It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is France actually gonna try to step up to the plate?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 10:28 AM
link   
timesonline.co.uk...


France has caused anger in Iran and delight in Israel today with a hawkish statement saying that the world should be ready to go to war to stop Tehran getting nuclear weapons.

Bernard Kouchner, the French Foreign Minister, said in a radio interview last night that if Iran got the bomb, the world would be in real danger, and that the current stand-off with the country's Islamist regime was the greatest crisis of the time.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


From past experiences with France they did not want to do anything to help in the "war on terror" or the NWO orchestrated movie. Do you think maybe they are trying to get us to go in or do you think they will actually help out?

One thing the history books leave out is France had a few pockets of Resistance forces that tried to fight back and even killed 3 Reichsfurhers during the occupation. What can come of this newest message.




posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 10:32 AM
link   
scary stuff, Im not looking forward to whatever happens...



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 10:41 AM
link   
France have a different President this time. From what I've seen of him, Sarkozy has been working more closely with the US than Chirac, and is a man of stronger convictions than his predecessor.

Whilst I wouldn't rule out France becoming involved in a war with Iran, I'd say that their first priority would be the safety of their people. Would the loss of French soldiers' lives be worth the possibility of loss of French civilian lives IF Iran gained nuclear weapons, and IF they used them.

I wouldn't blow off Kouchner's statement as hot air just yet though. I also wonder if this is just a one-off statement, or if we'll hear anymore from the French soon.


[edit on 17-9-2007 by DragonsDomain]



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I thought they did that in WWI and WWII? I don't think it worked out to well for them.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by DragonsDomain
France have a different President this time. From what I've seen of him, Sarkozy has been working more closely with the US than Chirac, and is a man of stronger convictions than his predecessor.

Whilst I wouldn't rule out France becoming involved in a war with Iran, I'd say that their first priority would be the safety of their people. Would the loss of French soldiers' lives be worth the possibility of loss of French civilian lives IF Iran gained nuclear weapons, and IF they used them.

I wouldn't blow off Kouchner's statement as hot air just yet though. I also wonder if this is just a one-off statement, or if we'll hear anymore from the French soon.


[edit on 17-9-2007 by DragonsDomain]


Sarkozy said he would work to improve US-French relations, but wouldn't be a lapdog.

France doesn't need to worry about sending French soldiers to war, ever heard of the Foreign Legion. That's who they sent to Iraq during Desert Storm, and they'll probably send them again if war does ensue. The French are in combat alot more than people realize, it's just foreigners doing the fighting under the French flag.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Much of this has already been discussed in another thread in these forums.

France will do nothing by itself. It will have the blessing of whoever is president of the USA if/when France "decides" it has to do something.

The French resistance of WW2, one of the very few shining lights of French Military history in the last 250 years. I will give the civilians the applause they richly deserve for this action. The French military on the other hand....don't even get me started.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 01:08 PM
link   
France, while a power, doesnt really have the capability to take on an Iranian adventure al by itself. When France says war may be a possibility, they are meaning that the US will do something.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 04:26 AM
link   
If you go by past history then no one will take France serious. If you are going to talk the talk you had better be able to walk the walk. France two words Pa...lease.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by one mans opinion
 


Take a look on where France is currently involved before bashing it:


And Hinky:
Past 250 Years... Ever hear of man called Napoleon

And to those saying that the France has no guts to intervene:


Zaire-Kolwezi
The French Foreign Legion took back Kolwezi after a seven-day battle and airlifted 2,250 European citizens to Belgium, but not before the FNLC massacred 80 Europeans and 200 Africans. In one instance the FNLC killed 34 European civilians who had hidden in a room.


Just some food for the tought. Deny ignorance...



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 06:28 AM
link   
You guys are being to tough on the French.

They actually performed quite well in 1940 given the circumstances, many units even fighting to the last man but they were overwhelmed by superior numbers and bad/outdated tactics and planning (ex. the over reliance on the Maginot Line and the outdated concept of tank warfare of using tanks without infantry support). Alot of what we assume about the Blitzkrieg is actually taken from German propaganda, ex. the myth about Polish Cavalry charging German tanks with lances when in reality by 1939 Polish Cavalry were well equipped with anti tank weapons, light artillery, etc and the few times they were used they were actually able to delay the Germans for some time.

The Free French also fought so so in North Africa and the retaking of France though some units were more concerned with looting their own country then fighting the Germans.

France also militarily won the war in Algeria but the politicians wimped out and made them withdraw.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by ChrisF231
 


I agree. Like I said they were able to take out 3 reichsfurhers in the occupation. That was not their military. And the Foreign Legion is their biggest military force abroad. But after the war on torrer and the coalition were started, Most people lost faith in them.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by ChrisF231
 


I agree. Like I said they were able to take out 3 reichsfurhers in the occupation. That was not their military. And the Foreign Legion is their biggest military force abroad. But after the war on torrer and the coalition were started, Most people lost faith in them.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by northwolf

And Hinky:
Past 250 Years... Ever hear of man called Napoleon


Let's review Napoleon.... wiki Napoleon and Russia then Wiki Napoleon and Waterloo.

Enough about Napoleon.

Golly, looks like France's "active" military is involved with many peacekeeping missions for the UN. This is almost like camping out and watching. This isn't fighting and very far from combat.

Your map was awful pretty, too bad it didn't show were France refused to send peacekeepers. Probably because they would have been in a position to fight and ... we'll let history speak for itself.

France is an easy target to pick on. Let's just hope for everyone's sake that calmer people get involved with Iran and a diplomatic solution can be found.



new topics




 
0

log in

join