Fiji vs French Polynesia - - Re: hardcore lagoon action
 

I've seen several people (on these boards in particular) sneer at French Polynesia for various reasons (expensive, hate the French) and advise Fiji instead (yes, also the Cooks, but that's not my question here). I'm looking into FP because I am totally fascinated by the incredible lagoons. From the research I've done online, Fiji doesn't seem to have the same hardcore lagoon action that FP does. Is this true? Can anyone make a comparison?

love
roxy

I have been to FP, Cooks, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji etc. Though Fiji is my favorite, for hard core lagoon action, yes the lagoons on Bora Bora are the best I've seen. Second runner up is Aitutaki for beauty but not for abundance of fish. After saying that, I have found small places on various outer islands in Fiji to be great & I liked better because you are usually exploring them alone & not with the pack going to do the shark feeding or manta ray petting. That is just my preference. If you had a bad time in any of these places, than tropical locals are just not for you!

Yes, the low class American public loves to hate the French, even if they have never been to France or seen a French person. This moronic and bigoted attitude is pretty sad and only serves to reinforce another concept: the Ugly American.

People should stop taking personally the political decisions of foreign governments. The decision of the French government to not support the war in Iraq doesn't warrant this barrage of nastiness towards the French people. As a matter of fact, the British people (and the Spaniard, the Italians, etc..) were far more against Bush and the war than the French were. However, because Blair supported the war, all the Brits are "ok", but the French are not. Pretty lame thinking if you ask me.

As far as travel goes, Americans need to get over all this b.s., and go wherever they want, with a spirit of friendship and courtesy towards the people of the countries they visit. You will be surprised how much good will there is towards Americans, since that, contrary to some people here, foreigners don't confuse US government politics and the American people.

French Polynesia is indeed paradise,and the lagoons are unique. There is no such thing in Fiji where, yes, there are beautiful coral reefs, but no lagoon. The beauty of the islands of FP is unmatched anywhere, and the overwater bungalows are also a unique feature of these islands. Fiji has very nice resorts, excellent diving, nice beaches and friendly natives, but somehow it doesn't have the romance or mystique of Tahiti.

p.s. there is a really good travel board for Tahiti at http://www.tahiti-explorer.com/

Jacky - Travel Talk is for talking travel not politics. I think your opinions should be kept to yourself.

Thank you, those were the exact answers I needed!

love
roxy

I think I did quite a bit of research myself and never having been to either - I'm still happy about our decision to go to the Cook Islands instead of FP. Mainly - cost was the factor - after all FP costs about 50% more than what we're getting in the Cook Islands, for the same 4/5 star level of accommodations. And, we're still getting the crystal blue lagoon by spending an entire week on Aitutaki after a week on Rarotonga.

All politics aside - I get the feeling that FP tends to have more honeymooners and thus, seems more crowded than the Cook Islands. This was another reason why we chose Cooks over FP. And, yes the NZD goes a lot further than the EUR.

Been to both FP and the Cooks (though not Fiji), and I think Simone has made the right choice. Though FP is definitely more beautiful, the Cooks are not far behind and the option of staying longer for the same amount of cash is pretty hard to pass up.

The Cooks are our destination of choice. We will NEVER forget our trip to FP... but we will return to the Cooks.

Ken

PS: Although I agree that the French can be somewhat difficult (I lived there when I was young and my brother was born there, so this is not just an uninformed statement), the fact is, people in various countries make their decisions based on what is perceived as being in THEIR national interests, not OURS (speaking as an American). Personally, I think no one can blame them for that, after all, we do the same. As Americans, we may (or may not) disagree with them), but they have the right to set for themselves the course their country chooses to take. Those who criticise the French (or anyone else) for not backing the US on the Iraq issue, should consider the fact that MAYBE THEY JUST DIDN'T BELIEVE THE JUSTIFICATION WAS THERE. If they didn't believe it was there, then they made the best choice based on their conscience. No one should be faulted for that.

Those of us (Americans) who blame the French for not backing us in Iraq, when we saved them from Hitler, should remember that we ONLY did so after being attacked ourselves and thereby forced into it. Even the pre-Pearl Harbor aid that we gave the Allies was not directed toward France, but towards Britain... and most Americans of the time opposed even that - and this was in spite of the debt we owed France for helping us win the War of Independence.

We will follow the path that we perceive as being in OUR national interests, folks in other countries will of course do the same.

PS@: Sorry for the long-winded tirade. I really don't mean to turn this into a political debate. It's just something I've felt like saying for a long time. Not trying to offend anyone, or start an arguement. Just trying to get folks to think objectively a little and try to see the world from someone else's shoes.

Ken

You'll never find people that are as warm as the Fijians. If I had a choice it would be Fiji hands down.