Discussion in 'Europe' started by jimnyc, Aug 31, 2003.
Q. What do you call 100,000 Frenchmen with their hands up?
A. The French Army.
Der der der, heard that one already!
Q - How do you call the mightiest european army, one of the mightiest of the world, with good equipement, best tank of the world, one of the best fighter, one of the best rifle, maybe best than the famous M-16, and with high quality soldiers, who really know how to do the war without kill civilians, with a long practice of peace operation in hot zone, with British soldiers - who are really good too - ?
A - the French Army
Q - How do you call the amry with young soldiers who are not prepare to war, who shoot on everything, even women and kids ?
A - US Army
When is the last time your MIGHTY Army actually defended your country successfully?
Hell, I heard once that someone popped the cork to a champagne bottle and:
1. a whole battalion of french army surrendered.
2. a two mile long line of frenchmen signing up to be collaborators formed in under fifteen minutes.
3. the chunnel was jammed with french government officials hightailing it for London to set up a government in exile.
4. french flag makers were having heart attacks trying to figure out which flags to produce.
5. Responding to desperate pleas, George Bush told Jacques Chirac that America could not, in conscience, assist without authorization from the UN.
P.S. Get a sense of humor, Francois. It's a joke.
Kinda hard to kill civilians in war if you make the Americans do all your dirty work. Kinda easy to call your equipment the best if you never test it in battle.
its also kinda hard to practice peace operations in the middle of a war
It also hard to claim the French are the mightest army in the Europe when the British actually have military experience.
Its also easy to be an ungrateful sob with a stick up his butt when "young soldiers unprepared for war" have to save your butts every couple decades.
merlin, I've got humour, but it's borung when I read always the same things about France , your jokes did like France now is the 1940 France......tell at a German that his country is like in 1940, I think he'll kick you
British slodiers did war in Iraq, yes, so they had a war experience in 2003/2004. But saying that France hasn't is wrong : in Yugoslavia, with Blue Helmets, during severals years, in 1999 in Kosovo - the second most impotrant army sent here after USA were the french one.
2004 : Haiti's inetrvention with US Marines and French RIMA (marine infantry, like your Marines), RPIMA (Paras from marine infantry).
2003/2004 : In Ivory Coast, fights against Rebels.
Be sure that french amry is ready for a war, for a conflict, our equipment is good, our soldiers are too, but i wish that the wars for those France is ready would not come (it's not cowardice, but the wish of peace).
(Do youknow that France have oe of the best military intelligence corps ? With Mirage F-1, ground vehicles............this intelligence corps helped USA in Afghanistan.... And about the french special forces : high high quality : they are great in intelligence mission, in snowy mountain, urban zone, or every other kind of ground. They are the best at fight, their practice is the best - or one of the best - , and did you know, the US Navy seals copy their practice on the French Foreign Legion's one........... )
(french elite's regiments : Legion, RPIMA, 17th Hussard, 35th Dragon........a lot of other.)
So the French army is ready for a war...
And when you ask me when France defend itself, it is a little stupid : it means that you deem the French Army in relation to the French army of 1940..... 2 things : the 1940's french army was not bad,but the HQ was. the tactics were not good. But the army : soldiers, equipment....were good. the HQ was really bad.
second thing : the French army of 1940 is not the actually French Amry : it's a non-sense to think that if French army failed in 1940, it 'll failed also now. You can't deem something actual compared with something old. If you do it, you can say everything, but all would be dumb.
Appreciate a thing compared with this thing, but 60 year's agos is stupid.
To end : you say that US kill civilian but France didn't the dirty job, and din't even the war....during the UN ops in Balkans, French and British didn't kill civilians.......they protect them.
Actually, the French Army is not all that bad.
The French Army
There are only a few armies in the world today that retain robust full spectrum capabilities. Beyond the U.S. and British Armies, the French Army is one of the few land forces that not only maintains a substantial worldwide presence and a capability to fight at high intensity, but also is increasingly optimized for power projection.
The French Army has recently completed the ambitious restructuring program it launched in 1995, despite the handicaps of budget constraints imposed by five years of a center-left government from 1997 to 2002. These funding constraints hit especially hard at equipment maintenance and modernization accounts, in part because the Army was so heavily engaged in a series of deployments and overseas commitments. Nevertheless, despite the strains of this vigorous operational tempo, the French Army has completed the transition to an entirely new force structure, converting from a division to a brigade-centered force, and making the transition to an all-volunteer force.
During the same period, adding to its long-standing presence in Africa and the Pacific, the French Army began in 1992 a substantial long-term and continuing effort in the Balkans, where nearly 100 French soldiers have perished in the intervening decade.
In addition, after September 11, 2001, the French Army was asked to mount a major effort in Afghanistan. There, French soldiers operate in close conjunction with their American counterparts, notably in training the Afghan Army, participating in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), and recently deploying special operations forces in a combat role.
To this has been added deployments to the Ivory Coast, where after helping evacuate American citizens, the French force has been engaged in a risky but so far successful effort to keep the lid on an explosive situation. Despite having fewer soldiers than the situation would seem to demand, French soldiers have employed their sense of the terrain and the overall environment to prevent the emergence of still another failed state, of still another spawning ground for instability and a potential safe haven for terrorists.
Recently, the French Army has also sent units to the Democratic Republic of the Congo for similar purposes.
At the same time, the French Army continues to develop its Air-Land Operational Space concept, a parallel to the U.S. Armys Future Combat System. This programs scope and bold vision, like the British Armys FRES (Future Rapid Effects System) effort, show that high technology in the landpower arena is not a one-way street from the United States to Europe.
Even in the domain of future high-intensity combat, the French Army remains centered around the soldier on the ground to maintain Contact With Reality as the current French Army doctrine states. Despite the deep tensions of the past year over Iraq, the French Army is more often than not still ranged solidly on the ground beside the Army of its oldest ally, the United States.
One may disagree with a nation's politics, but most coalition/allied soldiers I have worked with are very professional. Like the US soldiers, they want to do a good job.
I don't think the problem has been the 'French Soldier' but rather the French Leadership.
I totally agree.
Separate names with a comma.