Features

Jeanette X · #1

As long as we are discussing Catholicism, check out the saints index on Catholic Online. There really is a saint for almost every day of the year. http://www.catholic.org/saints/stindex.php

Saint Bartholomew: Skinned alive

You gotta admire that kind of devotion to a cause...

Saint Joan of Arc: Warrior for France

My personal favorite.

El Blanco · #2

The greatest warrior in French history was a 16 year old chick. Anybody else not shocked?

Also, a lot of those saints never really existed. They were more like glorified local legends. That isn't to say that none of them were real.

Jeanette X · #3

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Blanco

The greatest warrior in French history was a 16 year old chick. Anybody else not shocked?

Also, a lot of those saints never really existed. They were more like glorified local legends. That isn't to say that none of them were real.

Well, we do know that Joanie existed. There are records of her trial.

And I believe I read that the Vatican unsainted a few saints because of the lack of historical evidence.

The_Rorschach · #4

I don't think she got it Blanco, but I did.

Jeanette X · #5

No, I got it. It was a crack about the French and how they didn't support the war.

Protoclown · #6

Don't worry about it, Jeanette. Rorshach just feels a childish compulsion to insult you ever chance he gets. Ignore him.

Jeanette X · #7

Message deleted.

El Blanco · #8

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeanette X

No, I got it. It was a crack about the French and how they didn't support the war.

No, its a crack on France's inability to succeed in any military venture. Believe me, the jokes about the French didn't just show up a few months ago. How many times did Married With children or the simpsons make a crack like that?

Jeanette X · #9

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Blanco

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeanette X

No, I got it. It was a crack about the French and how they didn't support the war.

No, its a crack on France's inability to succeed in any military venture.

Its a rather sexist joke now that I think about it.

El Blanco · #10

Thats okay, honey. We don't expect you gals to be able to keep up with our jokes. You just need to keep a clean house and look pretty.

Jeanette X · #11

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Blanco

Thats okay, honey. We don't expect you gals to be able to keep up with our jokes. You just need to keep a clean house and look pretty.

I can clean house, look pretty, and chop people's heads off in battle.

Speaking of women, Saint Agatha here is the patron saint of rape victims, and of breast cancer. She was tortured and her breasts were cut off when she refused to work in a brothel

"Cruel man, have you forgotten your mother and the breast that nourished you, that you dare to mutilate me this way?"

Saint Bibiana is also one of my favorites. She too was forced into prostitution and imprisoned when she refused. She was forced to live in a mad house, and the time she spent there made here the patron saint of the mentally ill.

theapportioner · #12

No, its a crack on France's inability to succeed in any military venture

And a highly inaccurate one. See Charles Martel, Charlemagne, Napoleon, for example.

The_Rorschach · #13

Christ people. Since World War 2 France has been regarded as a military non-entity. The joke, as I saw it, was pretty innocent, but worth a chuckle.

And furthermore, Proto, I don't even see how I could possibly be insulting Jen in this. She responded to what was a fairly light hearted post by Blanco with information regardng the verifiable evidence that certain Saints were more than legend -Entirely ignoring his minor jest.

I was just trying to let him know it didn't fall entirely on deaf ears. I'm not a complete asshole you know.

El Blanco · #14

Quote:

Charles Martel, Charlemagne

Germans. Look where the Holy Roman empire was.

Quote:

Napoleon

Born and raised on Corsica, which may fly French flags, but is more Italian. and the only reason he is considered all that great was that he actually got French troops to fire their rifles.

and, even if all that wasn't true, you named three guys. Out of how many centuires of warfare?

You would have been much better off to cite William the Conqueror.

theapportioner · #15

Germans. Look where the Holy Roman empire was.

"Germanic" does not mean "German", dude. And besides, they are considered to be part of French dynastic history. And the linguistic differences that we see today didn't develop fully until after Charlemagne, so there's no separating the "French" from the "German" at the height of the empire. And the borders of Charlemagne's empire were quite different from that of the later H.R.E.

Born and raised on Corsica, which may fly French flags, but is more Italian. and the only reason he is considered all that great was that he actually got French troops to fire their rifles.

Sheesh. That's like saying Washington was a British revolutionary.

and, even if all that wasn't true, you named three guys. Out of how many centuires of warfare?

Hey, not denying French futility here. Since Napoleon I it's been one humiliation after another after another. But there are significant footnotes/parentheses/asterisks to that point that people seem to forget.

ItalianStereotype · #16

william the conqueror was norman and had a viking descent if i recall correctly.

the french truly haven't been successful in their military history.

Gallic Wars-don't know much about these, but i know the french lost.

100 years war- the french were massacred until henry VI came to the throne in england.

french wars of religion- fought to a standstill against the huguenots, no clear victor

30 years war- french not truly involved in this war, but still managed to get attacked. :/

spanish succession- got their asses whipped by the english.

king williams war-

napoleonic wars- as was already stated, napoleon was basically an italian. not that the italians have much of a military record themselves.

franco-prussian war- the prussians were inside paris in a matter of weeks.

wwI- stalemate

wwII- aside from the resistance, the french basically welcomed the nazis in.

indochina campaign-

Sethomas · #17

Everyone's forgetting that France DID win the American Revolution.

ItalianStereotype · #18

pssh. they showed up and looked pretty.

Jeanette X · #19

Quote:

Originally Posted by ItalianStereotype

pssh. they showed up and looked pretty.

They provided vital funding that the war probably wouldn't have been won without.

The_Rorschach · #20

Edit: Christ, that was Seth that said that, not Jen. Sorry, and Jen, you actually are right that we could haven't won it without their assistance. Ignore my using your name below. I thought you wrote that utterly asinine comment above.

Alright alright, this is not because I dislike you Jen (I don't), but because I feel the need to correct your statement. I'm being clear on this less I find you biting and Proto setting trained Circus animals on me. Your understanding of our history is flawed, and your interpretation of it painful for me to read.

The French DID NOT win the revolutionary war.

In fact, they did not even become actively involved until after the American victory at Saratoga in 1778. Nor did they enter into the war for our benefit, no more than Spain or Holland did.

The French wanted to avenge their defeat in 1763 at the hands of the British in the Seven Years' War. True, they had been secretly supplying the Americans with military supplies since 1775, but not to aide us, only to attack the British -We were proxy soldiers in what they believed to be a war bound for certain failure, what troops and supplies we were given were token gestures only. By 1780, both Holland and Spain joined the French and Americans. The Spanish, it is true, were a little hesitant to make war against another colonial power, but the possibility of destroying British trade hegemony was too powerful to resist. It was that same allue which had first attracted the French.

Now, like most Americans you probably assume that Yorktown ended the American Revolution when the French Navy trapped Cornwallis's soldiers at Yorktown by preventing English ships sent from New York from rescuing the British army. Technically, the British could have continued fighting as more than ten thousand soldiers remained in New York City under General Clinton and thousands more could have been sent from England. However, the British had been attacked in Parliament and spread thin by attacks in all parts of their empire thus the British ministry decided to cut its losses in America and grant independence to its former colony. It did so primarily in order to consolidate its own military forces and fight the French and Spanish.

The British went on to defeat both European powers and preserve what would come to be called the Second British Empire. This would cause a certain irony as, along with the money lent to America, it ultimately lead to the bankruptcy of Louis XVI which was one of the major causes of the French Revolution. Now, what Italian said was a bit flippant and dismissive, but not entirely inaccurate.