French threatens nuke launch?
Discussion
scorp said:
About time the french started to grow some balls, its also encouraging they are offering to pool their arsenal with ours to protect a wider europe.
Protect a wider europe?
Thats propaganda rubbish.
NATO already does that, requiring every member to treat an attack on another member's territory as an attack on it's own.
TheLemming said:
Protect a wider europe?
Thats propaganda rubbish.
NATO already does that, requiring every member to treat an attack on another member's territory as an attack on it's own.
Propaganda?
NATO includes non-european countries, like the USA. Why on earth shouldn't europe defend itself?
TheLemming said:
NATO already does that, requiring every member to treat an attack on another member's territory as an attack on it's own.
Which both France and Germany have conveniently forgotten in recent times.
As for pooling our deterrent with the French to protect the EU..
If the EU want to "borrow" our subs, the EU can damn well pay towards their upkeep.
>> Edited by monkeyhanger on Friday 20th January 17:30
Gazboy said:
Can't see how France can say anything to Iran with a speech like this!
>> Edited by Gazboy on Friday 20th January 17:14
More a warning to Iran that if they do develop Nuclear weapons and give them to terrorists they will suffer the consequences.
There is nothing that new about what Chirac is saying. What is the difference between a state launching a missile or smuggling one in to the 'enemy' country? Both are acts which require a retaliatory strike.
scorp said:
Protect a wider europe?
Thats propaganda rubbish.
NATO already does that, requiring every member to treat an attack on another member's territory as an attack on it's own.
Propaganda?
NATO includes non-european countries, like the USA. Why on earth shouldn't europe defend itself?
NATO does include non-european countries. So what?
It also includes the vast majority of european countries, all of which are obliged to mutual defence. I'd rather have the US on my side if it came to a shooting war than the French!
You speak of europe as a single entity, not a popular view or one that I endorse. Europe can't defend "itself" because there is no europe as a sole entity - there are however many European nations.
European nations can and will defend themselves and their allies and neighbours, as a part of their agreements to do so, primarily under the Nato agreement.
What exactly is Europe under a military threat from? Are the French going to nuke Huddersfield when they have UK based suicide bombers taking a ride on the TGV?
It's political posturing, nothing more.
JagLover said:
Can't see how France can say anything to Iran with a speech like this!
>> Edited by Gazboy on Friday 20th January 17:14
More a warning to Iran that if they do develop Nuclear weapons and give them to terrorists they will suffer the consequences.
There is nothing that new about what Chirac is saying. What is the difference between a state launching a missile or smuggling one in to the 'enemy' country? Both are acts which require a retaliatory strike.
Ah so France wouldn't support an American attack on Iran, but if Iran was deemed a threat to France then France might independently attack Iran to defend France and this might coincidentally be at the same time as US/UK forces attacked, so rather than Frnace alligning with US policy it would rather be a happy coincidence?
andymadmak said:
Where was all this French agression in 1939? 
andy
>> Edited by andymadmak on Friday 20th January 17:19
Totally unfair on the French (imo)
The French resistance were some of the bravest fighters of WW2, (Male and female) There was only one thing that saved England in late 1939 from invasion by the well oiled German war machine and that was 21 miles of the English channel. We were woefully unprepared until Uncle Sam started to pour in supplies of planes and tanks a year or so later under lend lease....
Would we have won the war without American support??.........I doubt it.........
Wacky Racer said:
Where was all this French agression in 1939?
andy
>> Edited by andymadmak on Friday 20th January 17:19
Totally unfair on the French (imo)
There was only one thing that saved England in late 1939 from invasion by the well oiled German war machine and that was 21 miles of the English channel. We were woefully unprepared until Uncle Sam started to pour in supplies of planes and tanks a year or so later under lend lease....
Would we have won the war without American support??.........I doubt it.........
Probably not. But we paid through the nose for American support and sacrificed the majority of the empire in the process.
I believe that it was only last year (or perhaps the year before) that we finished paying off the US for ww2 aid. Anyway besides the point, we are hijacking what appears to be an interesting thread!
scorp said:
Would we have won the war without American support??.........I doubt it.........
We wouldn't of lost either, most of europe would of been speaking Russain however.
Most? Try all.
The Russians won WW2. As I understand it 90% of the German troops we're fignting on the Eastern front. The allies had to make a dash for Berlin to stop the whole of Western Europe being overrun by the Soviets.
Has America not clung onto Western Europe as a missle staging post it may not have won the cold war.
timmy30 said:
Most? Try all.
The Russians won WW2. As I understand it 90% of the German troops we're fignting on the Eastern front. The allies had to make a dash for Berlin to stop the whole of Western Europe being overrun by the Soviets.
Has America not clung onto Western Europe as a missle staging post it may not have won the cold war.
I agree entirely
With reference to my earlier post, to take one example in 1943/44 Bomber Command was suffering horrific Lancaster losses over Reich territory, until they were escorted deep into Germany by American Mustang fighters fitted with wing mounted long range fuel tanks.....
Where did most of the hardware come from used in Operation Overlord durind "D" day on June 6th 1944, who suffered the most losses on the day????
Read the history books
and take your blinkers off.
Where did most of the hardware come from used in Operation Overlord durind "D" day on June 6th 1944, who suffered the most losses on the day????
Read the history books
and take your blinkers off. scorp said:
Would we have won the war without American support??.........I doubt it.........
We wouldn't of lost either, most of europe would of been speaking Russain however.
Interesting
I would agree that regardless of whether or not the D Day landings went ahead the Russians would have won by that point. But would they have won with no American assistance whatsoever.
America gave Russia masses of food and military equipment and, when the struggle in the East could have turned either way substantial German resources were diverted to both North Africa and to air defences to meet the bomber offensive, both of which campaigns the Americans had substantial involvement in.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff