You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the way in which the GPL restrictions enter force. Your first example is covered by the "system library exemption" - but even if it wasn't, it wouldn't have the effect you posit.
The GPL says that if you distribute the GPL'd program, or a derivative thereof, you have to also provide the source to the program or derivative under GPL-equivalent terms (to the people you distributed the program / derivative to).
This means that if I distribute your GPL program linked with some of Microsoft's code, I have to provide the source to the whole ball of wax, or risk being sued by you for breaking your copyright. Note that as long as Microsoft is a third party, this doesn't put any restrictions on them (of course!). If I don't have access to Microsoft's code, which is likely, then I can't distribute that derivative work without being in violation of your license.
