Wallonia - Independence, union with France or Union with the Netherlands? [Archive] - The Apricity Forum: A European Cultural Community

Crossbow

06-09-2011, 09:28 PM

Wallonia, being a part of the actual Belgian state should be incorporated in the Netherlands for historical reasons plus the fact that they are part of a smaller country and have been able to maintain their cultural peculiarities in that quality. In a Netherlandish confederation it would be granted equal rights with respect to language, and it would be able to preserve its identity.
In France, a big country with a centralized government, Wallonia would not benefit of these advantages, and disappear. To this you can add the disdain many French feel for Wallonia (and that disdain includes even the Flemish regions incorporated into France three centuries ago). So it is highly questionable if France would like to incorporate Wallonia in the French nation at all. The region isn't economically interesting either.
Remember that from 1815 to 1830, the Netherlands were reunited again, though it did not last very long that time. Now we have the chance to put it right.

Sikeliot

06-09-2011, 09:32 PM

I don't know much about Wallonia but I'd imagine they have much more in common culturally with the French than the Dutch.

Osweo

06-09-2011, 11:16 PM

Belgium is a kind of insult to common sense and nationalist sympathies, so the Walloons ought probably to leave it. :p

I don't think joining la Republique du Paris would do them much good though. France is the antithesis of a nation-state, with its centralising tendencies and anti-ethnic political principles. Democracy is also more effective in smaller units than in hulking great states like France. Let's have a second Luxemburg, eh? :p

(I'm tempted to add the Picards to it, too. Just for fun)

Portukalos

06-09-2011, 11:29 PM

If you watch a French reality show , there is alway at least one Belgian candidate. I've heard once there were over 4 Belgian candidates , I mean it's like if they were from a region of the country...

I wonder if they participate in Belgium's reality show as well...they can even vote (I mean they watch French TV , they vote on French tv etc..)

Comte Arnau

06-09-2011, 11:30 PM

Belgium has an advanced language policy, while in France not using French is anti-France by law. In Belgium, not only Walloon, but also Picard, Lorrain (Gaumois) and Champenois are recognized as indigenous regional languages. In France, they're 'weird French', usually scorned with the name of patois.

Tel Errant

06-10-2011, 02:22 PM

Wallonia should join France, because they're French.

What is striking in many european nationalists is their lack of ambition, non-interventionism in world's affairs and sometimes even will to cut off some parts of their own country to live in isolation.
This kind of mentality is very telling.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 02:25 PM

They are not French. They are not French. There are actually few French in France. Bretons aren't French, Flemish are Dutch, Alsatians are German etc.

Laudanum

06-10-2011, 02:26 PM

Tel Errant

06-10-2011, 02:28 PM

They are not French. They are not French. There are actually few French in France. Bretons aren't French, Flemish are Dutch, Alsatians are German etc.

Repeating it like a mantra won't change reality.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 02:29 PM

I think Wallonia should join France. Even though they had some cultural connection to the Netherlands, they are becoming more and more connected to French culture. Most Wallonians I have spoken feel more connected to the French than to Dutch people.
Yes that's because they have been subverted as the language barrier has been moving north for some time. If you hand over Wallonia you can soon hand over Flanders too, and Brabant and Limburg. It's rewarding theft.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 02:30 PM

Repeating it like a mantra won't change reality.
Because you are the one lying.

Laudanum

06-10-2011, 02:33 PM

Yes that's because they have been subverted as the language barrier has been moving north for some time. If you hand over Wallonia you can soon hand over Flanders too, and Brabant and Limburg. It's rewarding theft.

I'm just giving my opinion. I think Wallonia is culturally closer to France than to the Netherlands. Flanders is culturally loser to the Netherlands, and should therefore stay Dutch. Most people from Flanders feel connected to the Dutch, so I don't think they'd like to be French.

Tel Errant

06-10-2011, 02:33 PM

Because you are the one lying.

They speak, they feel, and they are French. Accept it.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 02:35 PM

They speak, they feel, and they are French.
While they aren't.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/France_map_Lambert-93_with_regions_and_departments-occupation.svg

This would be a good solution to stop theft with Vlaanderen en Artesië back in our hands.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 02:35 PM

I'm just giving my opinion. I think Wallonia is culturally closer to France than to the Netherlands. Flanders is culturally loser to the Netherlands, and should therefore stay Dutch. Most people from Flanders feel connected to the Dutch, so I don't think they'd like to be French.
They will be still be taken over if France would get a bridgehead in Wallonia.

Tel Errant

06-10-2011, 02:38 PM

While they aren't.
They are.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/France_map_Lambert-93_with_regions_and_departments-occupation.svg

This would be a good solution to stop theft with Vlaanderen en Artesië back in our hands.

In Nazis' hands, rather.

But this will never happen again.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 02:39 PM

Who knows because republican France shouldn't exist. But they aren't French. Soon you will say that Flemish and Limburgians are French.

The correct borders of France will be: Brittany independent or within the United Kingdom, Artesië, Wallonië and Vlaanderen Dutch. Border at Witsant running to the Luxembourg border (Luxembourg province to be handed over to Luxembourg), Elsaß-Lothringen (German if demilitarised), Diddenuewen and surroundings to Luxembourg, Franche-Comté to Switzerland, Nice and Corsica to Italy. Basque Country to Spain, the Catalan areas to Spain.

Tel Errant

06-10-2011, 02:46 PM

Who knows because France shouldn't exist. But they aren't French. Soon you will say that Flemish and Limburgians are French.

The correct borders of France will be: Brittany independent or within the United Kingdom, Artesië, Wallonië and Vlaanderen Dutch. Border at Witsant running to the Luxembourg border (Luxembourg province to be handed over to Luxembourg), Elsaß-Lothringen (German if demilitarised), Diddenuewen and surroundings to Luxembourg, Franche-Comté to Switzerland, Nice and Corsica to Italy. Basque Country to Spain, the Catalan areas to Spain.

This is just nonsense.

And my last answer to you about that question.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 02:47 PM

This is just nonsense.

And my last answer to you about that question.
Bullshit.. because French was spoken in Maastricht as well for some time and the area was forcibly ceded to France. And the same goes for areas in Brabant and Zeeuws-Vlaanderen.

The correct borders of France will be: Brittany independent or within the United Kingdom, Artesië, Wallonië and Vlaanderen Dutch. Border at Bonen running to the Luxembourg border (Luxembourg province in Belgium to be handed over to Luxembourg), Elsaß-Lothringen (German if demilitarised), Diddenuewen and surroundings to Luxembourg, Basque Country to Spain, the Catalan areas to Spain.

What the French real objective (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_French_Empire) is:

French troops occupied Maastricht from 1673 to 1678. It was subsequently restored to Dutch rule but in 1748 the French again took the city after the Second Siege of Maastricht during the War of Austrian Succession. The French returned once more in 1794 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht#Bulwark_of_the_Netherlands), when Maastricht was annexed and became a French city of what would become the First French Empire. For 20 years Maastricht was the capital of the French département of Meuse-Inférieure.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 02:59 PM

So in order to prevent further French encroachments the border between the the Netherlands and France will be fixed: Bonen, Atrecht, Kamerijk, Luxembourg border and from each land lot along the border should be determined whether it is French or Dutch.

The French language in Wallonia will be protected and receive the same status as Dutch or Frisian (but Walloon should take precedence over French and all the village and city names will be changed to it's Walloon variant rather then standardised French) although the villages and towns along the Opaalkust will receive their former Flemish names again (the French "names"(usually mispronunciations or mistranslations of their real names - will be included on the signs for the coming 50 years).

The French language in those areas will still receive (for the foreseeable future) the same treatment as Flemish Dutch and be an official language until the younger generations have switched to Flemish or in the case of some Artesian areas to a patois.

In Wallonia the area where a Champenois dialect is being spoken would be handed over to France. The rest (apart from the province of Luxembourg) will remain Dutch.

Those ruling francophone elites in "Belgium" that have been pushing for frenchification and who have always despised the local Flemish will be barred from the country so the Walloons and Flemish can find peace and work in their own cultures.

Maybe even reinforced by the fact that when many immigrants leave Brussels their places can be taken by Flemish -- thus reinforcing Brussels' culture. With the constant mix of Flemish Dutch and Walloon and with some French in the background, with it's palaces, high cuisine, it's architecture, it's myriads of parks and museums it could make a fine capital of the United Netherlands. It could be our own Bern (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern).

Crossbow

06-10-2011, 04:51 PM

Bullshit.. because French was spoken in Maastricht as well for some time and the area was forcibly ceded to France. And the same goes for areas in Brabant and Zeeuws-Vlaanderen.

The correct borders of France will be: Brittany independent or within the United Kingdom, Artesië, Wallonië and Vlaanderen Dutch. Border at Bonen running to the Luxembourg border (Luxembourg province in Belgium to be handed over to Luxembourg), Elsaß-Lothringen (German if demilitarised), Diddenuewen and surroundings to Luxembourg, Basque Country to Spain, the Catalan areas to Spain.

What the French real objective (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_French_Empire) is:

The left Rhine territory has been on their wish-list too.
The Greater French Empire can be seen as an early counterpart to the Great-German Reich.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 05:00 PM

It's two different sides of the same coin.. so.

Comte Arnau

06-10-2011, 05:23 PM

Basque Country to Spain, the Catalan areas to Spain.

Lol. From one place where they don't belong to another place where they don't belong.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 05:30 PM

Lol. From one place where they don't belong to another place where they don't belong.
From where they can become independent if they are integrated in Bask Country and Catalonia ?

gandalf

06-10-2011, 07:27 PM

I think all land west of the Rhine should be French .

We will protect the indigenous who speak the Dutch and Flemish patois ,

and feed them with monkey nuts .

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 07:38 PM

Yap.. French are imperialists. So no.. Wallonia should be Dutch (Dutch as in the sense that it is part of the United Netherlands) and what is west of the Rhine should not automatically be French. Actually.. France should nowhere be near the Rhine. France's eastern border in France itself should be close to the River Meuse.

Laudanum

06-10-2011, 08:04 PM

Why don't we just let them decide for themselves which country they want to join?

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 08:06 PM

Why don't we just let them decide for themselves which country they want to join?
Nope. Because if they would join France then that border would move directly to Maastricht and then to the Moerdijk. It would reward bad behaviour so we should seduce them to join us. France must be curtailed.

Either they would be ruled in cantons and by a Federal Government in Brussels (thus for a large part by themselves) or by the frogs (and Jews and Masons) in Paris.

Laudanum

06-10-2011, 08:11 PM

Nope. Because if they would join France then that border would move directly to Maastricht and then to the Moerdijk. It would reward bad behaviour so we should seduce them to join us. France must be curtailed.

Either they would be ruled in cantons and by a Federal Government in Brussels (thus for a large part by themselves) or by the frogs by Paris.

I don't really see the problem. Like I said earlier, Flanders has more similarities to Dutch culture, and therefore will most likely stay Dutch. I think it's up to the countries themselves to decide who they would like to join.

I don't see Maastricht becoming French in the near future.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 08:12 PM

I don't really see the problem. Like I said earlier, Flanders has more similarities to Dutch culture, and therefore will most likely stay Dutch. I think it's up to the countries themselves to decide who they would like to join.

I don't see Maastricht becoming French in the near future.
In the near future.. there is more then 6 months ahead of you. The take-over of our South went slowly.

Laudanum

06-10-2011, 08:16 PM

In the near future.. there is more then 6 months ahead of you. The take-over of our South went slowly.

Wallonia might become a part of France in the future, but that does not mean that every other place in the Southern Netherlands will become French as well..

Making Wallonia a part of the Netherlands would simply make them a bunch of outsiders.

The Lawspeaker

06-10-2011, 08:24 PM

Wallonia might become a part of France in the future, but that does not mean that every other place in the Southern Netherlands will become French as well..

Making Wallonia a part of the Netherlands would simply make them a bunch of outsiders.
Swiss French or Swiss Italians are no outsides either. Neither are Frisians. They are of Dutch origins and should be seen as such no matter what the Flemish nationalists say.

But: make no illusions. That's how French work.. they move people in that speak their language and move them into important positions and slowly subvert the place. That's how they take Wallonia and then take Flanders and then Brabant, Limburg and the rest.

You don't really want to hand them over to the Jacobins do you ?

Laudanum

06-10-2011, 08:32 PM

Swiss French or Swiss Italians are no outsides either. Neither are Frisians. They are of Dutch origins and should be seen as such no matter what the Flemish nationalists say.

But: make no illusions. That's how French work.. they move people in that speak their language and move them into important positions and slowly subvert the place. That's how they take Wallonia and then take Flanders and then Brabant, Limburg and the rest.

You don't really want to hand them over to the Jacobins do you ?

Wallonia hasn't been a part of the Netherlands for many, many years. They have slowly become more connected to the French, culturally. That's why I wouldn't mind if they would join France. I don't think they would fit with the Netherlands anymore.

Frisians speak Frisian and have their own traditions and cultural roots, but they feel connected to the rest of the country. All Frisians are able to speak Dutch as well. I don't think people from Wallonia feel connected to the Netherlands anymore.

Flanders, Brabant and Limburg are not French speaking places. Flemish people obviously want to speak Dutch instead of French. The same goes for Brabant and Limburg.

Crossbow

06-10-2011, 09:48 PM

Think of it as a buffer-region to France as well. In 1830, the Southern Netherlands separated from the northern part. Under the Dutch king Willem I, equal rights had been granted to both the Dutch speaking part and the francophone part. You know what happened: it took the Flemish a century to regain their rights, because the official language was French, and a lot of effort was put into the destruction of Flemish. Discrimination and disdain was their share. France has never had any empathy with other nations: look at the alliances with the Turks because they wanted to fight the Habsburg dynasty, the Thirty Years War etc. Poland was an ally and 'friend', but just because the French needed a 'gendarme in the East' against the emerging state of Prussia.
Think about that.

Comte Arnau

06-10-2011, 11:59 PM

That's the secret plan of the EU. Walloonia to France, Flanders to the Dutch, and Brussels DC apart, capital of Europe.

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 12:02 AM

And that's why it should not go to France but to the Netherlands with Brussels as our Washington D.C. :thumb001:

Since we should leave the E.U and become a neutral country and confederation like Switzerland. We would need a fitting House of Parliament though.. I was thinking about something that would look a bit like Het Loo or Versailles with a cupola and beautiful formal gardens. And where ? At the exact where now the EU- buildings stand and it should have enough space for the États généraux or Staten-Generaal.

Now that would be a great idea for an all-out offensive to patch-up Brussels but since we should not be some sort of a over-centralised state like France we would not call Brussels the capital but bondsstad or la ville fédérale - the Federal City.

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 12:45 AM

The cantons of the then reunited Netherlands:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Blason_liege_prov.svg
Lidje

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/Blason_namur_prov.svg
Nameur

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Flag_of_Hainaut.svg
Hinnot

http://www.stichtingmilieunet.nl/andersbekekenblog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Vlaanderen.jpg
Vlaanderen (Flandre) --- including South Flanders and parts of Artesië.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/Limburg-nl-wapen.svg
Limburg

http://img.geocaching.com/track/dcca07e6-f142-4a26-9ada-fad14ed15bd3.jpg
Brabant

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/WapenZeeland.gif
Zeeland

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/Arms_Utrecht_Province.gif
Utrecht

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Wapen_van_Noord-Holland.svg
Holland en Westfriesland

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/Gelderland_wapen.svg
Gelre en Gulik.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/Overijssel_coat.gif
Overijssel

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/Flevoland-coa.gif
Flevoland

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 12:46 AM

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Drenthe_wapen.svg
Drenthe

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Groningen_coa.svg
Groningen

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/WapenFriesland.gif
Fryslân

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Greater_Coat_of_Arms_of_Brussels.svg
The Federal City - Brussels.

Not for sale

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 12:52 AM

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bc/Grand_Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_France.svg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bc/Grand_Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_France_%26_Navarre.svg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/%C3%8Ele-de-France_flag.svg
And this is a not a part of our heraldry. Keep your lilies and we'll take the lions.

Ouistreham

06-11-2011, 01:02 AM

French are imperialists.

This is rich coming from a Dutch.

Which cuntry in the post-WWII years was begging the Allies to be given a large chunk of Western German territory (including Cologne, Münster, Osnabrück and Aachen!) that would enlarge the Dutch territory by half, and from which Germans would be expelled by millions?

Fortunately, the Americans just laughed at those demented claims (fervently supported by among others the old hag Wilhelmina)

Stereotypes sometimes sound true: the Dutch do behave like Jewish wannabes.

"Why don't we just let them decide for themselves which country they want to join?"

— Nope.

Dutch sense of democracy summed up in one word.

Belgium has an advanced language policy, while in France...

Hey, Spanish idiot, do you really ignore what brutal language dictatorship is raging in Flanders?

Ever heard that around Brussels there are suburbs with overwhelming French speaking majorities (up to 85%) like Kraainem, Linkebeek, Rhode-St-Genèse that were included against their will in officially Flemish territory? Members of the city councils are not allowed to pronounce a single French word in their deliberations, otherwise the Flemish language police cancels the whole session!

This is unique in the world AFAIK.

And some mayors weren't recognised by the Flemish authorities because they had addressed their electors in their own language!

This is absolutely mad, but that's the way it goes in Belgium.

This poor excuse of a country must split. Outragious Flemish jacobinism had made it impossible to reconcile communities.

Belgium must and will die and can die at any time, 25 minutes or 25 years from now.

And the good news is: when Flanders will join the Netherlands, the merger won't give birth to a Larger Nederland but to Bigger Flanders. It will be a country with a 2/3 Catholic majority and a predominantly Flemish mindset, people in Limburg and North-Brabant are going to rejoice, the hated Cheeseheads will be reduced to an unsignificant fraction. :)

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 01:04 AM

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0d/France_1552-1798.png
A history of French theft until 1798.

Ceterum autem censeo, Francia esse delendam.

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 01:08 AM

This poor excuse of a country must split. Outragious Flemish jacobinism had made it impossible to reconcile community.

After centuries of oppression and discrimination by you filthy frogfaces ? Of course they despise you. This is what the French press wrote with great pleasure when Flemish soldiers were dying because they couldn't understand their officers and of course they deny it now (because only French-speakers were appointed as French was the language even-though the majority of the population spoke (and thank God still does speaks) Flemish) and when Flanders was burning in 1914:

Après la guerre on ne parlera plus le flamand

After the war.. no one will be left to speak Flemish.

This would in turn lead to problems within the Belgian Army (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublieme_Deserteurs).

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 01:31 AM

So my advise for these poor Walloons that don't speak Flemish is this:
Retournez à l'école et d'apprendre une autre langue.

And for the Flemish that still don't learn their French (and we should too):

Ga maar terug naar school en leer eens rap een andere taal spreken.

If the Swiss can do it with FOUR languages (an officer in the army needs to be able to speak all four with fluency!) then we can damn well do it with two major languages and a language from which most native speakers also speak Dutch.

Unlike the frogs from which an awful lot would not even "humiliate" themselves to learn another language I would see no problem in learning French in order to make life easier for my fellow citizens down south in case of a re-unification. I don't speak it yet as I was so stupid to flunk it but at least then speaking French (and speaking Flemish or Dutch for them) would be a patriotic duty. The Swiss can do it with all four.. think about that and they are still one nation. Indivisible.

Osweo

06-11-2011, 01:40 AM

You've lost your mind, Civis. :ohwell:

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 01:42 AM

You've lost your mind, Civis. :ohwell:
No I didn't. I don't want to loose half my bloody country to people that have no business there - we already lost it to the franskiljons, masons and like-minded scum in 1830 and we could now actually win it back one day. Would you like to loose half of England to the Scots or would you not care if everything above Manchester became Scottish ?

Make it even better: to the Paki's because like the French the Paki's moved in and took over the area.

Crossbow

06-11-2011, 01:53 AM

This is rich coming from a Dutch.

Which cuntry in the post-WWII years was begging the Allies to be given a large chunk of Western German territory (including Cologne, Münster, Osnabrück and Aachen!) that would enlarge the Dutch territory by half, and from which Germans would be expelled by millions?

Fortunately, the Americans just laughed at those demented claims (fervently supported by among others the old hag Wilhelmina)

At least the Allies let your friends the Poles (you know, the ones that Napoleon had taught how to fight) annex 114.000km2 of German territory. The demented claims you speak about were rapidly dropped, but your friends the little stooges got away with their demented claims, much to your pleasure I reckon.

Stereotypes sometimes sound true: the Dutch do behave like Jewish wannabes.

Dutch sense of democracy summed up in one word.

Hey, Spanish idiot, do you really ignore what brutal language dictatorship is raging in Flanders?

Ever heard that around Brussels there are suburbs with overwhelming French speaking majorities (up to 85%) like Kraainem, Linkebeek, Rhode-St-Genèse that were included against their will in officially Flemish territory? Members of the city councils are not allowed to pronounce a single French word in their deliberations, otherwise the Flemish language police cancels the whole session!

Brussels is still Flemish-Brabant, so who is usurpating the region of Brussels?

This is unique in the world AFAIK.

And some mayors weren't recognised by the Flemish authorities because they had addressed their electors in their own language!

This is absolutely mad, but that's the way it goes in Belgium.

This poor excuse of a country must split. Outragious Flemish jacobinism had made it impossible to reconcile communities.

Belgium must and will die and can die at any time, 25 minutes or 25 years from now.

And the good news is: when Flanders will join the Netherlands, the merger won't give birth to a Larger Nederland but to Bigger Flanders. It will be a country with a 2/3 Catholic majority and a predominantly Flemish mindset, people in Limburg and North-Brabant are going to rejoice, the hated Cheeseheads will be reduced to an unsignificant fraction. :)

No problem I prefer them a million times over filthy Maghrebians who are turning your country into an African colony (Égalité, fraternité?).

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 01:57 AM

And some of the areas that were claimed actually had historic ties to the Netherlands (Benthem, Gulik, Staats-Opper Gelre) or spoke Dutch before or spoke or speak Low Saxon dialects. I think that the "old hag" (and I have no sympathies for that woman that ran away leaving her people to the krauts) also wanted to unite Nassau with the Netherlands.

While I think she should have departed for that Nassau but.. she didn't. Unfortunately she stayed on.

And when it comes to Brussels and Wallonia. You only need to look at the names to see what was Flemish and what wasn't. Names have been Frenchified and real French names are rare in that area and that even extends all the way down to Witzand or Bonen on the Opaalkust.

A couple of samples:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/France_Flanders_language-nl.svg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Bruxelles-Brussel.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Brussels_signs.jpg

Waver (now Wavre) - taken by the French in 1794.

Kasteelbrakel (now: Braine-le-Château)
Geldenaken (now: Jodoigne)
Bevekom (now: Beauvechain)
Terhulpen (now: La Hulpe)

And a lot more (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_Franse_plaatsnamen_in_de_Franse_Nederlan den).

And for areas still in Flanders the names are ready:

Kortrijk: Courtrai
Ieper: Ypres
Gent: Gand
Antwerpen: Anvers
Brussel: Bruxelles
Leuven: Louvain
Mechelen: Malines
Brugge: Bruges
Tongeren: Tongres

Where will it stop ? At Bois-le-Duc (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bois-le-Duc) ? La Haye (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Haye) ?

Albion

06-11-2011, 07:23 AM

Lol, and I thought the English had old scores to settle with the French. :p

No I didn't. I don't want to loose half my bloody country to people that have no business there - we already lost it to the franskiljons, masons and like-minded scum in 1830 and we could now actually win it back one day. Would you like to loose half of England to the Scots or would you not care if everything above Manchester became Scottish ?

Make it even better: to the Paki's because like the French the Paki's moved in and took over the area.

Noooo!!! Never! I think a lot of Northern English wouldn't oppose it though sadly, swapping London's distant and shoddy rule for Edinburgh's. :rolleyes2:

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 12:07 PM

Lol, and I thought the English had old scores to settle with the French. :p

Noooo!!! Never! I think a lot of Northern English wouldn't oppose it though sadly, swapping London's distant and shoddy rule for Edinburgh's. :rolleyes2:

Well. Osweo doesn't seem to mind it if "French" *-speaking Dutch would be handed over to Paris' distant rule so I wonder how you would if Manchester would be handed to Scotland or a lot of cities to the Paki's -- because that last scenario is a bit more like the French actually: moving in and taking over.

I would defend his country against a take-over.. so why would he gladly see my country being taken over ?

* Belgian French (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_French) and Walloon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walloon_language) - not French French.

Peasant

06-11-2011, 12:23 PM

This bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-speaking_Community_of_Belgium) should unify with Germany if anywhere.

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 12:25 PM

This bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-speaking_Community_of_Belgium) should unify with Germany if anywhere.
Agreed. If it remains demilitarised.

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 12:26 PM

Double.

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 12:26 PM

Double.

gandalf

06-11-2011, 01:52 PM

I think all land west of the Rhine should be French .

We will protect the indigenous who speak the Dutch and Flemish patois ,

and feed them with monkey nuts .

Do you like nuts Civis Batavis ? :D

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 01:53 PM

Do you like nuts Civis Batavis ? :D
Do you like your North Africans, frogface ?

gandalf

06-11-2011, 02:00 PM

NO , not more than you like your's , gouda brain .

gandalf

06-11-2011, 02:10 PM

Do you like your North Africans, frogface ?

NO , and do you like your's , gouda-brain ? :D

Crossbow

06-11-2011, 02:24 PM

This bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-speaking_Community_of_Belgium) should unify with Germany if anywhere.

When they want to (and it is not unlikely that they prefer to stay within the Netherlands), they should have the right to reunite with Germany.

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 02:29 PM

Gandalf.. your user title:

Force et Honneur

For the French that means:

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/defeat/attack-france-surrender.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YYMeAu4i7gA/SvrH348446I/AAAAAAAAGho/a8JcGbIbXxg/s1600/victorious-german-enter-paris-france-surrenders-1940-ww2-second-world-war-2-two-incredible-images-photos-pictures-003.jpg

http://nevadanewsandviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/a3.jpg

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070101230715/uncyclopedia/images/6/63/French_surrender.jpg

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c384/wolfdog11/French_Surrender.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YYMeAu4i7gA/SvA-c1MSDPI/AAAAAAAAGRA/lrVM3L4RgYM/s1600/german-soldiers-march-paris-june-1940-june-second-world-war-two-2-amazing-pictures.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_oIAhQMTG-dU/S-6X8ZTvc-I/AAAAAAAAE44/QfP6yTQawu4/s1600/blitzkrieg-europe-1940-ww2-second-world-war-illustrated-history-pictures-photos-images-german-soldiers-champs-elysees-paris.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/21/article-1288305-0047A57700000258-458_634x399.jpg

http://library.thinkquest.org/CR0212881/crypar.jpg

French ? Honour ? Ne existe pas.

If they can't win it against an army they commit atrocities like in Bodegraven in 1673, Zeeuws-Vlaanderen in 1747 (the Netherlands were neutral and attacked) or in Italy in 1944 (or in Algeria or Vietnam). And when there are no civilians to be slaughtered they surrender as quick as they can and wait for their liberation and then demand shares of land because their non-existent "honour has been violated." Of they blow up an unarmed ship like in Auckland. Also typically French.

Crossbow

06-11-2011, 04:39 PM

^Nevertheless, they managed to be permanent member of the UN, but based on what actually? It must be their greatness.:rolleyes:

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 04:41 PM

Nevertheless, they managed to be permanent member of the UN, but based on what actually? It must be their greatness.
L 'argent. Graisser la patte :rolleyes2:
Money talks.

Albion

06-11-2011, 06:13 PM

^Nevertheless, they managed to be permanent member of the UN, but based on what actually? It must be their greatness.:rolleyes:

Being a "victor" of WWII.
All members of the security council took part in it and it is widely criticized and has been suggested that countries such as Germany and Brazil should join (I agree with Germany joining).

Tel Errant

06-11-2011, 08:20 PM

Ok.

Gandalf.. your user title:

Force et Honneur

For the French that means:

For the French that means the greatest military history in Europe; three empires, one colonial, one continental, and an other one colonial, all started and restarted from zero.
For the French that means the only country in Europe with an independant military industry, nuclear capacity and foreign policy when other European countries look at their feet, buy american F16 and follow Bush in Irak.
For the French that means the biggest and strongest state in Western Europe, a state that has not to deal and make concessions to various independantist movements. A state that is sitting in all of its neighbors' territory and is present in all the oceans.

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/defeat/attack-france-surrender.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YYMeAu4i7gA/SvrH348446I/AAAAAAAAGho/a8JcGbIbXxg/s1600/victorious-german-enter-paris-france-surrenders-1940-ww2-second-world-war-2-two-incredible-images-photos-pictures-003.jpg

http://nevadanewsandviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/a3.jpg

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070101230715/uncyclopedia/images/6/63/French_surrender.jpg

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c384/wolfdog11/French_Surrender.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YYMeAu4i7gA/SvA-c1MSDPI/AAAAAAAAGRA/lrVM3L4RgYM/s1600/german-soldiers-march-paris-june-1940-june-second-world-war-two-2-amazing-pictures.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_oIAhQMTG-dU/S-6X8ZTvc-I/AAAAAAAAE44/QfP6yTQawu4/s1600/blitzkrieg-europe-1940-ww2-second-world-war-illustrated-history-pictures-photos-images-german-soldiers-champs-elysees-paris.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/21/article-1288305-0047A57700000258-458_634x399.jpg

http://library.thinkquest.org/CR0212881/crypar.jpg

French ? Honour ? Ne existe pas.

Germans were lucky. From 1933 on they won a diplomatic and military poker game with a pair of 8 in their hands.
Long story short: In 1940 the Germans entered in France via Belgian Ardennes when the bulk (and the best) French troops were heading north to help the Dutch who surrendered after five days. The "impenetrable" Ardennes were guarded by unequiped reservists. Guess what happened.
The French line cut, the tactical advantage gained by the unexpected attack through the Ardennes and the disorganisation that followed, the better coordination of the german army and also simply the advantage of being the attaquant won the price.

In some ways 1940 was another 19th century manoeuvre war battle.

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 08:39 PM

http://www.bunkergordel.be/images/fotos%20van%2018%20daagse%20veldtocht/belgisch%20leger%20in%201940.jpg

http://blogimages.seniorennet.be/opdevlucht/561870-9c6b9a6f4378bd94d9b1cfd4da859185.jpg

http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae100/wickidwim/LD.jpg
France abandoned them in 1940.

No. France is a state that just took from others that it didn't have itself and surrendered like cowards when the Germans were not even half-way across their country. Let's compare this to the Belgians and Dutch in 1940 and the Belgians in 1914.

The Battle of the Netherlands was five days - 8 when you take Zeeland into account. The Dutch army, hopelessly unprepared and unequipped, fought against a numerically stronger enemy with sheer determination for every inch of soil. When the battle began there were landing paratroopers landing all around The Hague and at major bridges all over the place. After the initial shock of being attacked without as much as a declaration of war they fought with brutal determination. The paratroopers around The Hague were crushed with heavy losses about both sides by men with some ageing armoured cars and 1890s rifles with barely any training. The best troops Germany had to offer were routed at The Hague.. and at the Grebbe when the Germans launched the Waffen-SS against the Dutch troops there they were driven back three times over with severe losses.

At Kornwerderzand the Dutch managed to block the Germans for five long days with a navy gunboat bombarding German positions. In the South.. were we were waiting for the French to link up our defences were in disarray. The Moerdijk Bridges had fallen into German hands and around Dordrecht there was fierce fighting about regaining control there --- while the Dutch were waiting for the French to appear and assist the troops there. The French never came. Of course they didn't.

At Hoek van Holland, some British troops managed to land and they blew up the Shell refineries in the port of Rotterdam and managed to escort the government out of the country (they should have left those deserters but alright). So in the 14 of May Rotterdam was bombed to pieces, the initial reports indicated that 30.000 people had died (of course.. the number would later on be corrected to 950) but it did it's work: it spread panic. The Germans announced that Haarlem and Utrecht would be next unless the Dutch surrendered. The Dutch did that on the 15th -- only fighting on in Zeeland where some French had came into the country but we can safely say that the French abandoned the Allies in 1940. The only ones fighting were the Northern and Southern Dutch (in total 5000 Northern and 12.000 Southern deaths) the Czechs and the Norwegians. The French were just themselves: cheese-eating, surrender monkeys, letting the Brits, Dutch from both North and South, Czechs, Poles, Norwegians (navy) and troops from the British Commonwealth die for them.

That is the real history of May 1940.

France doesn't have any glory and it has no honour. Maybe it deserved some for it's stupid yet rather brave defence of Paris in 1914 and the actions around Verdun before the entire army mutinied.

Both in 1914-1918 and 1939-1945 it also took countless young lifes from the New World to die for them --- they should have left them to the Germans.

Tel Errant

06-11-2011, 08:45 PM

You are dishonest.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataille_de_France

The Lawspeaker

06-11-2011, 08:53 PM

No you are dishonest (but of course, a Frenchman finds it difficult to be honest). At each Dutch, Polish, Czech and British corpse there should be a new tombstone: Sacrifié pour la gloire de France. Sacrificed for the glory of France.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 12:07 AM

More and more Walloons are learning Dutch/Flemish (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=434674#post434674) as the number of Flemish and Northern Dutch that are moving in Wallonia is growing. The Walloons seem to be very happy with the newcomers and their investments and since they are learning Dutch/Flemish we should really work on our French.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 12:25 AM

F6vSjSUbSS0

zqvynHRLrdQ
Are Walloons and Brusselaars French ? Tell that to Jacques Brel that perfectly described the landscape of our Delta. Yes.. he is singing about Flanders but he might just as well have been describing Zeeland or Holland. Or even Frisia.

No frog could describe that landscape or the feelings that are attached to it. It takes a Dutchman to do that.

gandalf

06-12-2011, 10:20 AM

I have done a quick research on the net " Wallonie et Hollande"
to see if how this idea is spread : I just found two or three facebook links ,
amongst witch you , Civis , probably have one at least ...

To bad because I wouldn't be against a wide Nederland
that include the Wallons if they agree .

I wouldn't if I was one of them tho , I love french cultures so much .

And never expect that north of France would join Dutch countries .

Even if those northen lands are full of germans , they , very quickly ,
by themself , a long time ago , gave up their germanic cultures for ...
something else , to build the special French culture ,
and will never go back .

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 01:31 PM

That's what you say. But I don't care about what French imperialists say because there are also Belgian websites and organisations but since you don't speak Dutch you can't read it.

You know the main difference between Wallonia with the Netherlands and Wallonia with France ? It's who rules the place. Scenario 1 it will be the Walloons in Scenario 2 it will be the Jews of Paris.

You know.. now that we think of it: this hyper-liberal stuff here in Europe started in France. The French Revolution was a masonic revolution more then anything else: everything that was traditional had to disappear. The French even destroyed the mediaeval cathedral (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Lambert's_Cathedral,_Li%C3%A8ge) of Liège destroying centuries of art. May 1968 also started in France. The mass immigration also came forth from French examples, no ?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Cath%C3%A9drale_Saint-Lambert_1770_dessin_dans_La_Meuse_ann%C3%A9es_1970 .jpg
During the Prince-Bisphoric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince-Bishopric_of_Li%C3%A8ge). Before the French came. And did you know that during the Republic Walloons came to the Netherlands and not to France because they were free here ? We still have plenty of Walloon churches. My ancestors seemed to have attended one.

And later on during real unification France played a major role in the destruction of our country with the Legion belge et parisienne that financed "Belgium's" adhesion to France because they also wanted Flanders.

gandalf

06-12-2011, 01:44 PM

Why are those dutch people burning the French flag ?

Crossbow

06-12-2011, 01:47 PM

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 01:48 PM

Why are those dutch people burning the French flag ?
No those are French. You brought them in.

gandalf

06-12-2011, 01:57 PM

Show us the Wallons who want to joint Nederland .

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 02:03 PM

Show us the Wallons who want to joint Nederland .
Go look for them yourself in Dutch-speaking sections of forums. But there were influential people in it back in the day like Lucien Jottrand (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucien_Jottrand), Bert Anciaux (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bert_Anciaux) (who is Flemish but his name clearly shows something). Furthermore it is widely written about in Belgium mainly by the Flemish who seem to dislike their own "nationalistic" countrymen. A nice article (http://www.baarlewerkgroep.org/nl/documentatie/interessante-teksten/30-het-walenland-en-de-nederlanden) would be this (but in Dutch and that's your problem).

But thanks for the Facebook idea.. I checked them and joined them.

Karl der Große

06-12-2011, 02:10 PM

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 02:11 PM

Vive la Wallonie libre!

Wallons would be welcome in France if Belgium state was disolved but France will do nothing for the dissolution of the Belgium state. The ones who really fight for the separation are the Flemish they have an active party for this.

"The Belgium question, we must not get involved... Unless, at some point, the Flemish make life impossible for Walloons, at which point the Walloons would throw themselves in our arms."

Charles de Gaulle.
Get out of here, kraut. De Gaulle was a coward that ran TWICE (in 1940 he fled to Britain and in 1968 to West-Germany) when his country needed him. And you only say this because I am against German unification but a German unification wouldn't be so dangerous if there was also a Greater Netherlandic unification because we would have 27 million inhabitants then and be a power of our own.

Karl der Große

06-12-2011, 03:42 PM

A h ok, so since the heartland of Wallonia was part of the German Holy Roman Empire since its foundation by Karl der Große in 800 until the 15th century as I said it in another thread, and from the mid-16th century 1/3 of Wallonia remained German until the French Revolution in 1789 and followed by Napoleonic invasions, then return it to who they really belong, to Germany :thumb001:

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 03:42 PM

poiuytrewq0987

06-12-2011, 03:43 PM

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 07:40 PM

Get out of here, kraut. De Gaulle was a coward that ran TWICE (in 1940 he fled to Britain and in 1968 to West-Germany) when his country needed him. And you only say this because I am against German unification but a German unification wouldn't be so dangerous if there was also a Greater Netherlandic unification because we would have 27 million inhabitants then and be a power of our own.

You really are dishonest. De Gaulle went to London in 1940 because he refused the issue of the war and wanted to continue it by all means.

The 29 May 1968 he desappeared with his wife for an unknown destination and was back in Paris the day after. We know that during that day he met the general Massu in Baden Baden but what he did and where he was the rest of the time remains a mystery.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 07:54 PM

You really are dishonest. De Gaulle went to London in 1940 because he refused the issue of the war and wanted to continue it by all means.

The 29 May 1968 he desappeared with his wife for an unknown destination and was back in Paris the day after. We know that during that day he met the general Massu in Baden Baden but what he did and where he was the rest of the time remains a mystery.
For short: he ran twice.He deserted his people no matter how you twist it.
Typical frog behaviour.

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 08:08 PM

For short: he ran twice.He deserted his people no matter how you twist it.
Typical frog behaviour.

He was in mission in London before the armistice and stayed there because he refused Vichy.
He had to met important peoples during the context of the cold war and social crisis in France and was back the day after in may 68.

Albion

06-12-2011, 08:14 PM

For short: he ran twice.He deserted his people no matter how you twist it.
Typical frog behaviour.

...and then stabbed Britain in the back when it tried to join European organisations, namely the EU. :mad:

I'm against the EU, but that's not the point - he turned on the country which had helped him so readily. He had no honour.

Óttar

06-12-2011, 08:24 PM

Wallonia to the French, Flanders to the Dutch. Solved.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:24 PM

...and then stabbed Britain in the back when it tried to join European organisations, namely the EU. :mad:

I'm against the EU, but that's not the point - he turned on the country which had helped him so readily. He had no honour.
Lacking honour and decency is a French characteristic. They pride themselves in their shamelessness.

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 08:24 PM

...and then stabbed Britain in the back when it tried to join European organisations, namely the EU. :mad:

I'm against the EU, but that's not the point - he turned on the country which had helped him so readily. He had no honour.

De Gaulle saw the CEE like a extention of the French zone of influence. And Britain like an american agent.
Besides, Britain has always been an enemy of any continental power or unity, it's their position by default and it is quite understandable.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:25 PM

Wallonia to the French, Flanders to the Dutch. Solved.

Stay out. Wallonia and Flanders into a United Netherlands. America to Mexico. Problem solved.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:30 PM

De Gaulle saw the CEE like a extention of the French zone of influence. And Britain like an american agent.
Besides, Britain has always been an enemy of any continental power or unity, it's their position by default and it is quite understandable. Knowing France's history on the continent which has nothing but a history of subversion and betrayal Britain's point of view for hundreds of years was sensible. Regrettably we were on the wrong side of the North Sea ourselves as it would have been better for the Netherlands not to have been on the European Continent sharing a border with France.

The Allies were weak in 1813. France should have been utterly destroyed. They didn't and the rest of Europe paid the price.

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 08:30 PM

^ Mort de rire. Il est vénère le civis.

Edit: c'était pour le commentaire précédent, mais ça le fait quand même.

Óttar

06-12-2011, 08:31 PM

Stay out. Wallonia and Flanders into a United Netherlands. America to Mexico. Problem solved.
On second thought, Belgium and the Netherlands to the French. You deserve each other. :coffee:

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:31 PM

^ Mort de rire. Il est vénère.
Frankrijk was de eerste U.S.S.R voor Europa. De 1917 revolutie was hetzelfde als die van 1789.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:32 PM

On second thought, Belgium and the Netherlands to the French. :coffee:
On second thought: America definitely to the Mexicans.

Óttar

06-12-2011, 08:41 PM

On second thought: America definitely to the Mexicans.

The Allies were weak in 1813. France should have been utterly destroyed. They didn't and the rest of Europe paid the price.

Wow, so destroy France and Germany. Heil mijn Führer!

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:42 PM

Wow, so destroy France and Germany. Heil mijn Führer!
Better: Let them destroy each other. Every day another Verdun. At least the pair of them will then leave the rest of the civilised world alone.

Albion

06-12-2011, 08:44 PM

De Gaulle saw the CEE like a extention of the French zone of influence. And Britain like an american agent.

Exactly.

Besides, Britain has always been an enemy of any continental power or unity, it's their position by default and it is quite understandable.

Britain has never liked big shots, its always checked the domineering ambitions of France, Germany, the USSR and EU to the best of it's ability.
Britain is a good counterweight and has always been so, that's why France and the EU don't like us.

Britain's point of view for hundreds of years was sensible.

:thumb001:

Regrettably we were on the wrong side of the North Sea ourselves as it would have been better for the Netherlands not to have been on the European Continent sharing a border with France.

Agreed, that stormy channel is a life saver, how many invasions have been ruined by storms and English fleets. If we were attached to Europe we'd have been invaded tons of times.

I only wish it were wider, the Normans made it across - it seems the pope's blessing was enough that time. :rolleyes2:

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:50 PM

The more of them:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Bundeswehr_G36.jpg

And him:

http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/news/2009/march/French_soldiers_france_join_NATO_again_001.jpg

Kill each other off for all eternity -- the bigger the chance that the EU collapses and the rest of Europe can live in peace.
And have your little showdowns in Elsaß-Lothringen - not in the Netherlands OR Switzerland, thanks very much.

And we should build a nice big Maginot line from the Eems all the way to the Opaalkust with holes in them so we can feed you peanuts.

Óttar

06-12-2011, 08:54 PM

not in the Netherlands OR Switzerland, thanks very much.
The Swiss don't like you. :coffee:

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 08:55 PM

Better: Let them destroy each other.

It would be unfair for Germany.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:56 PM

The Swiss don't like you. :coffee:
No one likes you either. Piss off. This is a European fight.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 08:56 PM

It would be unfair for Germany.
Not really. You lot deserve each other. How many boys from the Low Countries had to die because you frogfaces and krauts went muscle to muscle again over some Polaks who had it coming anyway ?

Albion

06-12-2011, 08:58 PM

Kill each other off for all eternity -- the bigger the chance that the EU collapses and the rest of Europe can live in peace.
And have your little showdowns in Elsaß-Lothringen - not in the Netherlands OR Switzerland, thanks very much.

Europe will never live in peace, peace in Europe is a artificial concept created recently since the collapse of the EU and its a lie.
Europe is the warring continent, there can never be a total lack of war, even now, one of the most peaceful times there are disputes going on in the east - unrecognised territories too.

America's lament of a pacifist Europe is short sighted, the spark will ignite the fuse eventually. Give it 30 years tops until there is another war between two of the large European nations.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 09:01 PM

Óttar

06-12-2011, 09:03 PM

No one likes you either. Piss off. This is a European fight.
After you. Kroot.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 09:04 PM

After you. Kroot.
Donderstraal een klote eind op, Yank, niemand hier vraagt om jouw aanwezigheid.
Dit is tussen Europeanen onderling en daar begrijp je toch geen moer van.

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 09:06 PM

that's why France and the EU don't like us.
You would be surprised but the French don't dislike the Brits, at least no near as much as the British dislike us. We're more of a germanophobe (but it's fading) and americanophobe (increasing) people.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 09:08 PM

To the Yank here: stay the hell out of family affairs. We are having one of our traditional European brawls here. A tradition going back some 2000 years -- so GTFO.

Óttar

06-12-2011, 09:12 PM

Donderstraal een klote eind op, Yank, niemand hier vraagt om jouw aanwezigheid.
Dit is tussen Europeanen onderling en daar begrijp je toch geen moer van.
Verpiss dich.

Albion

06-12-2011, 09:12 PM

Yes.. now you know why Low Countries always desperately tried to remain neutral (and were always still attacked by either the frogfraces or the krauts), Celtabria and why both France and Germany should be dismantled for the greater good of all.

Not dismantled, just kept in check. Britain or at least England will always make sure of that, and Russia will too.
I would like to see France give Brittany and their portion of the Basque country independence, Alsace to Germany and the Flemish area in the NE to Flanders (regardless of what state that is in).

We can't dismantle France or Germany though, and Northern France and Occittania have "fused" if you like, so I doubt many in Occittania would want independence from France, the national anthem is La Marseillaise for goodness sake.

The other nations of Europe will make sure they don't get any ideas, no need to break them up.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 09:13 PM

Verpiss dich.
Ik ben geen mof: opsouten.

Only a European can tell the difference and until you can: get the fuck out. Verstaan ?

Albion

06-12-2011, 09:16 PM

You would be surprised but the French don't dislike the Brits, at least no near as much as the British dislike us. We're more of a germanophobe (but it's fading) and americanophobe (increasing) people.

We don't dislike you, we just distrust you. British right-wing newspapers will make that clear. :D:D:D

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 09:19 PM

Not dismantled, just kept in check. Britain or at least England will always make sure of that, and Russia will too.
I would like to see France give Brittany and their portion of the Basque country independence, Alsace to Germany and the Flemish area in the NE to Flanders (regardless of what state that is in).

We can't dismantle France or Germany though, and Northern France and Occittania have "fused" if you like, so I doubt many in Occittania would want independence from France, the national anthem is La Marseillaise for goodness sake.

The other nations of Europe will make sure they don't get any ideas, no need to break them up.

There's nothing to keep in check, Europe will never be at war again, we're old and more interested in the TV program than in any irredentist utopy.
The enemy is within.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 09:21 PM

Well that's what they said after the 1914-1918 bar brawl that left a lot of broken windows and a lot of skulls bashed in -- even innocent bystanders had been beaten up and forced to pick sides. Everyone was suddenly fed up with it but the next friday night in 1939 the party was on again so... never say never.

Maybe we grew a bit rusty after the last bar brawl because now we just put up crazy faces and hold up bar stools saying that we are going to murder each other again. And we have been playing that funny little game with Ivan and his gang for some 40 years but maybe we have become a bit rusty --- only those crazy Balkanoids now know how to go hooligan like in the old days.

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 09:23 PM

We don't dislike you, we just distrust you. British right-wing newspapers will make that clear. :D:D:D

So do we, that's your reputation over here. Hiding behind waterwalls and changing alliance depending on the circumstances.

Tel Errant

06-12-2011, 09:28 PM

Ok, It's 23:27 here and I have to wake up at 5 every morning, so I'm off for tonight.

And don't edit your posts after I'm off...

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 09:29 PM

Ok, It's 23:27 here and I have to wake up at 5 every morning, so I'm off for tonight.

And don't edit your posts after I'm off...
Off you go, frogface. Bon nuit.

Albion

06-12-2011, 09:31 PM

There's nothing to keep in check, Europe will never be at war again, we're old and more interested in the TV program than in any irredentist utopy.
The enemy is within.

That's BS, of course there's something to keep in check whilst powerful nations still exist.
There's the large nations in Europe of Russia, France, Germany and the UK, the nuclear weapons states of France, the UK and Russia and the warring states of the Balkans.
The enemy is from within alright, it is both external (Middle East, China, America) and internal (states I mentioned earlier).

We act like good friends now, but what's guaranteeing this? NATO? For how much longer can America remain world policeman??

Anyone of those nations could start another war.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 09:38 PM

Yap.. maybe we do need a fresh and merry little war here in Europe. That's at least what they thought just before 1914 when things were getting peaceful and stale and whatnot.

Stuff is pretty damn stale now too. Where's Gavrilo Princip when you need him ?

Libertas

06-12-2011, 09:42 PM

Nowadays Princip would just be spouting anti-Habsburg propaganda on the web.

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 09:45 PM

Nowadays Princip would just be spouting anti-Habsburg propaganda on the web.
Yes.. back in the day he was getting shit done. O Tempora O Mores.

Ouistreham

06-12-2011, 09:48 PM

Not dismantled, just kept in check. Britain or at least England will always make sure of that

— Britain is nothing. Just a mildly amusing comedy, an insular nuisance that belongs to a remote past. It is so inherently untrustworthy that it is just as pointless to rely on it as to take those clowns seriously (that's the reason why we are somehow fond of them, since they are no longer in a position to trigger world wars in which we were expected to fight in first line while they were hiding behind us, ready to sail back to their island at any time).

I would like to see France give Brittany and their portion of the Basque country independence, Alsace to Germany and the Flemish area in the NE to Flanders (regardless of what state that is in).

— Basque country, possibly.
Brittany, never. Scotland will go independent long before Breton sovereignists are able to attract more than 2% of votes.

Albion

06-12-2011, 10:01 PM

— Britain is nothing.

Says the country that doesn't fight its own wars.

Just a mildly amusing comedy, an insular nuisance that belongs to a remote past.

Both France and Britain have worked to remain relevant in the modern world, you're just the EU's bitch and we're America's.

It is so inherently untrustworthy that it is just as pointless to rely on it as to take those clowns seriously (that's the reason why we are somehow fond of them, since they are no longer in a position to trigger world wars in which we were expected to fight in first line while they were hiding behind us, ready to sail back to their island at any time).

Hiding behind France? Pfft, you're already running, waving you silly white flags as you go.

Of course you can rely on Britain, you asked for our help twice, we offered it - I don't see anything unreliable there. Now if you want unreliable, try France in a war.

And I don't see why anyone would want a WW, France stage the first one with Napoleon, the last was really WWIII.

http://images.worldgallery.co.uk/i/prints/rw/lg/3/7/Benjamin-Robert-Haydon-Napoleon-Musing-at-St-Helena--Restrike-Etching--37503.jpg
I wish I could of been there, I wouldn't know whether to mock him or push him over the edge.

Britain / England will always be there to ruin your silly little plans, and St Helena still beckons.

Brittany, never. Maybe you should offer to set them free.

gandalf

06-12-2011, 10:01 PM

No way any part of France would want to leave this wonderfull country .

For what would they leave ? France is only in France .

I can find amusing to take the piss of each other like do good friends ,

but a war between Europeans : nobody wants it , never ,

we have done enough butcheries last century ,

and thank those millions of brothers who died ,

to make us understand this .

Osweo

06-12-2011, 10:11 PM

[FONT="Georgia"]That's what you say. But I don't care about what French imperialists say because there are also Belgian websites and organisations but since you don't speak Dutch you can't read it.

In other words Flemings are talking, and NOT WALLOONS.

Show us the Wallons who want to joint Nederland .
Exactly!

[FONT="Georgia"]
Go look for them yourself in Dutch-speaking sections of forums.
Flemings again... :rolleyes:

Bert Anciaux (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bert_Anciaux) (who is Flemish but his name clearly shows something).
His surname is irrelevant. I have ancestors called Burgess and Grainger. Nevertheless, they were not French.

I'm against the EU, but that's not the point - he turned on the country which had helped him so readily. He had no honour.
A patriot's duty is to his own country, and should not be swayed by any personal obligations he may have toward a potential opponent or rival state. Good on de Gaulle. :shrug:

And as if the British state assisted him out of pure good will! :rotfl:

The Lawspeaker

06-12-2011, 10:27 PM

Whatever you can do to oppose me out of spite purely for having a friendship with Cato, Osweo. I know how it works with you.

If you don't know how it all works and disregard everything that I have said (eventhough the fact that Dutch is a rapidly growing language (http://binnenland.nieuws.nl/562869) in Wallonia and the fact that Walloon itself is a mixture between Germanic and Romance tongues and the fact that Belgian French is not like French French) about the matter you might just as well keep quiet as well.

And regardless of the fact that the Seventeen Netherlands were one within the HRE and later on within the United Kingdom of the Netherlands and that a pan-Netherlandic (Whole Netherlands- idea, Bourgondicism -- whatever it is named now) - idea is nothing new and actually enjoys some support from people in higher places.

Because you always support those that I have a disagreement with without looking into the matter.

My adversity against a United Germany is justified: maybe you have forgotten about 2 World Wars. Ooh no.. wait. Only France's, Germany's or Spain's or whatever country you would then like to support suffering matters. Not the fact that the Netherlands got demolished and steamrolled during the last world war and that Belgium got demolished, raped and demolished two times over. Not important, I suppose.

Osweo

06-12-2011, 11:53 PM

Whatever you can do to oppose me out of spite purely for having a friendship with Cato, Osweo. I know how it works with you.
LoL, I didn't even realise till you said! :rotfl:

However, my position on international relations isn't based on fleeting personal antagonisms. unlike some I could mention... :p

If you don't know how it all works and disregard everything that I have said (eventhough the fact that Dutch is a rapidly growing language (http://binnenland.nieuws.nl/562869) in Wallonia and the fact that Walloon itself is a mixture between Germanic and Romance tongues and the fact that Belgian French is not like French French) about the matter you might just as well keep quiet as well.
Bla bla, Walloon is French with lots of borrowings. And most Walloons speak an ever more standardising Parisian anyway.

And regardless of the fact that the Seventeen Netherlands were one within the HRE and later on within the United Kingdom of the Netherlands and that a pan-Netherlandic (Whole Netherlands- idea, Bourgondicism -- whatever it is named now) - idea is nothing new and actually enjoys some support from people in higher places.
I care more for people in lower places.

Because you always support those that I have a disagreement with without looking into the matter.
lol

My adversity against a United Germany is justified: maybe you have forgotten about 2 World Wars. Ooh no.. wait. Only France's, Germany's or Spain's or whatever country you would then like to support suffering matters. Not the fact that the Netherlands got demolished and steamrolled during the last world war and that Belgium got demolished, raped and demolished two times over. Not important, I suppose.
The world wars had very particular reasons to break out. Saying it's just because there were large strong French and German states is just fucking stupid. To prevent that from having happened, you'd have to reverse the ENTIRETY of European history. Without France and Germany, there IS NO EUROPE, and certainly no Netherlands.

Your adapting 'Carthage must be destroyed' to both your neighbours just marks you out as a barmy bastard, sorry!

Laudanum

06-13-2011, 12:24 PM

gandalf

06-13-2011, 01:39 PM

I heard at the radio that only 20% of Flemish want separation from Wallons ,

so this thread , interesting though , is surrealistic .

Crossbow

06-13-2011, 01:52 PM

It is good to have a stance on this matter though, anticipating to the future. We don't want to have the border with France any closer to us.
People here talk about Dutch 'expansionism'. That is rubbish, there never has been any Dutch expansionism, in contrast to France. French history is but one of aggression and expansionism.
The whole question about Wallonia is reduced to a mere language issue, but the true issue is about the Netherlands, and its historical borders.
I don't understand why this is not accepted, while France hosts (and other countries for that matter) several linguistic minorities, and that doesn't seem to be a problem: so we're applying double standards here.

Tel Errant

06-13-2011, 03:24 PM

That's BS, of course there's something to keep in check whilst powerful nations still exist.
There's the large nations in Europe of Russia, France, Germany and the UK, the nuclear weapons states of France, the UK and Russia and the warring states of the Balkans.

This is just paranoïa, neither France nor Germany nor the UK will threaten militarily one of their neighbour, let alone be a nuclear threat in France's and the UK's cases for other European states since you mention it.
What's left of the warring states of the balkan? Bosnia and Kosovo are under UN control, Croatia in the EU soon and Serbia candidate.
Russia can be troublesome, yes, but I don't imagine them intervening agressively in Ukraine or Belarus.
Call me optimist, I'll be flatered.

We act like good friends now, but what's guaranteeing this? NATO? For how much longer can America remain world policeman??
We act like good friends because we are, economic rivals but political friends nonetheless.

Anyone of those nations could start another war.

Starting a economically ruinous, humanly bloody and politically suicidal war against another NATO member? What for? To get back the Val d'Aoste?
That doesn't make sense.

Tel Errant

06-13-2011, 03:32 PM

Says the country that doesn't fight its own wars.

Both France and Britain have worked to remain relevant in the modern world, you're just the EU's bitch and we're America's.

Hiding behind France? Pfft, you're already running, waving you silly white flags as you go.

Of course you can rely on Britain, you asked for our help twice, we offered it - I don't see anything unreliable there. Now if you want unreliable, try France in a war.

And I don't see why anyone would want a WW, France stage the first one with Napoleon, the last was really WWIII.

http://images.worldgallery.co.uk/i/prints/rw/lg/3/7/Benjamin-Robert-Haydon-Napoleon-Musing-at-St-Helena--Restrike-Etching--37503.jpg
I wish I could of been there, I wouldn't know whether to mock him or push him over the edge.

Britain / England will always be there to ruin your silly little plans, and St Helena still beckons.

Maybe you should offer to set them free.

Stop reading Civis' posts...

Tel Errant

06-13-2011, 03:40 PM

Can't we just stop bitching, and let Wallonia decide for themselves? Their opinion is the only thing that matters. Dutch and French people are fighting over a country which (at the moment) isn't even theirs.
Dutch and French peoples are not fighting over it, do you? We don't.
Karl der Grosse's quotation of De Gaulle summarises well the French position. The rest is internet talk.

Laudanum

06-13-2011, 03:42 PM

Dutch and French people are not fighting over it, do you? We don't.
Karl der Grosse's quotation of De Gaulle summarises well the French position.

Not literally fighting, no. But you're both discussing who should have it in a very hostile way, and that's kinda stupid. Like I said, Wallonia's opinion is the only thing that matters here.

Tel Errant

06-13-2011, 03:45 PM

But you're both discussing who should have it in a very hostile way, and that's kinda stupid.

This is the internet.

Like I said, Wallonia's opinion is the only thing that matters here.
I agree.

Laudanum

06-13-2011, 03:48 PM

This is the internet.

Discussions on the internet don't always have to be stupid and pointless. Sometimes you can learn something from people's opinion. But this isn't really the case here. It's just Dutch and French people bitching about who should have a country which isn't even theirs at the moment.

Tel Errant

06-13-2011, 03:51 PM

who should have a country which isn't even theirs at the moment.
May civis hear you.

poiuytrewq0987

06-13-2011, 04:04 PM

Discussions on the internet don't always have to be stupid and pointless. Sometimes you can learn something from people's opinion. But this isn't really the case here. It's just Dutch and French people bitching about who should have a country which isn't even theirs at the moment.

You're lucky Civis Batavi left before he could see your post. :p

Laudanum

06-13-2011, 04:44 PM

You're lucky Civis Batavi left before he could see your post. :p

I don't care about what he thinks. He has his own opinion about this subject, and I respect that. I just think it's useless to discuss a topic like this on a forum without listening to the opinion of the people from the country that is being discussed. :)

Albion

06-13-2011, 07:12 PM

This is just paranoïa, neither France nor Germany nor the UK will threaten militarily one of their neighbour, let alone be a nuclear threat in France's and the UK's cases for other European states since you mention it.

A world war, no, but some war involving one or more of them will happen in Europe some time.
I think its silly to think that we can predict peace in the future when so much of our history has been anything but.

To know where you are going, you must know where you came from.

What's left of the warring states of the balkan? Bosnia and Kosovo are under UN control, Croatia in the EU soon and Serbia candidate.

They'll find something to argue about, either them or somewhere else.

Russia can be troublesome, yes, but I don't imagine them intervening agressively in Ukraine or Belarus.

I imagine them annexing Belarus diplomatically and throwing their weight around when it comes to Ukraine.

Call me optimist, I'll be flatered.

Yes, you're very optimistic, I'm a bit of a pessimist I suppose.

We act like good friends because we are, economic rivals but political friends nonetheless.

Politics changes with politicians. Your next set of politicians in years to come may not be so friendly with other nations.

Starting a economically ruinous, humanly bloody and politically suicidal war against another NATO member? What for? To get back the Val d'Aoste?
That doesn't make sense.

It doesn't have to be a NATO member, it can be any European nation. Just a while back Russia invaded Georgia. Its not hard to imagine.

Stop reading Civis' posts...

Why? Usually I find them a good read and he's a good member. This thread is more about entertainment so far, you continentals calling each other names is amusing, if a little sad. ;)

Besides, that twit Ouistreham needed a good talking to, which was the aim of that post.

Laudanum

06-13-2011, 07:44 PM

This thread is more about entertainment so far, you continentals calling each other names is amusing, if a little sad. ;)

Agreed.

Tel Errant

06-13-2011, 08:41 PM

A world war, no, but some war involving one or more of them will happen in Europe some time.
I think its silly to think that we can predict peace in the future when so much of our history has been anything but.

Let's agree to desagree then, I think wanting to keep France and Germany (which was your initial statement) or any other EU member for that matter in check because one day they can start a war totally irrealist given the actual European geopolitical configuration. And this configuration won't change anytime soon.

I imagine them annexing Belarus diplomatically and throwing their weight around when it comes to Ukraine.
Look at the orange revolution, Russia couldn't do much.

It doesn't have to be a NATO member, it can be any European nation.
Almost all of us are NATO members by now.

Just a while back Russia invaded Georgia.
But we're talking about inter-European conflicts, and primarily of the potential danger of France and Germany. We're going a bit offtopic, aren't we?

Why?
Because for a moment I thought it was one of his posts.

This thread is more about entertainment so far, you continentals calling each other names is amusing, if a little sad. ;)
You'd love French forums. ;)

Besides, that twit Ouistreham needed a good talking to, which was the aim of that post.
And France took the shit. :)

Albion

06-13-2011, 09:01 PM

I think wanting to keep France and Germany (which was your initial statement) or any other EU member in check because one day they can start a war totally irrealist.
Let's agree to desagree.

Let me rephrase that - they'll be brought into line if they get any ideas on European domination again.

Look at the orange revolution, Russia couldn't do much.

From the ashes rises the phoenix. We can't count on such a large country being weak forever.

But we're talking about inter-European conflict, and primarily of the potential danger of France and Germany. We're going a bit offtopic, aren't we?

I couldn't think of any examples closer to home. We live in a quiet decade so far.

Because for a moment I thought it was one of his posts.

haha, yeah, I agree with a lot of what he writes, but I don't on this. Wallonia should be part of France.

And France took the shit. ;)

Well I couldn't just call him an idiot whilst not explaining the reasons for it.
Sorry, I shouldn't have roped all of France into it, I hate it when people do that with Britain and yet I have made the same mistake.

Tel Errant

06-13-2011, 09:09 PM

That thread should be split.

Osweo

06-13-2011, 09:11 PM

From the ashes rises the phoenix. We can't count on such a large country being weak forever.

A sheep nailed to a donkey doth not an elephant make! :thumb001:

Albion

06-13-2011, 09:36 PM

That thread should be split.

Why?

A sheep nailed to a donkey doth not an elephant make! :thumb001:

Witty, but this doesn't apply to Russia in my opinion. I'm surprised you of all people suggest it.

Tel Errant

06-13-2011, 09:41 PM

Why?

Because we're not just a bit offtopic.

Albion

06-13-2011, 10:32 PM

Because we're not just a bit offtopic.

meh, its the same geographical space, who gives a damn. :)

_______

06-13-2011, 10:42 PM

up to walloons

Ibericus

06-13-2011, 10:42 PM

NO. We should get back Belgium and Netherlands. But I don't want any of your negros and arabs.

Tel Errant

06-14-2011, 02:54 PM

Witty, but this doesn't apply to Russia in my opinion.
I think it applies. Russia possesses many of the attributes of a giant; its landmass, huge natural ressources, relatively important population, as well as its statut as a nuclear, spatial and military power.

But on the other hand it's a colossus with feet of clay unable to resist the demographic and economic pressure exerced by the chinese that rent them the russian far est a couple years ago.
It's a wobbly state with a corrupted administration and political class, controlled by oligarch and mafias. Economically it's GDP is not much higher than that of a country like Spain and socially it suffers plagues like alcoholism, aids and drugs.

I'm worried for Russia's becoming. :(

A sheep nailed to a donkey doth not an elephant make! :thumb001:

Let's hope that the growing tusks of the awakening mammoth won't kill the donkey...

(And now we're offtopic :D)

Tel Errant

06-14-2011, 03:02 PM

NO. We should get back Belgium and Netherlands.

Start by keeping Catalonia in.

Ibericus

06-14-2011, 03:51 PM

Start by keeping Catalonia in.
Catalolnia is already in, and it always be. The indendentists altough very loud are a minoirty, around 16%. Nothing to worry about. Altough they try to 'reclute' immigrants, and convert them, to increase their numbers and fight against a common enemy.

Comte Arnau

06-14-2011, 06:47 PM

Catalolnia is already in, and it always be. The indendentists altough very loud are a minoirty, around 16%. Nothing to worry about. Altough they try to 'reclute' immigrants, and convert them, to increase their numbers and fight against a common enemy.

Lol. Make a film of it.

poiuytrewq0987

06-14-2011, 07:36 PM

Lol. Make a film of it.

He isn't wrong though, the Catalan party only got 779,000 votes in the 2008 elections. For a country of 45 million... that's pretty dismal.

Comte Arnau

06-14-2011, 11:54 PM

He isn't wrong though, the Catalan party only got 779,000 votes in the 2008 elections. For a country of 45 million... that's pretty dismal.

Lol, what the fuck is 'the Catalan Party'?

Gotta love those who talk of what they know nix about.

poiuytrewq0987

06-15-2011, 09:50 AM

Lol, what the fuck is 'the Catalan Party'?

Gotta love those who talk of what they know nix about.

Convergence and Union party. :coffee:

Johnston

09-04-2011, 04:58 AM

Both Wallonie and Flandres are French since the Capetians at least.:)

The Lawspeaker

09-04-2011, 05:15 AM

Both Wallonie and Flandres are French since the Capetians at least.:)
Shut up. That makes Dutch "French" too then because we are Franks but Franks and French are not the same. Then half of Germany would be French too as they too are Franks. Now please, ignorant Yank, shut up.

Johnston

09-04-2011, 05:31 AM

Shut up. That makes Dutch "French" too then because we are Franks but Franks and French are not the same. Then half of Germany would be French too as they too are Franks. Now please, ignorant Yank, shut up.

http://www.heraldique-europeenne.org/Regions/France/Anciennes_Pairies.htm

Sorry to burst your bubble Mr. Batavian. Get over it.:rolleyes:

The Lawspeaker

09-04-2011, 06:23 AM

http://www.heraldique-europeenne.org/Regions/France/Anciennes_Pairies.htm

Sorry to burst your bubble Mr. Batavian. Get over it.:rolleyes:
Yes and they were also part of the Seventeen Netherlands and of the Holy Roman Empire (Burgundian Circle).. so your point being ?

They were also part of Spain and Austria for a while so ?

Johnston

09-04-2011, 06:25 AM

Yes and they were also part of the Seventeen Netherlands and of the Holy Roman Empire (Burgundian Circle).. so your point being ?

They were also part of Spain and Austria for a while so ?
Sounds about as plastic a culture as American. I wouldn't be surprised if Spanish Burgundy had a claim to New York and Johannesburg.;)

The Black Legend lives on!

The Lawspeaker

09-04-2011, 07:18 AM

Say.. good luck being British again then. Fool.

Johnston

09-05-2011, 03:24 AM

Say.. good luck being British again then. Fool.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavian_Republic

The Batavian Republic (Dutch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_language): Bataafse Republiek) was the successor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_of_states) of the Republic of the United Netherlands (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Republic). It was proclaimed on January 19, 1795, and ended on June 5, 1806, with the accession of Louis Bonaparte (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Bonaparte) to the throne of the Kingdom of Holland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Holland).

The new Republic enjoyed widespread support from the Dutch population and was the product of a genuine popular revolution. Nevertheless, it clearly was founded with the armed support of the revolutionary French Republic. The Batavian Republic became a client state, first of that "sister-republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_client_republic)", and later of the French Empire of Napoleon Bonaparte, and its politics were deeply influenced by the French who supported no fewer than three coups d'état to bring the different political factions to power that France favored at different moments in her own historical development. Nevertheless, the process of creating a written Dutch constitution was mainly driven by internal political factors, not by French influence—until Napoleon forced the Dutch government to accept his brother as monarch

Who's in denial now? I rest my case.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 03:36 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavian_Republic

Who's in denial now? I rest my case.
You. Because you don't know the history of this country. You have nothing but your stupid fantasies. The Dutch Republic had been through a phase of corruption during the 18th century and the Stadtholders had been inactive figures at best. So the people of those days (1795 to be more exact) thought they were being liberated but the new Batavian Republic was a mere client state and a very unstable one at that with a series of coup d'etats. Then it became a Kingdom but remained a client state until it got absorbed for 3 years into the French Empire.

You probably don't even know what language is being spoken here nor have you ever been to Europe.

Johnston

09-05-2011, 04:14 AM

You. Because you don't know the history of this country. You have nothing but your stupid fantasies. The Dutch Republic had been through a phase of corruption during the 18th century and the Stadtholders had been inactive figures at best. So the people of those days (1795 to be more exact) thought they were being liberated but the new Batavian Republic was a mere client state and a very unstable one at that with a series of coup d'etats. Then it became a Kingdom but remained a client state until it got absorbed for 3 years into the French Empire.

You probably don't even know what language is being spoken here nor have you ever been to Europe.
That is why you have chosen the name Civis Batavi, I am sure. Or maybe you are a pure Batavian from Roman Belgium! :rolleyes: You split hairs for convenience in casuistry, and go especially mad over the Frank/French non-conflation. This appears to be the worst for you.

So what? You are free to interpret other countries and continents yourself. Who says you cannot? Free speech and the sharing of opinions is the way of the world. Get a grip on yourself.:p

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 04:19 AM

That is why you have chosen the name Civis Batavi, I am sure. Or maybe you are a pure Batavian from Roman Belgium! :rolleyes: You split hairs for convenience in casuistry, and go especially mad over the Frank/French non-conflation. This appears to be the worst for you.

So what? You are free to interpret other countries and continents yourself. Who says you cannot? Free speech and the sharing of opinions is the way of the world. Get a grip on yourself.:p
Civis Batavi means Dutch Citizen and it is derived from the tribe of the Batavi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavi_(Germanic_tribe)) and has nothing to do with the Batavian Republic.

Particularly read this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavi_(Germanic_tribe)#The_Batavian_myth) part.

Johnston

09-05-2011, 04:27 AM

Civis Batavi means Dutch Citizen and it is derived from the tribe of the Batavi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavi_(Germanic_tribe)) and has nothing to do with the Batavian Republic.

Particularly read this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavi_(Germanic_tribe)#The_Batavian_myth) part.

That is why you have chosen the name Civis Batavi, I am sure. Or maybe you are a pure Batavian from Roman Belgium! :rolleyes: You split hairs for convenience in casuistry, and go especially mad over the Frank/French non-conflation. This appears to be the worst for you.

So what? You are free to interpret other countries and continents yourself. Who says you cannot? Free speech and the sharing of opinions is the way of the world. Get a grip on yourself.:p

Johnston

09-05-2011, 04:29 AM

You believe all non-Continentals are merely ignorant, and "little people" akin to the Lilliputians in Gulliver's Travels. Yes, condescension comes naturally to your sort. You may forget that the people you send off into the wide world, like the colonial wilderness, really left because you had to have it all to yourselves, in a dog-eat-dog environment. Fuck preservation if it means preserving that, because it is anti-preservation to begin with. It was the dreams of the expelled citizens of such places as the Dutch Republic, for example, who wished that their homeland would someday not be subjected to the hubris and dubiousness of such you display routinely to non-Continentals as much as you have shown other Continentals. You have as much an attitude problem as Londoners, Parisians, and New Yorkers. I am sure these three metropolitan areas would suffice for the image you Continental fetishists portray and instill upon others. It is no wonder Joe McCarthy doesn't post here anymore, after seeing how you belittle him and his own feelings toward contributing to what is supposed to be a cause for mutual interests.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 04:30 AM

Since you don't even bother to read it: SHUT UP.
Do you even know what language I speak, hillbilly ?

Johnston

09-05-2011, 04:38 AM

Since you don't even bother to read it: SHUT UP.
Do you even know what language I speak, hillbilly ?
I wish I was a hillbilly, and then I'd have some class. Oh wait? Was that an echo from somewhere on your side of the internet? You are communicating in England's language. That's right! Shows you!:rolleyes:

EDIT:
Oh...speak only when spoken to. :rolleyes: Are you a self-styled aristocrat? A fop? A dandy? A macaroni! Where is your armorial? Show me! Maybe this has something to do with the habit of sending second and third sons overseas who could not inherit at home. It happened in the viking period and also in the colonial, but the arrogance is contemporary.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 04:43 AM

I wish I was a hillbilly, and then I'd have some class. Oh wait? Was that an echo from somewhere on your side of the internet? You are communicating in England's language. That's right! Shows you!:rolleyes:
Yes because we learn that as our secondary language but we speak Dutch here.

En wat mij betreft kun je je fantasieën waarbij je Europese volkeren uit elkaar trekt of bij elkaar voegt zonder dat je überhaupt ooit in Europa geweest bent en dus ook geen bal verstand hebt van de Europese geschiedenis (ja ik heb je wel gezien in die "Kill the Union"- draad in the Britse sectie en in de Duitse sectie over het maar bij elkaar voegen van landen die niets met elkaar hebben en over je fantasie om Pruisen maar weer als land onafhankelijk te laten worden waarmee je heel Duitsland uit elkaar scheurt - en dan zullen we het nog niet eens hebben over het uitleveren van de Walen en de Vlamingen aan het Franse gebroed wat hun altijd geknecht heeft..) zonder meer in je reet steken, verstaan ?

En flikker maar nou maar lekker op naar Trollololistan.

Johnston

09-05-2011, 05:00 AM

Yes because we learn that as our secondary language but we speak Dutch here.

En wat mij betreft kun je je fantasieën waarbij je Europese volkeren uit elkaar trekt of bij elkaar voegt zonder dat je überhaupt ooit in Europa geweest bent en dus ook geen bal verstand hebt van de Europese geschiedenis (ja ik heb je wel gezien in die "Kill the Union"- draad in the Britse sectie en in de Duitse sectie over het maar bij elkaar voegen van landen die niets met elkaar hebben en over je fantasie om Pruisen maar weer als land onafhankelijk te laten worden waarmee je heel Duitsland uit elkaar scheurt) zonder meer in je reet steken, verstaan ?I have no objection to your interest in America, if you actually develop one. I have only seen disinterest and contempt, unless you can show me threads wherein you opened up topics showing your genuine interest regarding Americana, and American issues, with your personal interpretation, and your own humble inquest into the hearts and minds of those resident here.

No American would say that he alone is entitled to have a perception or view on American issues, and that others have nothing good to say whatsoever, unless they are obsequious in devotion to a dictated perspective. That is your modus operandi, and thus, your presumptive double standard befits you. E.G. you presume to speak on behalf of Britain and Germany, but claim it is your rank, right, or privilege to ban me from the same. I would not say that you are forbidden from speaking with any interest regarding Canada or Cuba. Feel free...

I have mentioned America reflexively because it is the most relevant inverse of the discussion between us. The same goes for any other New World creole country, because it appears that you have a rigid mindset of the apparent mutually exclusive differences between colonizing power and the colonist country subsequently formed.

Don't you see? Your opinion does not offend me, because you are free to have it. Opinions are like assholes: Everybody has one, and it does little good becoming upset by them. You wish for all non-Continentals to fall to their knees in awe and do as they are told, and to be molded in your image for your approval. This is the symptom of the EU, and you are a charming example of its futuristic regress. You exhibit the signs of one who is enthused at the (lack of) free speech conventions in post-war Germany. Go ahead and revel in it. I share no interest in thought control myself.:lightbul:

EDIT:
Yes, you call somebody you believe is beneath you, and truculent to your haphazard, frantic attempt to censor, a troll. How convenient. If you cannot dictate thoughts, show how alarmist and panicked you are that somebody thinks differently from you, and approaches issues from an independent perspective. I assure you, I may be a registered Republican, but I am an issues voter. I do not go with the party platform. I officially rate as Methodist for church, when I do go on Sundays, but that is hardly the whole of it. Please respect that I am a person entitled to my own opinions at least. I afford you the same.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 05:08 AM

billErobreren

09-05-2011, 05:08 AM

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 05:11 AM

eh...:dunno: I don't hear Walloon people complaining or bitching about identity or saying which country they'd like to join or be independent(if they think they can handle it I'd say give it to them). maybe if they pulled an ETA or IRA(car bombs, politician assassination, osv) I'd put more thought into this, my guess is they'd fit better with the French culturally & linguistically but they look a tad more like the Dutch to me. really why try & fix what isn't broken so...don't really care
If Belgium collapses (I don't think it will happen any day soon) they should be offered to join the Netherlands (there could be a referendum held) because I do think that even if they speak this mixed French, because it isn't true French, that they would be better off in the Netherlands where they would have some home rule whereas in France they would be governed from Paris and become a minority.

But if they would want to be independent. Fine. Same for Flanders. The door should always be open and their seats at the table kept warm.

billErobreren

09-05-2011, 05:17 AM

If Belgium collapses (I don't think it will happen any day soon) they should be offered to join the Netherlands (there could be a referendum held) because I do think that even if they speak this mixed French, because it isn't true French, that they would be better off in the Netherlands where they would have some home rule whereas in France they would be governed from Paris and become a minority.

But if they would want to be independent. Fine. Same for Flanders. The door should always be open and their seats at the table kept warm.

sure. works for me like I said don't really care. & they look more like the dutch to me anyhow

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 05:18 AM

sure. works for me like I said don't really care. & they look more like the dutch to me anyhow
That's because they are. And some (actually a great number for what I have seen) are so "French" that they have Flemish/Dutch last names. And most village names in Brabant (a Dutch name), around Liege and in Hainaut (itself basically the French pronounciation of Henegouwen) have French names that have been directly translated from Flemish.

So go figure.

Johnston

09-05-2011, 05:22 AM

Blabla. In the meanwhile you just post the stupid threads without thinking for a single second that maybe these places are not like America and they have established cultures going back thousands of years. The languages have evolved and people have been formed organically. It's not like taking a ruler to a state border and giving half a state away. It's not like taking half of Nevada to California.. they wouldn't give a shit. They are all the same anyway but borders here have a history.. and a pretty long and bloody one too. And you for instance giving Wallonia and Flanders to France without even thinking for a second what the history is just stupid. Maybe the French had been trying to iradicate the Flemish language for a long time ? Until way into this century the French-speaking elite humiliated the local Flemish peasanty - denied them their education in their own language and when drafted let them serve under French-speaking officers and let them die because they couldn't understand a word of French.

Less then a century ago 80 percent of Brussels spoke Dutch.. now it is around 30 at best. That's how the Frenchification has been undertaken: destroying a culture and now they are messing about again about the Halle-Vilvoorde area around Brussels which used to be at the heart of the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium. So: Wallonia and Flanders to France ? What the fuck, you damned idiot ?

Ever heard of the Guldensporenslag or the Brugse Metten? That's how much the Flemish love the French.Right...I simply babble things you find inconvenient to pay attention to, because otherwise you would talk to me as an equal, and not as an untermensch who needs your instruction on how to live.:rolleyes:

European borders in some regions are less than my own age standing: anywhere east of the Iron Curtain, and you wish to pull rank...How historic!:thumbs up

If you cared one whit about the facts of history and geopolitical considerations in mind, especially the ones you just posted...Look at your own profile:

"Ancestry: The Greater Netherlands (including Flanders and Frisia) and the Kingdom of France."

How are these a conflict of interest? We have mentioned the Carolingians and simultaneously dismissed them in one breath. How about that for precedent? Not my doing. Clearly, you are unhappy with the reality of the situation. What is the solution to reality? You tell me, since I am not allowed an opinion!

I have a good comparison: Scotland is named for the Irish. That about fits the relationship of France being named for the Dutch. In Scotland, Scots is actually English, because of my ancestral kingdom of Northumbria having been split up, and part of our population dominating Scotland via Edinburgh. This was instrumental to the Union forming in 1707.

Think of it this way, if the Flemings are included as part of France in the Ancient Regime, and Walloons speak French, then Belgium clearly swings to France, even if much of the origins of both Belgium and France actually come from the Netherlands or Germany. Looks like a perpetual identity crisis, where people share an identity but not a mutual classification or the same political stratum.

Look, I am sympathetic. I have considered the Basque Country's issues myself, and think their issues are just as complicated and convoluted. I do not know why you are treating me like a terrorist.

EDIT:

It is clear you personally prefer a language-basis. Zeeland, Holland, and Fryslan were never part of Capetian France, because of the Treaty of Verdun. Flanders remained French through this agreement. It is not my fault. I see you think it was an historical accident that has plagued your people. I was siding with precedent rather than any bias.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 05:26 AM

Right. You are really an idiot. My ancestry means that some of my ancestors came from France to the Netherlands. They were Huguenot and some others were refugees for the French Revolution.

Think of it this way, if the Flemings are included as part of France in the Ancient Regime,
They weren't. They were no longer a vassal of France after the 15th century. So please if you want to fuck up do it good.

and Walloons speak French,
Not French French no. But Belgian French.. there is a difference in words, in grammar, pronunciation etc. And they also speak their own language now which is called Walloon. A language which is now under threat of extinction because of French.

then Belgium clearly swings to France, even if much of the origins of both Belgium and France actually come from the Netherlands or Germany. Looks like a perpetual identity crisis, where people share an identity but not a mutual classification or the same political stratum.
It doesn't swing to France. The French-speaking elite tried to Frenchify the country, yes and then came up with ideas coming from France as they wanted to hand over the country to France whether the people liked it or not but the culture of that area for the most part is originally Dutch. That's even more strongly so in Flanders.

It is clear you personally prefer a language-basis. Zeeland, Holland, and Fryslan were never part of Capetian France, because of the Treaty of Verdun. Flanders remained French through this agreement. It is not my fault. I see you think it was an historical accident that has plagued your people. I was siding with precedent rather than any bias.
In the days of Capetian France there was no such thing as a nationstate but only Empires and people were sold off to whatever Lord paid most. For instance the Middle Empire comprised off Frisians, Saxons, Germans of all sorts, Italians, the ancestors of the Slovenians, Swiss, Austrians etc.

Ridiculous.

Johnston

09-05-2011, 05:33 AM

Right. You are really an idiot. My ancestry means that some of my ancestors came from France to the Netherlands. They were Huguenot and some others were refugees for the French Revolution.

They weren't. They were no longer a vassal of France after the 15th century. So please if you want to fuck up do it good.

Not French French no. But Belgian French.. there is a difference in words, in grammar, pronunciation etc.

It doesn't swing to France. The French-speaking elite tried to Frenchify the country, yes and then came up with ideas coming from France as they wanted to hand over the country to France whether the people liked it or not but the culture of that area for the most part is originally Dutch. That's even more strongly so in Flanders. We are actually closer in blood than you think (hint hint, I am not 1000000% Anglo-Saxon), but I am not driven to hysteria. You cannot possibly avoid seeing the connotations of your combined ancestry on a geopolitical basis, or do you? It is natural and rather stereotypical. Nothing to get worked up over. I understand the subtleties. Perhaps you can see that the pre-Habsburg Burgundian Netherland situation was more "par for the course" than events which followed? Why else would there be a novelle national struggle for self-determination? It was not all religion, for instance, and the Batavian Republic would have been more sensible other than the technicality of Habsburg Burgundy inheritance, which was legal despite the face of it.

In the days of Capetian France there was no such thing as a nationstate but only Empires and people were sold off to whatever Lord paid most. For instance the Middle Empire comprised off Frisians, Saxons, Germans of all sorts, Italians, the ancestors of the Slovenians, Swiss, Austrians etc.

Ridiculous.I know it looks like the Dual Monarchy, which was torn asunder for the very same reasons. This is the imperial ideal of European Continental integrationists, in the name of Rome, etc.

Oh well.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 05:37 AM

Clearly we aren't. Between the Batavian Republic and the Burgundian Circle and then later on the Seventeen Netherlands from which 7 seceded that would become the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands (yes North Brabant was later on occupied for a part and the situation in Limburg was chaotic and far too complicated for you so I won't go there and Drenthe was too poor) is a couple of hundred years.

The best idea for a united Netherlands today would either be a confederal republic or a United Kingdom if it would be possible to unite the Dutch and Belgian Royal Houses. When that would happen we would return to much of the old Seventeen Provinces.

So what we are dealing with are two rump-states of a single nation. Hell let's make it easy for you: East and West Germany. Do you know what Belgium means ? It means the Netherlands. What do you think that the Latin name Northern Netherlands - the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands was ? Belgium.

Irony, no ? Belgium. Foederatae Belgii Provinciae (Federated Belgic Provinces) or Belgica Foederata (Belgic Federation). Belgians are Dutchmen and Dutchmen are Belgians.

Johnston

09-05-2011, 05:43 AM

Clearly we aren't. Between the Batavian Republic and the Burgundian Circle of the Seventeen Netherlands from which 7 seceded that would become the Netherlands (yes North Brabant was later on occupied for a part and the situation in Limburg was chaotic and far too complicated for you so I won't go there and Drenthe was too poor) is a couple of hundred years.

The best idea for a united Netherlands today would either be a confederal republic or a United Kingdom if it would be possible to unite the Dutch and Belgian Royal Houses. When that would happen we would return to much of the old Burgundian Circle.I am 1/8th Huguenot, 1/8th Catholic, so this means that 2 of my great grandparents came from French families. I have an Anglo-Saxon perspective on their inclusion in my bloodline, comparable to your Dutch version. However, I see mine as more coalescent with English aggrandizement in France than anything else, since both are Norman. The Channel Islands are still in England's hands, and I want to keep it this way.

I like the idea of the Imperial Circles. They make much sense when you look at the map. On the other hand, what you are proposing is like uniting the Alpine Countries. I do not understand the dogged determination to prevent such a thing from happening, except small minds, who like microstates.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 05:46 AM

Johnston

09-05-2011, 05:51 AM

I am proposing a unification (if they would want it) of Germany and Austria, yes. Unless you now think that the Netherlands and Belgium are Alpine countries. We don't even have mountains here or any sort. :coffee:

No. I don't want to return to Imperial Circles. I'd be quite content with a re-United Netherlands.What?

I was comparing feasibility of Low (Neder/Platte--interestingly enough, Prussia was of this derivation) Country unification with that of "Hoch" (Alpine) unification. Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Austria won't do it. I could see the two Luxemburgs reuniting, but be serious. Belgium called it quits in the early 19th century, without any real reason or opposition because there was nothing against it, only that they felt like it and did so. It is part of the Dutch spirit of independence and liberalism.

I compared the Imperial Circle you spoke of in its sense of a corporate existence preceding the United Provinces.

We are speaking the same language and terms, but you think I am trying to argue to make it more complicated than it is. I understand you perfectly.:)

Johnston

09-05-2011, 05:54 AM

Oh look:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Belgium

When Belgium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgium) became independent in 1830 the National Congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Congress_of_Belgium) chose a constitutional monarchy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_monarchy) as the form of government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_of_government). The Congress voted on the question on 22 November 1830, supporting monarchy by 174 votes to 13. In February 1831, the Congress nominated Louis, Duke of Nemours (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis,_Duke_of_Nemours), the son of the French (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France) king Louis-Philippe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis-Philippe_of_France), but international considerations deterred Louis-Philippe from accepting the honour for his son.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 05:56 AM

A unification of the two Luxemburgs should definitely be considered (there could be referendum) in case of a Northern Netherlands, Southern Netherlands unification. I think that North and South should learn from the two Germany's on how not to do it and first seek to align our socio-economic and political systems before an unification can take place. We have been separate for quite some time now and the countries should first take the time to prepare themselves. I actually wrote (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30171&highlight=erwin+kroll) about it before.. unfortunately it's in Dutch.

Johnston

09-05-2011, 06:04 AM

So what we are dealing with are two rump-states of a single nation. Hell let's make it easy for you: East and West Germany. Do you know what Belgium means ? It means the Netherlands. What do you think that the Latin name Northern Netherlands - the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands was ? Belgium.

Irony, no ? Belgium. Foederatae Belgii Provinciae (Federated Belgic Provinces) or Belgica Foederata (Belgic Federation). Belgians are Dutchmen and Dutchmen are Belgians. This is apparent from the cartographic inscriptions on maps made regarding New Nederland, and by "Leo the Belgian". You like lions! Apart from Calvinism, this is another thing you have in common with the Scots.;) I know that the House of Percy had its line in Flanders, as did Clan Douglas. The last name Bremner comes from Brabant, but is Scottish.

http://annebremner.com/_img/anne.jpg

BTW, my Huguenot line lived in Leiden, Liege, and Bavaria in addition to Amsterdam, and their origins in Normandy. I am not a Calvinist though. I am an Arminian.:)

Johnston

09-05-2011, 06:15 AM

What is your take on so many people voting France? I assume you voiced your objections almost all upon me for having done so, and I am not even pro-French.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0d/France_1552-1798.png

A history of French theft until 1798.

Ceterum autem censeo, Francia esse delendam.

See here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_lands_of_France

It is a trend in history.

The Lawspeaker

09-05-2011, 10:08 AM

What is your take on so many people voting France? I assume you voiced your objections almost all upon me for having done so, and I am not even pro-French.

See here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_lands_of_France

It is a trend in history.
I think it's a nice example of people not knowing history and equating language and ethnicity.

Troll's Puzzle

09-08-2011, 08:43 PM

Walloons are a race of filthy perverts.

Therefore it's only right that they should join with the French.

AntonyCapolongo

09-08-2011, 08:55 PM

[FONT="Georgia"]It should join the Netherlands. And France as a nation should be dismantled. Brittany independent, Savoia to Switzerland, the Alsace-Lorraine to Germany, the part they stole from Luxembourg to Luxembourg. Cosica and Nice back to Italy.

I'm agree, France should be dismantled. But not agree with some details : Corsica and Nice have never been Italians, they can't "back to Italy". Corsica have been Ligurian, and Nice have been Piemontese. Now I think Corsica should be independent, and Nice a part of Provence : Nissards speak a sort of Provençal, and before being a possession of Piemont, Nice was Provençal ! And don't forget also Iparralde (Northern-Basque Country) to Euskal Herria, Rosselló i Cerdanya (Nord-Catalonia) to Catalunya, etc.

gandalf

09-08-2011, 09:39 PM

The Lawspeaker

09-08-2011, 09:42 PM

Tony and Civis are members of the " jealous of France" social group ,

and I can understand this disease : France is beautiful , deep and strong .

I suggest that all Nederland and Belgium come back to France .
I prefer Germans marching through Paris and this time we should let them pass. Or marauding Englishmen like in the good old days of the Hundred Years War.

The only good Frenchman is a dead one. :coffee:

gandalf

09-08-2011, 09:58 PM

Get yourself a nice smoking joint Civis , and relax !

Albion

09-09-2011, 09:37 AM

I prefer Germans marching through Paris and this time we should let them pass. Or marauding Englishmen like in the good old days of the Hundred Years War.

The only good Frenchman is a dead one. :coffee:

Lol, a little harsh there Civis.

The Lawspeaker

09-09-2011, 05:46 PM

lN5O3DeYcxs
1814,1815,1871 and 1940.

For the froggies. Enjoy. :thumb001:

gandalf

09-09-2011, 08:57 PM

The march of the gooses , your favourite danse Civis ?

I can see you on this picture ,
you are the little chicken who already has his foot on the floor ,
you should train more to be a goose my little chicken ... arff !

Don't get exited , have a joint man ...

gandalf

09-09-2011, 09:00 PM

A join to Nederland ... of coarse !

Stan

09-09-2011, 09:57 PM

Being Flemish, my view on this is simple. As long as Flanders has its independance, the Walloons can do as they please. Stay independant, join France, form a federation with the Congo or even colonize the moon for all I care. No longer our concern then. As long as we don't have to form a country with them anymore, it's all good :D

AntonyCapolongo

09-09-2011, 10:24 PM

the Walloons (...) colonize the moon for all I care.

Haha, it can be catastrophic, but send the Wallons and the Picards to the moon could be a nice solution.

Stan

09-10-2011, 06:32 AM

The first building they'd put up there after they claimed it would probably be an unemployment office.

AntonyCapolongo

09-10-2011, 07:18 AM

The first building they'd put up there after they claimed it would probably be an unemployment office.

Yes exactly, and it will be the same with the Picards. These two stupids people should unite.

Tel Errant

09-16-2011, 03:47 PM

Not French French no. But Belgian French.. there is a difference in words, in grammar, pronunciation etc.

Ah? You have to explain it to me then, because I've never noticed any grammatical nor lexical differences between French spoken in Belgium and French spoken in France. They just pronounce the 'r' in a harsher way.
Your understanding of the French language must be better than mine.

The Lawspeaker

09-16-2011, 03:50 PM

Ah? You have to explain it to me then, because I've never noticed any grammatical nor lexical differences between French spoken in Belgium and French spoken in France. They just pronounce the 'r' in a harsher way.
Your understanding of the French language must be better than mine.
And you aren't French (I know who you are but I won't give you away). I have actually heard it for myself when I was travelling through Wallonia and France and I barely speak any French but people do use different words and speak differently.

But you can look it up here on Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_French) as well. Do they use words like bourgmestre (while we call him the burgemeester or in some cases the burgervader) in France ? No they don't. They call the good man the maire. And when they have the souper.. the French have dinner.

And when I leave the door open a Brusselois or a Walloon in general would complain "Ça tire ici" which is the same as "Het trekt hier" in Flemish Dutch while a Frenchman would look up arrogantly and scorn me "Il y a un courant d'air". When we have dinner together I would hope he would say "Ça me goûte !" and it is the same when he would say it in my language, Dutch, ("Dat (heeft ge-) smaakt !" while a Frenchman would say "ça me plait !"

Tel Errant

09-16-2011, 03:51 PM

The first building they'd put up there after they claimed it would probably be an unemployment office.

Lol it sounds like you're talking about French Flanders.

The Lawspeaker

09-16-2011, 03:58 PM

Lol it sounds like you're talking about French Flanders.
After the French emptied the region of whatever valuables it had. In France there is only one place where you can expect real wealth: Paris. Paris, Paris everything is Paris. Fuck the rest.

Tel Errant

09-16-2011, 04:01 PM

And you aren't French (I know who you are but I won't give you away).
And you're not Dutch either, fool.

I have actually heard it for myself when I was travelling through Wallonia and France and I barely speak any French but people do use different words and speak differently.
Liar.

But you can look it up here on Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_French) as well.
Look it up on the news of the RTBF or read it up in Le Soir. There's no differences.

Do they use words like bourgmestre in France ? No they don't. They call the good man the maire. And when they have the souper.. the French have dinner.
Lol you're crazy. They also say nonante instead of quatre-vingt dix like the Swiss do, and the Provençals use 'con' as a puntuation mark, so what? You can find some of these peculliarities in any region of France.

Tel Errant

09-16-2011, 04:06 PM

After the French emptied the region of whatever valuables it had.

More like Wallonie and the northern tip of France had the same fate as their economies were built upon coal, and now they're facing the enduring economic depression that followed the end of it.

The Lawspeaker

09-16-2011, 04:08 PM

And you're not Dutch either, fool.

Liar.

Look it up on the news of the RTBF or read it up in Le Soir. There's no differences.

Lol you're crazy. They also say nonante instead of quatre-vingt dix like the Swiss do, and the Provençals use 'con' as a puntuation mark, so what? You can find some of these peculliarities in any region of France.

Yap. You're not French, Alana. :coffee: There is as much as difference between French in Belgium, French in Switzerland, French in Luxembourg, French in Canada and French in France as there is between American English and British English. Good... people can perfectly well understand each other (although maybe not always as the French Republic tried to wipe out the Walloon dialects during it's rule of Belgium as it wasn't "French" enough for them --- something that was followed by the same policies from the French-speaking elite that had dominated Flanders since the Middle Ages.. the socalled franskiljons (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franskiljons)).. it's all French but they have developed differently as French in Belgium came forth from the dialects and from the French elite and from the constant mixing with Flemish.

Evidence for Frenchification (not Wallonification) ? Look at the place names all over Belgium that are literal translations of Flemish names. Look at the place names in "French" Flanders, Picardy and Artesië.

The same with Swiss French that has always been in contact with Swiss German and Swiss Italian thus creating it's own language separate from Standard French. Surely they can understand each other but do they use words like huitante, cornet, fœhn in France ?

Canadian French (and there are differences between the Acadiens and the Quebecois) is an even more beautiful example. Canadian French and the French spoken by some people in Haiti or the Cajuns developed itself in isolation since the 18th century. These forms of French developed itself without the heavy-handed controls by the Academie Française.

And the reasons why the Provençals use "con" ? That's because they aren't French. They have been influenced by the Catalans and the Italians. And if you would go South-West you'd find out that Roussillon is actually Rosselló. Perpignan ? Perpinyà.

Tel Errant

09-16-2011, 04:32 PM

Yap. You're not French, Alana. :coffee:
Here's my advice to you civis: take a week long break off the internet, it will do you good.

There is as much as difference between French in Belgium, French in Switzerland, French in Luxembourg, French in Canada and French in France as there is between American English and British English.
...and Flemish and Dutch I supose?
But such is not the case for the French language.

The same with Swiss French that has always been in contact with Swiss German and Swiss Italian thus creating it's own language separate from Standard French. Surely they can understand each other but do they use words like huitante, cornet, fœhn in France ?
The word huitante is used in Vaud but not in the rest of the Cantons (they say octante), but the French they use is the same as in France or Belgium. The dialects are clinically dead and they never developped an own form of French.
Fœhn is used in France, it's the name of a wind.

Canadian French (and there are differences between the Acadiens and the Quebecois) is an even more beautiful example. Canadian French and the French spoken by some people in Haiti or the Cajuns developed itself in isolation since the 18th century. These forms of French developed itself without the heavy-handed controls by the Academie Française.

French in Canada have developped a difficultly understandable jargon called joual and their accent is the most difficult of the French speaking countries but the French used in the medias is the same.

And the reasons why the Provençals use "con" ?
Con is an insult that has become so common over here that the caricatural provençal guy will use it at the end of every single phrase, that's a stereotype.

That's because they aren't French. They have been influenced by the Catalans and the Italians. And if you would go South-West you'd find out that Roussillon is actually Rosselló. Perpignan ? Perpinyà.

Pfff. And the whole Belgium has been influenced by France therefore I claim the whole country as legitimate and future regions of France.

The Lawspeaker

09-16-2011, 04:37 PM

Here's my advice to you civis: take a week break off the internet, it will do you good.
Ouch did I find you out ? :D

...and Flemish and Dutch I supose?
But such is not the case for the French language.
There are differences between Flemish Dutch and Standard Dutch, yes. I don't see why I should deny that. We don't have a language academy here.

Huitante is used in Vaud but not in the rest ofthe Cantons (they say octante), the French they use is the same as in France or Belgium. The dialects are clinically dead and they never developped an own form of French.
Bullocks. If they use a different word then the language isn't the same as the language differences do not confine itself to a single word. Don't fool me. :coffee:.
And you tell me that places which are usually separated by mountain ridges do not have real living dialects. It's funny that the Norwegians do have strong living dialects then.

Fœhn is used in France, it's the name of a wind.
As a loanword. And it has a different meaning. The Swiss use it to denote a hair-dryer as well. In France it is called a sèche-cheveux.

French in Canada have developped a difficultly understandable jargon called joual and their accent is the most difficult of the French speaking countries but the French used in the medias is the same.
It's not a dialect. But a language. In the same way as Afrikaans is a language separate from Dutch.

Tel Errant

09-16-2011, 04:56 PM

Ouch did I find you out ? :D
Yeah, I admit it Sherlock, you're the best you've found me out.

There are differences between Flemish Dutch and Standard Dutch, yes. I don't see why I should deny that. We don't have a language academy here.

You just mentioned one of the reasons explaining why French is spoken the same everywhere in the French speaking countries.

Bullocks. If they use a different word then the language isn't the same as the language differences do not confine itself to a single word. Don't fool me. :coffee:.

Don't fool yourself, one word doesn't make a different language, huitante and octante are in the Larousse anyway so they're French words.

And you tell me that places which are usually separated by mountain ridges do not have real living dialects. It's funny that the Norwegians do have strong living dialects then.
That's the power of the French culture and language. Believe me or not Franco-provençal dialects have died out in Switzerland.

As a loanword. And it has a different meaning. The Swiss use it to denote a hair-dryer as well. In France it is called a sèche-cheveux.
Fantastic.

And?

It's not a dialect. But a language. In the same way as Afrikaans is a language separate from Dutch.
It's a gross speech that is used by the uneducated and/or in informal situations. Afrikaans is the only language of the Boers, Joual is just an argotic form of French used in Canada.

Albion

09-16-2011, 05:45 PM

After the French emptied the region of whatever valuables it had. In France there is only one place where you can expect real wealth: Paris. Paris, Paris everything is Paris. Fuck the rest.

Yes, the situation in England is much worse though. London this, London that. London gets the Olympics, London gets all the museums, the art galleries, basically everything.

Outside of London there isn't much but historic buildings and architecture and a couple of attractions but by far most things are located in London.

Every time something new is planned for England it's got to be there, visitors to England often just visit the capital and surrounding areas - up in the North and Midlands there is nothing like that.

In France at least they have a few nice cities down near the Med, England just has London and then a load of provincial towns and cities.

...and Flemish and Dutch I supose?
But such is not the case for the French language.

I thought French was the standard dialect based on that of Paris of the Langues d' Oil?

Pfff. And the whole Belgium has been influenced by France therefore I claim the whole country as legitimate and future regions of France.

I beg to differ. Ireland talks English but we {no longer} claim it. ;)

Bullocks.

I believe the correct English is 'bollocks' referring to two pieces of the male anatomy. Bullocks are male cattle, it doesn't work the same as a vulgar word.

poiuytrewq0987

09-16-2011, 06:31 PM

Yes, the situation in England is much worse though. London this, London that. London gets the Olympics, London gets all the museums, the art galleries, basically everything.

Outside of London there isn't much but historic buildings and architecture and a couple of attractions but by far most things are located in London.

Every time something new is planned for England it's got to be there, visitors to England often just visit the capital and surrounding areas - up in the North and Midlands there is nothing like that.

In France at least they have a few nice cities down near the Med, England just has London and then a load of provincial towns and cities.

Hey, I did visit Brighton too. :D

Tel Errant

09-16-2011, 06:32 PM

I thought French was the standard dialect based on that of Paris of the Langues d' Oil?
The Francien (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francien_language) hypothesis saying that French comes from the dialect spoken in Île-de-France is discredited nowadays, and the origin of French is an open question. In my opinion it's a composite class language, the language used by the bourgeoisie, nobility, writers, poets and philosophs that has followed its own development along the centuries. It's a court language.

I beg to differ. Ireland talks English but we {no longer} claim it. ;)
You guys have no ambitions.

The Lawspeaker

09-16-2011, 06:48 PM

Pfff. And the whole Belgium has been influenced by France therefore I claim the whole country as legitimate and future regions of France.
You mean that it has been hyjacked by the franskiljons. I hope that the Africans will breed the French out. :D

Kataphraktoi

09-16-2011, 07:01 PM

The Lawspeaker

09-16-2011, 08:11 PM

A (re)unification of the Netherlands and Flanders (and perhaps Luxembourg), with Wallonia going to France is the most likely option; the United Kingdom of the Netherlands didn't work then and the cultural and linguistic differences would make a 'Whole Netherlands' difficult.
No it didn't work because of William I's stupid policies and because of France actively trying to divide the Netherlands - supporting the franskiljons. This would also lead to the discrimination of the Flemish after the Belgian independence. France also actively send troops to Belgium during the Belgian Revolution.

As for Belgium: Flanders, Brussels and Wallonia to the Netherlands. "French" Flanders to the Netherlands as well as the former Flemish-speaking regions of Artois.

The Lawspeaker

09-16-2011, 08:13 PM

As for France: division along the 1940 lines. Artois and Flanders to the Netherlands, Elzass-Lothringen to Germany and Brittany independent. The complete destruction of all French cultural institutions, complete disarmament and de-industralisation (industries minus workers to be transferred to Germany and the United Netherlands, plus the wholesale importation of Africans to France in destroy French genetic make-up.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/France_map_Lambert-93_with_regions_and_departments-occupation.svg

Ouistreham

09-16-2011, 08:21 PM

Wallonia, Brussels and all 'Belgian' communities with a French speaking majority (Linkebeek, Rhode-St-Genèse, Craainem) to France.

Period.

gandalf

09-16-2011, 08:46 PM

"After the French emptied the region of whatever valuables it had. In France there is only one place where you can expect real wealth: Paris. Paris, Paris everything is Paris. Fuck the rest."

Then you are a goose from the city ;
you think that out of Paris there is nothing interesting .
Of course for a dutch living out of cities is not possible so you can't imagine how rich are the provinces of France , but for you it is like too much adventure to visit I suppose .
You live in a handkerchief at 10 million people , while France is worked out by 60 millions ( 55 without our rats invaders ),
so we are working like powerfull men , like Franks , no laziness ,
we are strong .

"As for Belgium: Flanders, Brussels and Wallonia to the Netherlands. "French" Flanders to the Netherlands as well as the former Flemish-speaking regions of Artois. "

Who is going to take our land ? you ? you can't even do the goose properly .

"As for France: division along the 1940 lines. Artois and Flanders to the Netherlands, Elzass-Lothringen to Germany and Brittany independent. The complete destruction of all French cultural institutions, complete disarmament and de-industralisation (industries minus workers to be transferred to Germany and the United Netherlands, plus the wholesale importation of Africans to France in destroy French genetic make-up. "

I know how you feel Civis , jealous of our great and beautifull country ,
doen't matter we still love you and the Dutch , good mates ,
you can come and visit , door is open , champ is in the fridge .

Osweo

09-16-2011, 09:17 PM

Yap. You're not French, Alana. :coffee:
Oh my God! :rotfl: CHRIST, Civis! Get a grip on yourself! He doesn't write REMOTELY like Alana, who is active here as 'Fresa' anyway! :bowlol:

Hey, I did visit Brighton too. :D
Our chief gay resort. :suomut:

:sherlock:

plus the wholesale importation of Africans to France in destroy French genetic make-up.

No personal affront on web forum justifies saying such things. SHAME on you. Honi soit qui mal y pense. :grumpy:

The Lawspeaker

09-17-2011, 04:12 PM

Wallonia, Brussels and all 'Belgian' communities with a French speaking majority (Linkebeek, Rhode-St-Genèse, Craainem) to France.

Period.
These are all Flemish placenames. Fuck you.

Tel Errant

09-17-2011, 05:34 PM

^ It won't be a problem, we've already renamed so many flemish placenames.

AntonyCapolongo

09-17-2011, 08:18 PM

Albion

09-18-2011, 09:46 AM

Don't say bullshit. Southern "France" is not to be destroyed. -_-

:thumbs up Occitania

Tel Errant

09-18-2011, 09:59 AM

Albion

09-18-2011, 12:30 PM

You can't separate "Occitania" nor any other part of France from the rest of the country, France's history has been shaped by peoples from the south as much as from peoples from the North, occitanian history is French history.

Agreed. These two areas have been bound together since the Frankish Empire, whatever differences existed (ethno-linguistic) have largely blurred into one French identity and ethnicity with regional subtleties.

I was merely mentioning what he was hinting at. ;)

AntonyCapolongo

09-18-2011, 02:52 PM

You can't separate "Occitania" nor any other part of France from the rest of the country, France's history has been shaped by peoples from the south as much as from peoples from the North, occitanian history is French history.

Mais ce n'est pas ça le problème, le problème, c'est que toi et tes amis, et tu le disais récemment sur le forum, vous ne voulez même pas nous accorder le droit d'avoir des régions historiquement correctes (Berry, Languedoc, Provence, Poitou, etc) et de préserver nos langues un minimum ! Vous voulez nous détruire de A à Z, comment voulez-vous qu'on sois vos chiens fidèles si vous nous méprisez et voulez nous voir nous uniformiser ??

Tel Errant

09-18-2011, 03:31 PM

Mais ce n'est pas ça le problème, le problème, c'est que toi et tes amis, et tu le disais récemment sur le forum, vous ne voulez même pas nous accorder le droit d'avoir des régions historiquement correctes (Berry, Languedoc, Provence, Poitou, etc) et de préserver nos langues un minimum !
La préservation des langues régionales ne dépend que de ceux qui les parlent, quant aux régions elles-mêmes ne crois pas qu'on va s'amuser à en redéfinir les tracés pour faire plaisir à une poignée de régionalistes.

Vous voulez nous détruire de A à Z, comment voulez-vous qu'on sois vos chiens fidèles si vous nous méprisez et voulez nous voir nous uniformiser ??
Nous? Je parie que toi et les tiens pouvez vous compter sur les doigts de la main, combien de personnes crois-tu représenter en Provence?
Personne ne veut détruire personne, personne ne méprise personne, tout ça c'est ton délire victimaire.

Albion

09-18-2011, 03:34 PM

Personne ne veut détruire personne, tout ça c'est ton délire victimaire.

See also: Scottish and Welsh in the UK. ;)

AntonyCapolongo

09-18-2011, 06:29 PM

La préservation des langues régionales ne dépend que de ceux qui les parlent, quant aux régions elles-mêmes ne crois pas qu'on va s'amuser à en redéfinir les tracés pour faire plaisir à une poignée de régionalistes.

Nous? Je parie que toi et les tiens pouvez vous compter sur les doigts de la main, combien de personnes crois-tu représenter en Provence?
Personne ne veut détruire personne, personne ne méprise personne, tout ça c'est ton délire victimaire.

Oui, voilà. La discusion est inutile avec les chauvins Français. Vous qui bandez en entendant votre hymne, qui enculez vos coq et qui vous tenez fiers devant votre morceau de chiffon (avec lequel je me torche le cul) n'êtes qu'une race de merde chauvine avec un immense complèxe de supériorité, rien de plus. Impossible de parler avec vous, vous vous prennez pour les saints des saints, ceux qui éclairent le monde et ne font de mal à personne.

Vous ne valez pas plus que les arabes.

Tel Errant

09-19-2011, 04:07 PM

C'est ça victime, arrêtes de nous casser les couilles avec ta propagande de naciounal-socialiste-prouvençau-anti-occitan-e-pro-catalan ça n’intéresse personne. Je trouve que j'aurais été bien patient avec toi en étant le seul Français à prendre la peine de répondre à tes inepties.

Albion

09-19-2011, 04:47 PM

Lol, all these vulgar phrases missing from English, I find this very educational. ;)

Tchek

09-22-2011, 01:01 PM

Payens

09-22-2011, 02:20 PM

Wallonia, Brussels and all 'Belgian' communities with a French speaking majority (Linkebeek, Rhode-St-Genèse, Craainem) to France.

Period.

Will never happen, however you can have Wallonia, same impoverished (http://www.tourpress.nl/materials/pers_images/080229_080229_charleroi_lelijkste_plek_ter_wereld. jpg)culture as south of the Belgian border. They also share this hostile and completely misplaced imperialistic spasm, correlated with the same linguistic fetishism.

Tel Errant

09-22-2011, 05:57 PM

Tel Errant

09-22-2011, 06:12 PM

Je vois que la France est toujours aussi populaire :D

Personnellement, l'union de la France et de la Wallonie, je suis a priori contre.
Bien que relativement Francophile (surtout en ces temps de francophobie generalisée), je pense que comme l'a dit notre camarade batave plus haut (avec son langage fleuri), Paris a tendance a "pomper" la province et la mépriser par la suite; et si je prend la vraie capitale de la Wallonie, Liège (pas l'"officielle", étant Namur), je pense que c'est une ville trop particulière et independante pour se soumettre a Paris. Au fond, peut-etre qu'une independance genre Pays de Galles serait mieux. Paris a tendance a reduire le "non-Parisien", c'est-a-dire le provincial, à un crétin prolétaire pinardisé (chti, beauf etc...) afin de s'assurer de ne pas nuire au prestige de Paris.

Un gros probleme de la Wallonie etant sa "francophonitude" alors qu'aucun centre economique de grande importance a proximité n'est francophone. La Wallonie est tournée culturellement vers le sud mais economiquement vers le Nord. Les grands pôles economiques de la region sont le Luxembourg, la Flandre, les Pays-Bas et l'Allemagne de l'ouest, où la langue Française est soit pas comprise, soit mal reçue. Un Wallon doit par consequent se mettre a une langue etrangère presque systematiquement si il veut en profiter, et c'est un obstacle handicapant.
Le pôle economique francophone de grande importance le plus proche, c'est Paris, et c'est loin. Donc la Wallonie "doit" considerer les pays du Nord pour se developer, bien que de plus en plus hostile a la langue française.

Une union avec la France signifie une rupture plus importante avec les regions du Nord, et une importance reduite a la peripherie de la France, alors que geo-economiquement, c'est au nord que ça se passe.

Paris ne pompe pas la province, au contraire, Paris redistribue les richesses générées à La Défense (http://www.ladefense-seine-arche.fr/les-enjeux-de-lamenagement/developpement-economique.html) (premier quartier d'affaire en Europe) au reste du pays. Il n'y a pas de parent pauvre en France, certains ont plus de difficultés que d'autres et sont aidés en conséquence; une Wallonie française ne se porterait que mieux que la Wallonie belge actuelle et je ne vois pas en quoi une Wallonie indépendante aurait statutairement davantage de facilité pour commercer avec le Nord qu'une région Wallone au sein de la communauté nationale. Il serait d'ailleurs intéressant de voir si le commerce extérieur wallon n'est pas davantage tourné vers le Nord-Pas-de-Calais que vers l'Allemagne ou les Pays-Bas.

gandalf

09-22-2011, 09:14 PM

Tchek 240

Je suis français et pas pour la Wallonie française ,
je suis pour la Wallonie belge , hollandaise ou indépendante .

Facile à traduire en anglais .

PS : tu vois Civis on peut s'entendre ...

Magister Eckhart

09-22-2011, 09:44 PM

Considering what a burden Wallonia has been on Flanders in the union, I certainly wouldn't wish them on the French. Then again, France's welfare state is better equipped to deal with a population like the Waloons, who could never survive on their own. Ultimately, therefore, I have to go with union avec France.

Payens

09-22-2011, 09:54 PM

^ South of the Belgian border is France, the second biggest economy in Europe and its most productive country (small ones like Norway and Luxembourg put aside).
You talking about the linguistic fetishism of the wallons is highly ironical.

Your impoverished culture is irrelevant in economical terms. Of course the propaganda machine that teaches you on our situation is a very centrist and subjective one. There is nothing ironic about my contempt for the linguistic masturbation of the frenchies, since the Flemish government goes by the territoriality principle first and foremost, the Walloons use the personality principle. One can use French if one pleases, but the demand for a basic capability of the language of the host nation, is a very common, rational and democratic one.

Not even when it freezes in hell, France would give up territory that is
a) historical French, territorial and cultural
b) is part of their present territory
c) has chauvinist aliens/invaders unwillingly to use French in regards of their contact with public institutions, schools, etc..
d) colonize, occupy and demand the anschluss of this territory, because they are unwillingly to adjust.
e) produce shit, but ask more and more money.

The problem of Belgium, this non nation, regards concerns and objects that are Flemish, be it our money, our territory or our right to protect our cultural identity against Walloon imperialism.