French Cut Down American Memorial (of sorts)

[DáinIronfoot]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,366467,00.html

"It should have been done a long time ago," said Nicolas Navarro, the curator of a World War II museum in the grounds of his family's 13th-century Château du Taillis nearby. "It's sad and pathetic that it wasn't."

I try not to dislike the French, I really do. But they don't make it easy, do they?

If things had happened in reverse and we had such trees carved by French soldiers over here, I would wholeheartedly endorse making it a national landmark protected by the US Park Service or something. Oy!

[AgentDrake]

Um. This might get some people annoyed at me, but:

To be honest, eliminating 'historic' graffiti is not exactly high on my list of problems with the French. (What with Sarkozy in office over there, I'm starting to like them all a lot more, though.) I can understand the POV saying that they should have kept the trees, but I don't really think it's inherently that big a deal. Obviously some people do, so they should of course consider keeping the things, but...? I mean, if some random French soldiers rescued America, then carved their names into, say, a rock cliff... then that cliff eroded underneath and became a potential hazard (note that the trees were a potential hazard) wouldn't we do something about it? What  probably should've been done was the local officials should've helped pay for pruning.

Alright. Now that I've offended everyone, I'm gonna shut up now. My apathy's gonna get me killed yet.

[MR. Lurtzy]

Well, that's the French for ya.

[Shieldmaiden]

If you read the entire article, then you will see that many French officials and locals wanted the trees to remain standing.  In fact, the French government would have been satisfied if the trees had merely been pruned to make them safe again.  It was the landowner, Robin, who decided that it was more cost effective to down the trees, rather than prune them:

"It costs about $1,200 to prune a beech tree but only about $300 to cut it down." Robin chose the cheaper option.

Granted, the French government could have helped out with the expense.  The article says that there was much controversy over this in the government.  And the locals are trying to get the remaining trees to be declared as historic monuments. 

My point is, we should not think that this was a decision made by the French people.  It sounds to me like there are some key members of the government and a landowner who were responsible for this. 

[DáinIronfoot]

Fair enough, Maiden. I saw that when I read it, yes, but that one quote just really fired me up. :-\

[SomeRandomDude]

No offense to our French friends on the boards, but the French government is completely messed up.

[SomeRandomDude]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,366467,00.html

"It should have been done a long time ago," said Nicolas Navarro, the curator of a World War II museum in the grounds of his family's 13th-century Château du Taillis nearby. "It's sad and pathetic that it wasn't."

I try not to dislike the French, I really do. But they don't make it easy, do they?

If things had happened in reverse and we had such trees carved by French soldiers over here, I would wholeheartedly endorse making it a national landmark protected by the US Park Service or something. Oy!

Context, Dain, context is key.

Local people are calling for the few "name trees" that still stand to be classified as historic monuments and saved from the same fate.

"It should have been done a long time ago," said Nicolas Navarro, the curator of a World War II museum in the grounds of his family's 13th-century Château du Taillis nearby. "It's sad and pathetic that it wasn't."

He was referring to making these trees a landmark, not cutting them down.