France rejoin NATO?
 

At first I thought it must be April 1st

BBC NEWS | World | Europe | France ends four-decade Nato rift

Wonder why it suits them now?

It's one of two things:-

1. Sarkozy is trying to bring France back to reality.

2. France wants to have more of an influence on NATO policy.

Neither one gives me the "warm and fuzzies"... It'll end in tears.

France...
 

When it comes to anti-French, anti-UK, anti-USA "popular antics" I wish that people would educate theirselves.
xxx
About France, and white flags...?
(1) Remember World War I (1914-1918) - The French fought valiantly.
(2) World War II (1939-1945) - yes, they surrendered in June 1940... but their "Resistance" against Nazis was the most effective of Western Europe. They bought havoc to their railroads tracks and bridges used for Nazi logistics. They helped thousands of downed aircrews to escape/return to UK.
(3) Their armed forces took active part to 1944 D Day for the liberation of France.
(4) They received very little help in Indochina (1954). Was it an excuse for US to make their Vietnam War ten years later...?
(5) Yet they took part as NATO member, to the Korean War (1950-1953). France was to the side of UK, for the Suez Canal (1956).
(6) Asking help again (1958) for Algeria (then a French Metropole Province) they received NO help, paving the way for DeGaulle's anti-US attitude.
(7) If DeGaulle policies had continued, UK would never been part of EU.
(8) The French always liked Americans, at worst they question US politics. I think UK does it too.
(9) Sarkozy is strongly pro-US, pro-UK and pro-NATO politician. Their forces are in Afghanistan NOW.
xxx
So criticize France... Shows you to be poorly informed about that nation.
They still put flowers to the military cemeteries in Flanders, and Normandy.
And yes, I like French cheeses and French wines...
xxx
:ok:
Happy contrails

...doing 4/5 of f**k all, unless you count pi$$ing it up in 'KAIA Napa' as a contribution to the war effort. God forbid we'd find them anywhere there is any actual fighting going on...

At least they built their own chow hall....which they don't let anybody else use...

They also helped out in so many ways during the Falklands war, providing information on the Exocet, delaying deliveries to Argentina and providing combat training against Aircraft the Argentinians operated............

So don't knock them.

Care to elaborate on that? I think you'll find that most WW2 historians give that accolade to the Norwegians.

Despite Allied propaganda to the contrary, the French "Resistance" was small and marginalised and looked upon as terrorists by the vast majority of the French population - until August 1944 - when magically, damn near everyone turned out to be a (very) secret member of that same resistance.

The exception were the Communists, who became very active against the Germans after Sept 41, but who were looked upon as dangerous radicals by the vast majority of the French. Most of those communists - (the few who survived the Germans and the very active Milice) - were promptly locked up by the post Vichy government and many ex-Milice were employed by the new government to continue locking up the very same people they'd been chasing under Vichy.

In mitigation, I'd say the majority of most nations tend to go with the flow and take the easy course, whoever is in power, and the French who did fight in the Resistance and others who went to England to join De Gaulle were very brave people indeed.

BelArgUSA
 

Your points are all well made but these will only enrage the Daily Mail readers in this forum as they'll be itching to drag out the same old same old tired witty stereotypes yet again.. (cheese eating surrenders monkeys, blah blah)

Sarko would be damned by this same element here if he kept France out of NATO and he'll be damned by them for returning to the fold..:ugh:

BelArgUSA also missed out Suez in 1956 and GW1 in 1992. In the latter the French were, I believe, the first with the post-attack videoes on the news.

When I hear stuff thrashing France I always look up WW1 Casualty list and get reminded of the sheer level of casualties that France suffered.

Casualties of World War 1 - World War 1 Killed and Casualties

75% casualty rate of those mobilised suffered by France.

If UK had the same casualty rate would it have changed the way the Govt had done things later and the likelihood is that it would have.

If UK had suffered same casualty rate it would have added another 41% (280,000) to those who had died and 81% (1.4 Million) more to those who were wounded.

Travelling through rural areas in UK and France I have often stopped and looked at the War Memorials saying a silent prayer in recognition for their sacrifice and with guide books they give you an idea roughly of current population. Most particularly in France counting the names and getting to 125 and finding out current population in the surrounding area in only 175 gives you an idea of the sacrifice across France. I have yet to come across anything like that scale in the UK.

I can understand why a World War 1 hero such as Petain made peace in 1940 having watched the wholescale slaughter in WW1 and the wiping of a generation and being unable to do it a second time.

Friends
xxx
I gave my personal opinion about France, a country and culture I know well, as I am a native of Brussels, Belgium (French was my language). The constant criticism of French politics by many in UK, and USA, is often not deserved. Having lived 25 years in USA (1969-1993), I never failed to defend France when criticized by anti-French Americans, as much as I defended USA or UK when they in turn were criticized by the French I would meet on my frequent visits in France...
xxx
Pontius Navigator
Sorry, I made a typo - 1958 for 1956 in mentioning the Suez Canal.
xxx
Wiley
Gladly will elaborate . My mother, born 1925, and young lady during WW2 was a "messenger" passing papers and scrolls inside her bicycle frame (removing the seat post) and when stopped by Nazis guards, she would flirt them and offer them a "date" for a dance the next saturday... Incidentally, she was part of a Communist cell (many in Belgium as well). She also escorted half a dozen downed aircrews, RAF and USAAF back into France, some all the way to the Spanish border, the airmen disguised as Flemish workers as they spoke no French, with false ID provided by her Resistance group. I owe my "being in the world" to a USAAF 2nd Lt, and the numerous haystacks they probably used to spend the night on the way to the Spanish border in 1943. Agree with you, the Norwegian, the Dutch, the Danes did a great job too, I would personally have thought that the Yugoslavs of Tito were the best at it. I grew up as a kid, around many people who were in the Resistance, or escaped to UK to join the miltary. My stepfather was in the Belgian Brigade, attached to the Canadian Army on D Day Normandy (Brigade Piron), my uncle, with the RAF.
xxx
So, still having UK-France animosity, ever since Hastings 1066...?
Time to forget it, except for soccer or rugby...
xxx
:ok:
Happy contrails

Non, non, Agincourt and Owen Glendower, but of course he was Welsh.

I should bloody well think so, they gave the missiles to the Argies in the first place.

I love Sarkozy, he reminds me so much of Mr Bean.

The Real Reason . . .
 

I reckon he's hoping if he joins we'll tell him where our subs are, so ours and his stop bumping into each other . . .

BelArg is spot on. France never left NATO: from 1/7/66 she stopped participating in ACE/AFCENT and other fora...but stayed at Council level, retaining Ops compatibility if not integration. CDG held one Nation intact despite internal stress: "apres moi le deluge". France's elite, 1930s-90s, was informed by 1936 near-descent into Spanish-style Left/ Right Civil War. That, BelAir, not US "pressure" (who has ever pressed a Frenchman?), was the reason CDG quit Algeria: risk of revival of that schism (plus the cost, in treasure and conscript flesh). He did not object to getting up the odd Anglo nose ("defense a tous azimuts"), but during Cuba, 10/62: 'he did not think we would have war but if Soviets forced US in such places as Berlin, France would be with US "France will act in accord with you."' Avalon Project - Cuban Missle Crisis - Telegram From the Embassy in France to the Department of State.

HQ2, why come in from the cold now? Cost. France has decided that its interests continue to require Power Projection, such as in Africa, and that new, Out-of-Area NATO offers an affordable, coalition-centric means of doing that. So, no PA2 CVF: Task-share with the willing.

Bel

A great story. Thanks for sharing, and merci beaucoup to your Mother.

Now, the next question on my lips: do you have a war time photo of her?!

"Task-share with the willing."

we're busy

How bloody cynical can they be... They didn't want to "play" when they didn't think it suited them but now they can profit off leaching of the rest of us they are all for it...

... and they wonder why the rest of the world treat them like a red-headed stepchild... http://www.hqrafregiment.net/images/.../kick_face.gif

Evanelpus....

remind me again where the Argentinians got their modern destroyers?

There are actually 3 obvious factions in the "frog-bashing" threads :

1 - Francophiles - those who actually quite like the french. Typically composed of those who have actually met Frech chappies, perhaps those who have always admired anyone whose in flight rations include a wine allowance. May know some history, eg Dien Ben Phu. May be old enough to remember a young Miss Bardot.

2 - Banter types. Don't REALLY have anything against the French, it's just a sort of comic device in all honesty, a bit like calling small people lofty and so on. Genuinely just using a stereotype that they know isn't actually accurate because the punchline is actually funny. (This is, in my opinion, the origin of the wickedly humorous 'cheese eating surrender monkeys' phrase - a beautifully expressed piece of work, only lacking in actual factual content).

3 - Genuine Francophobes. Probably never met anyone who is actually French, quite probably spends 23+ hrs a day at the keyboard and has hygiene issues.

I try to be type 1, but have a bad habit of being type 2
:}

Err, most certainly!


That should get the "Nurse, quickly please!" alarms going at the old PPRuNers rest home!

http://doctorbulldog.files.wordpress...t_bardot_1.jpg

Phwoar!

Davejb:

You forgot a type:-

4. Those that have known many actual French persons some of whom are very nice people. Those that try very hard to always speak, in a limited fashion, French when in France while speaking to French people. Those that have been spat on by a 60-70 year old Frenchman while, at 16 years of age in a cafe in a village in the middle of nowhere, trying to politely order a coffee for himself and his similarly aged friend in French and _not_ making a mistake in translation. Those that have watched, for 30 years, their "superior" and arrogant national image parade itself across the worldwide political landscape as if they are truly relevant. Those that have watched them, as they are doing now, play international politics so that it gives them a benefit while turning their back when it is to their cost or when their profit would be removed or reduced by doing what is in the best interests of the majority.

There are those of us who can actually see through the French national persona. As I said above, there are some very nice French people... But as a nation... Well... they continually, seemingly intentionally, come up short

mick2088, that should get the Air Engineers drooling!

I prefer the young BB, personally...:E

Mick,
the advantage of beng able to remember the lady in photo 1 is helped enormously by the ability of the aged to simply disbelieve stark reality as per photo 2....

AA - to be honest I think that describes every nation on Earth, including our own... pig ignorance is a human trait, not a national one.

I can't deny your premise but I can say that, like cooking and making wine, the French have elevated it to an art form.

Ok,ok, assuming that the Frogs are back on side, what do they bring to the party, in real terms? ie capability, unique assets, force multipliers etc etc that can change the way NATO does it's day to day buisness (lots of SH and AT in a sandy place would be a bloody good start, by the way!!). What does this do to the price of (NATO) fish? Genuine question:confused:

racedo
 

Having lived here for some 3+ years, you only have to go about with your eyes open to realise that the country NEVER recovered from the losses in WW1.

Now the inner cities, well, that's down to different factors..........

"Ok,ok, assuming that the Frogs are back on side, what do they bring to the party, in real terms? ie capability, unique assets, force multipliers etc etc that can change the way NATO does it's day to day buisness (lots of SH and AT in a sandy place would be a bloody good start, by the way!!). What does this do to the price of (NATO) fish? Genuine questionhttp://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/confused.gif"

Well you get to serve alongside the Foreign Legion for one... :E

Hmmm that reminds me, I must buy a new hunting accordian before the new season starts.

Glad Rag, quite right. In about 1912/13 the birth rate was dropping to, IIRC, less than 2 per couple so the population was shrinking. This was in contrast to Germany with a higher birth rate and increasing population.

This caused the leadership to increase conscription from 2 years to 3. By 1917 the strength of the military would have increased by 50% and their trained potential by 30%. This was a threat to Germany whose war plan called for a lightning attack on the French before a second assault on their Russian allies. A stronger French army would put those plans in jeopardy.

Law of unintended consequences perhaps?

So lets get this right:

They let everybody do their fighting and dieing for them.

They eat and drink well.

They have a great climate.

They think having a mistress is a birth right, and to do otherwhise might question their sexuality.......


COOL

And to the party? More AWACs, tankers, CV, wine, and quite a few FJ I imagine.

Pontious - did you mean CONscription?

If I was being really cynical, I could suggest that France is re-joining NATO/OTAN in order to put them in a stronger position to bid for work for their underemployed but very significant defence industry.

Barry, ty, it was early.

Ah, so I'm not the only one who has, ahem, 'suffered' a Legion etrangere Sunday lunch in the field?! (oh, allright then, Kabul - but I now know where the European red wine lake has gone - allot of it's in me .....:\)

Anyone who knows about the Old Guard at Waterloo, and the job they did shepherding Napoleon away from the battlefield - lockstep, in square the whole way, stopping everytime Allied Cav got close enough to let off a volley to drive them away, then continuing. Modern day they do a bloody good job in Africa

Still, it's far more fun to adhere to national sterotypes, isn't it...

I had a mate who was at Saint-Cyr (he failed to get into Sandhurst) and was shocked that at nights they didn't bother sending out patrols... their view was, whats the point, they couldn't see, they'd deal with it in the morning! He was probably lying, but it made me chuckle at the time.

A recent question on QI (A UK television programme) asked which was the most successful european nation in military terms since 1066. The answer was the French.

The numbers given were:

Of 125 major European wars since 1495, the French have fought in 50, more than Austria (47) and England (43).

Out of a total 168 battles since 387BC, they won 109, lost 49 and drew 10.


The French made a major contribution to NATO operations in the Balkans in 1997. The US initially issued a directive that NATO forces in Bosnia were to be "dry". It was the French who said "non", it was a condition of their service that wine was to be available with meals.

My Bold

How many did they win?

My Bold...

How many did they fight without international assistance?

There's lied, damn lies and statistics... I'd love to see the basis for these claims. Furthermore, suspicion is immediately raised when the first statistic is limited to a period only after 1495 and the second statistic begins in 387BC, (before the country of France existed). Funnily enough, if one does the maths, this means that the French have fought 168 battles in 2396 years - or a battle every 14 years. Worse yet they have fought in wars who's average number of battles was 3.36...

Sorry, the figures don't make sense...

One source I found cited 28 war that France has been in since 1945. I believe this may be more than UK and having had time to think through a few I make UK just 22.

UK would include things like Mau Mau, EOKA, Radfan and so on.

The stat was since 1495 not 1945... ;)