliant but strategically futile imperial wars.


Live our little life in our little country, comfortably without too much agitation is what we are doing since a while and it didn't gave us any good.
I've just cleaned my kristal ball, let me guess: aren't you a socialist civil servant ? those who have ruined France, there childrens and there grand childrens ?
"France fared better developing her inner capacities" ? see how low we are currently. give me a fvucking break.

France had been stollen Quebec, and Belgium is nothing more than an English drawing on the map. We've be despoiled. Quebec and Belgium belongs to France period.
And NO I'm not obsessed by that, I just express my opinion when I have an occasion witch is my right despite all the @ss holes who don't like it.
And NO I've never said we should go to war. Centuries of pressure, influence and patient work should do it. Stop twisting my words that would be a good start.

[DE_Six]

France had been stollen Quebec.

Quebec wasn't stolen from France. France lost it. Get over it.

Today's Quebecers are not Frenchmen in exile. We are our very own brand, the result of decades of immigration, intermarriage and internal emigration. I doubt there's even a remotely significant number of Quebecers who can claim pure french origins.

And I don't think even separatists would share your views. They think we should leave Canada to be independant, not to become a province of another country.

Your imperialistic dreams are downright sad.

I think that after what AtlanticFriend told you, you should kindly take a clue and hole up.

[Resevoir Hogs]

I think the France of today does not admit a colonial model anymore. That's why they dropped the African colonies. And mainly for that reason they won't pursuit a reunification with Quebec, unless and even that, Quebec secedes and makes (and wins) another referendum to be with.

Anything else is as much as a "whishful thinking" as the separationists in Quebec.

Thank you someone finally understands what I am getting at. Times have changed so much since the old imperialistic days of old Europe.

See this concept of reunification with France is utter nonesense for two reasons.
1. Quebec may be a primarily French province but it is not just French. There are a lot of billingual, english speaking, and the original inhabitants, the aboriginal tribes that live here too. Present day French speaking Quebeceurs owe no alliegance to France, they are a completely unique culture today. To take all of Quebec and give it to France would be lunacy because France no longer has any ligitimate claims to the land. That would be like English Canada reunifying under a British Empire.

2. Canada is now a sovereign and stable nation. For France to push to have it's old colony back would incur the contempt of both Canada and the US as well as other NATO allies. What is the point of being in a alliance like this if one of those allies turns around and tries to mess you up? Thankfully French leaders seem to have cooler heads than roland here.

[Resevoir Hogs]

And NO I'm not obsessed by that, I just express my opinion when I have an occasion witch is my right despite all the @ss holes who don't like it.
And NO I've never said we should go to war. Centuries of pressure, influence and patient work should do it. Stop twisting my words that would be a good start.


Roland you had better watch yourself. Don't start calling us assholes because you know we're right and can't stand to say it.

Oh and by the way England took Quebec by force in a time of war. Don't think for a second that France would ever get control of it through any other way than war. Centuries of pressure, influence and patience won't do it as long as there are patriotic Canadians prepared to defend our country by force.

You want Quebec back you'll have to take it, because its my home not yours.

[Olybrius]

Live our little life in our little country, comfortably without too much agitation is what we are doing since a while and it didn't gave us any good.
I've just cleaned my kristal ball, let me guess: aren't you a socialist civil servant ? those who have ruined France, there childrens and there grand childrens ?
"France fared better developing her inner capacities" ? see how low we are currently. give me a fvucking break.

France had been stollen Quebec, and Belgium is nothing more than an English drawing on the map. We've be despoiled. Quebec and Belgium belongs to France period.
And NO I'm not obsessed by that, I just express my opinion when I have an occasion witch is my right despite all the @ss holes who don't like it.
And NO I've never said we should go to war. Centuries of pressure, influence and patient work should do it. Stop twisting my words that would be a good start.

What a joke , you should live in the real world not in an imaginary one..
here you sound only like an totally immature and stubborn kid...

[Atlantic Friend]

When I say that the Republican ideal is not based on people's consent but on people's Rights, witch is true, you translate it as I consider people's consent as irrelevant. Small surprise your don't understand much then.

Given the fact that earlier in the thread you cheerfully advocate the use of military force against the civilian population of any part of France which would want to secede, I think that I translated your "Republican ideal" very precisely. Do the République a favor, and don't invoke her name in vain...

Speaking of people's rights, don't you think it's strange you don't even wonder whether the Québécois Canadians want to become French citizens ? Have you seen, in the last Independence referendums over there any Independeists party saying that Québéc should break away from Canada and ask for French membership ? I guess you're too preoccupied about getting a compensation for your lost "rights" to even think about such contemptible details...


Live our little life in our little country, comfortably without too much agitation is what we are doing since a while and it didn't gave us any good.

Oh, I'm sure attacking (politically or militarily) allied countries such as Canada
will do wonders for France's status in the world, there's just no doubt about that, how could I be so blind ? :roll:


I've just cleaned my kristal ball, let me guess: aren't you a socialist civil servant ? those who have ruined France, there childrens and there grand childrens ?

Oh my God, I'm discovered ! Yes, I ruined the country ! I ruined my children and grandchildren (along with yours, by the way). Hahaha ! And I plan to ruin the world now, and there's nothing you can do about it ! And I even peed in your cereals this morning !

Goodness, Roland, how old are you ?


"France fared better developing her inner capacities" ? see how low we are currently. give me a fvucking break.

How low ? Lessee...looks like we are the 5th largest economy (despite my best efforts to ruin the country, I should add), an independent nuclear power, with a population over 60 millions, a real international stature we tend to waggle in everybopdy's face for rather gratuitous reasons, we invest heavily in aerospace and medicine, etc. My God, you're right, we are doomed ! DOOOOMED !

As for our current challenges about unemployment, or immigration, or foreigners not respecting France enough (or Socialists civil servants ruining the country and children yet to be born), I'm really really sure attacking Canada or invading Belgium will do wonders for that...No, really, I mean it ! :roll:


France had been stollen Quebec, and Belgium is nothing more than an English drawing on the map. We've be despoiled. Quebec and Belgium belongs to France period.

I must say the "Roland doctrine" is extremely original. Basically, you just have to declare :

"Historically, [insert here name of coveted country/region] has always belonged to [insert here name of your country/region], which has been despoiled by jealous neighbours". Gosh, I'm sure nobody ever tried that before ! Historically, the Sudetenland...Historically, Eastern Poland...Historically, my jealous neighbour's wife...

Get serious, Roland. The new horizon is 2015, not 1315. It's no longer time to force the Flanders into submission, and your Napoleonic dream of a 120 Départements-strong France is dead as a dodo. Period.

You want France to engage in some glorious act, so a small part of this glory can shine on you by association ? Good news, no need to attack allies and neighbours ! You just have to pick one among the thousand dangers that ARE already threatening us, be brave, think about France, and do your duty, as is expected from everyone of us.

[Resevoir Hogs]

I like Atlantic friend's use of sarcasm, good one man.

[Nunavut's sewage]

And NO I'm not obsessed by that, I just express my opinion when I have an occasion witch is my right despite all the @ss holes who don't like it.


Dude you wanna start name calling now? You're the one who was complaining about it like a few posts ago. Well that just goes to show us how immature you are.

[California Joe]

I have always found Atlantic Friends posts to be informative and enlightening.

[roland]

Given the fact that earlier in the thread you cheerfully advocate the use of military force against the civilian population of any part of France which would want to secede, I think that I translated your "Republican ideal" very precisely. Do the République a favor, and don't invoke her name in vain...


and you learn the difference between Republic and Socialism before lecturing me on the Republic.



Speaking of people's rights, don't you think it's strange you don't even wonder whether the Québécois Canadians want to become French citizens ? Have you seen, in the last Independence referendums over there any Independeists party saying that Québéc should break away from Canada and ask for French membership ? I guess you're too preoccupied about getting a compensation for your lost "rights" to even think about such contemptible details...

You're a genius. Of course it's too soon, some more work need to be done.



Oh, I'm sure attacking (politically or militarily) allied countries such as Canada
will do wonders for France's status in the world, there's just no doubt about that, how could I be so blind ? :roll:


yeah and where did I said that we should attack Canada ? I've reminded not further than my last post that I never said that. We are a little thick Atlantic aren't we ? again, you are putting words in my mouth that's boring.



How low ? Lessee...looks like we are the 5th largest economy (despite my best efforts to ruin the country, I should add), an independent nuclear power, with a population over 60 millions, a real international stature we tend to waggle in everybopdy's face for rather gratuitous reasons, we invest heavily in aerospace and medicine, etc. My God, you're right, we are doomed ! DOOOOMED !


everything was already there 30 years ago. What was done since then ? NOTHING ! except 60,000 Euro of debt per active people who are only 20 million, among whome there is 6 million civil servant and 3 million unemployed. Good job.



As for our current challenges about unemployment, or immigration, or foreigners not respecting France enough (or Socialists civil servants ruining the country and children yet to be born), I'm really really sure attacking Canada or invading Belgium will do wonders for that...No, really, I mean it ! :roll:


That's not going to be your job anymore: you are going to be fired.
If France got "Argentinized" I just hope you're not going to die of starvation: hell who would ever hire a former civil servant ?



I must say the "Roland doctrine" is extremely original. Basically, you just have to declare :

"Historically, [insert here name of coveted country/region] has always belonged to [insert here name of your country/region], which has been despoiled by jealous neighbours". Gosh, I'm sure nobody ever tried that before ! Historically, the Sudetenland...Historically, Eastern Poland...Historically, my jealous neighbour's wife...


I could give you my loggin so you could do the questions and the answer that would be more simple.

[Zarathustra]

I have always found Atlantic Friends posts to be informative and enlightening.

That's true. He stoled to me the award of the cleverer French on here. Damn him !

[EvanL]

god you guys are such wankers.
http://www.worldpeace.no/filer/WHITE-FLAG-3.jpg

[Resevoir Hogs]

Meh this is a waste of time. I'm out, I agree with Atlantic Friend.

[dez000]

Reunification isn't occupation

http://rwf.be/images/RFW-100px.gif
http://rwf.ifrance.com/

Now I'm going to have problem with the Flemish belgian too...

Sorry Atlantic but it seems it's NOT thank to losers like you that France still exist. I guess that with capitulars your lot we would be still occupied by the English and our dear Alsace and Lorraine would still be German.
Now I guess you are ready to surrender Corsica, the West Indies, New Caledonia, Tahiti and so on aren't you ?

Huh, whats wrong with Flemish Belgians? Whats going on? And whats that french site about?