The French

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

Your assumptions are incorrect. France's culture is quite strong in the vast majority. Your assumption of birth rate boosted by first and second generation immigrants is just that. No data supports that assumption.

Are you saying the French replacement rate is sufficient excluding 1st and 2nd generation immigrants?

Certainly France subsidizes/pushes its culture very hard, I'll give you that I guess.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by tabs

The POODLE a better hunting dog....What is HUNTING IT? I really can't see that pipsquesk of a dog hunting anything other than its own collar?

Actually I like the Standard Poodle better than the Shepard.

The Airedale is the orginal Police Dog....The US, UK, Nipperoos and I even think the Krauts used em...fantastic dog...

Ohhh I'm sittin back and slamin the Thunder Bird Wine... anybody ever hear of a French wine called Ripple?

That's Le Ripple.

[Super_Dave_D]

[QUOTE=tabs;4132788]The POODLE a better hunting dog....What is HUNTING IT? I really can't see that pipsquesk of a dog hunting anything other than its own collar?

Actually I like the Standard Poodle better than the Shepard.

The Airedale is the orginal Police Dog....The US, UK, Nipperoos and I even think the Krauts used em...fantastic dog...QUOTE]

The Poodle is supposed to have originated in Germany and not France!

I have seen some pretty mean full size poodles and they make a pretty decent guard dog.

Interesting poodle info:

The poodle was originally bred to be a water dog -- retrieving game fowl trapped or shot down by its owners. In fact the name "poodle" is a derivative of the old German extraction "pudeln" which translates roughly as "to splash in water."

Unlike many other breeds of dog that were bred to specific sizes only within recent history, the poodle's three primary sizes -- toy, miniature and standard -- have been around for centuries. Aside from companionship, the toy versions and related cross-breeds played a somewhat dubious alternate role whereby they served as hand-warmers within the large sleeves of the nobility and emerging merchant classes around the time of the Renaissance. This practice became so widespread that they and other similarly small dogs became known as "sleeve dogs."

[RPKESQ]

Originally Posted by lendaddy

Are you saying the French replacement rate is sufficient excluding 1st and 2nd generation immigrants?

Certainly France subsidizes/pushes its culture very hard, I'll give you that I guess.

I'm saying the data to determine that doesn't exist. The French do not record race ANYWHERE (this edict is in the French Constitution). So how do you know how many 1st gen or 2 gen are not French returnees? Or French Canadians? Or English Francophiles? Or like me?

In France once you become a citizen all that is recorded is that you are now French and your country of origin. That means hundreds of thousands from former French colonies like Algeria, Tunisia and Viet Nam are not broken out by race. How do you determine what is "native"?

I am not belittling you in any way. This lack of data is a problem in France too. It is extremely difficult to target a subgroup in France for any purpose or measurement due to this Constitutionally mandated lack of data.

[creaturecat]

Bunch of Canadians killed today, fighting the war on terror in Afghanistan. Another sad day.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7573827.stm

[Mule]

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

I'm saying the data to determine that doesn't exist. The French do not record race ANYWHERE (this edict is in the French Constitution). So how do you know how many 1st gen or 2 gen are not French returnees? Or French Canadians? Or English Francophiles? Or like me?

In France once you become a citizen all that is recorded is that you are now French and your country of origin. That means hundreds of thousands from former French colonies like Algeria, Tunisia and Viet Nam are not broken out by race. How do you determine what is "native"?

I am not belittling you in any way. This lack of data is a problem in France too. It is extremely difficult to target a subgroup in France for any purpose or measurement due to this Constitutionally mandated lack of data.

Come on Frenchy, how about those military successes?

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

I'm saying the data to determine that doesn't exist. The French do not record race ANYWHERE (this edict is in the French Constitution). So how do you know how many 1st gen or 2 gen are not French returnees? Or French Canadians? Or English Francophiles? Or like me?

In France once you become a citizen all that is recorded is that you are now French and your country of origin. That means hundreds of thousands from former French colonies like Algeria, Tunisia and Viet Nam are not broken out by race. How do you determine what is "native"?

I am not belittling you in any way. This lack of data is a problem in France too. It is extremely difficult to target a subgroup in France for any purpose or measurement due to this Constitutionally mandated lack of data.

Algerian-born women in France have 32% more children than women born in France.

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

I have read Rick Atkinson's book. This is told from a limited viewpoint. You did not see that? A classic problem in any history book. If you took the time to explore the military archives you might change your opinion. The facts are there.
Granted that the book has an author. But the original landings coupled with the reality that the French could not see the problems with Germans in their own homeland and thier Generals, well documented siding with a puppet German replacement for the ligitimate government OF THEIR OWN LAND, is a breathtaking oversight on your reading of the history. NO DOUBT that De Gaule was not of that type. The losses at Oran were at the hands of the French. There willful use of force against the very forces that were fighting the invaders of there homeland is foolish. Every Frenchman killed in North Africa by Allied Forces deserved it more than the Germans. They were absolute fools not to see the obvious. This is not the armchair view, it was known that very day buy the Free French Forces. Now those guys were Frenchman to be proud of. This is the fact, not an interpretation.
But you are correct that "it is no surprise there are some very hard feelings by the "Greatest Generation" that may remain today", as it was based on much mis-information, myth and opinions, which just like racism is passed from generation to generation.
I agree in some part but not in others. Those that witnessed the behavior of the Vichey supporters and the colaborators are FULLY justified in their accurate portrail of the Vichey actions. Granted that does not get published or pointed out, that is a ligit claim, but the failure of the French after Dunkirk was remarkable. Ask any Brit. One of the most compelling statements by Churchill was his response to Peton after Peton's declaration that there would be no defense of Paris: Churchill's famous quote "Sir, if you do this, we British will hate you for one thousand years" (or words to that effect). That is not an opinion, but an indictement. Paris exists in its glory, on the backs of the British and their allies, including the Free French.

Every consider how to break that chain of opinion? It starts from facts and presenting those facts to the opinionated masses.

You have a point, but whose facts? Sometimes the masses make a good point.

The Greatest Generation opinions and beliefs are not infallible. Your great, great, great grandfather thought that if you traveled faster than a horse could gallop, your breath would be sucked out of you and you would die.

Maybe so, but is that relavent? France is moving to save itself from the self imposed degradation of the past as it sided with the socialist programs, but if I was going to lay my money on America or France, well I would go with us but I would not abandon the French as they in fact are a large part of who we were, just my opinion.

.......

[Super_Dave_D]

Originally Posted by Mule

Come on Frenchy, how about those military successes?

Heres one!

They won French Revolution, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

[RPKESQ]

[QUOTE=m21sniper;4132644]
1 aircraft carrier is about as useful as a track car with no spare parts. A minimum of 3 flat tops is required to keep a permanent long term presence -anywhere- even in your own waters.
The French know this and work in cooperation with the British Navy, including plans for new British carriers. Also they have cooperated with the US Navy several times on operations. So your “brilliant” (but well known to all parties) insight is not required.

The C. Degaulle (which has been plagued with problems since day 1) is little more than a showpiece.
Although it has had some problems it has been fully operational since March 5, 2001. Some US Navy ships have had far more difficulties to get to full operational status. But, of course, you don’t know that!
Showpiece only? Not according to the US Navy. Several combined operations have been accomplished without difficulties with high marks awarded to the French from the US Navy. But, of course, you know better.

Who are they going to nuke intercontinentally?
Canada?
All france 'needs' is IRBMs. Their ICBM program is a testament to their national hubris, and a total waste of money.
This is where you lack of strategic knowledge shows up clearly, just because you cannot conceive of a use doesn’t mean the French have your limitations. France had developed a nuclear triad just like the US and for the same reasons. Currently France has SSBM and Mirage 2000 N nuclear delivery systems. BTW, I and France are so happy to hear you think we waste our money it helping to defend the free world.

China has been in the UN security council since it's inception as well. I guess you're gonna argue they were a world power too? Perhaps recently, but that was hardly the case in it's inception.
France, like China, is a regional power.
Not according to the current US intelligence reports. Look it up. France’s Navy and Air Force has the ability to project power globally to a far greater extent than China could or can at this time. You really need to learn so much about the world; it’s not even funny anymore.
Yes well as long as the french are around we'll always be safe from those brutes in Angola and those evil Green Peacers.
So do you want them to start calling the Taliban, Angola bruts and Osama Bin Laden, Green Peacers? Your village is calling, they want their idiot back.
Source: Wikipedia
Afghanistan: Mission Héracles
On November 21, 2001, France decided to send Charles de Gaulle to the Indian Ocean in support of Operation Enduring Freedom against Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. Task Force 473, with 2900 men under the command of Contre-Amiral François Cluzel, sailed on 1 December. The task force was comprised of Charles de Gaulle, frigates La Motte-Picquet, Jean de Vienne and Jean Bart, the nuclear attack submarine Rubis, the tanker Meuse and the aviso Commandant Ducuing.
Embarked air power comprised sixteen Super Étendards, one E-2C Hawkeye, two Rafale Ms and several helicopters. The Super Étendards carried out their first missions above Afghanistan on 19 December, executing reconnaissance and bombing missions, covering over 3,000 kilometres. Overall they carried out 140 missions, averaging 12 every day, dodging five Stinger missiles.


Charles de Gaulle (right) and USS Enterprise, the first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.
On February 18, 2002, a Helios observation satellite spotted abnormal activities near Gardez. The next day, after American Special Forces in the region confirmed these observations, Charles de Gaulle launched two reconnaissance Super Étendards. On the 20th, British and US forces entered the valley and "Operation Anaconda" began in early March.
In March, Super Étendards and six Mirage 2000 aircraft carried out airstrikes against targets claimed to be al Qaeda. A few targets suggested by US forces were denied out of fear of hitting civilians. Nevertheless, French involvement was complimented by the US President George W. Bush on 2002-03-11, mentioning "our good ally, France, has deployed nearly one-fourth of its navy to support Operation Enduring Freedom".[3] At this point, the French air complement had been increased to 16 Super Étendards, 6 Mirage 2000 D, 5 Rafales, and two Hawkeye AWACS. From February, the air wings of Charles de Gaulle and USS John C. Stennis landed on each other's decks as a means of strengthening the ties between the allies.
On 2 May, Charles de Gaulle arrived in Singapore for relief and returned to Oman on 18 May.
Indian-Pakistani crisis
In June 2002, according to several reports,[4][5] while Charles de Gaulle was in the Arabian Sea, armed Rafale fighters participated in interposition patrols near the India-Pakistan border, marking a significant point in the Rafale M's operational career and its integration with the carrier. A number of sources have speculated on the exact nature and purpose of these flights.[6]
Rescue mission
On 9 October, the CrossMed (Regional Operational Center for Monitoring and Rescue in Mediterranean Sea) received a distress call on the 8-metre Babolin, whose hull was leaking. Charles de Gaulle, on maneuvers in the region, sent a helicopter that airlifted the three-man crew, despite 35-knot (65 km/h) wind, troubled sea, and bad visibility.
Continuing operations
Charles de Gaulle participated in further actions as part of Operation Enduring Freedom in 2005. It returned to Southwest Asia in May 2006 and shortly after supported coalition efforts over Afghanistan. The aircraft carrier regularly participates in the annual bilateral naval exercises between the Indian and French navies[7] called 'Varuna'.[8]

[RPKESQ]

Originally Posted by Rearden

Algerian-born women in France have 32% more children than women born in France.

And of course your source is?

BTW many thousands of Algerian women are not of North African stock, as they or their French families colonised Algeria and then returned to France after the Algerian war. But you knew that and that's why you posted a breakdown on what Algerian-born meant, right?

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

You are mistaken. I understand completely about counterinsurgency warfare. The type of warfare was not in question, read the thread. I listed most of the possible and actual US military involvements since WW II. How many were an unqualified success? How many are still up for grabs? How many resulted in failure?

Location and type of warfare was not discussed. Results were the focus

of the discussion.

Actually to divorce yourself from the doctrine the location and the type is essential to addressing or forming an opinion on the success or the failure of the war. I do not think I am mistaken, you are entitled to your opinion but don't project your opinion as fact. I have one small question, who formulated the modern tactics that we face on the field today that is referred to as an "insurgency". And who were probably the first westerners to face those tactics?

What say thee about what qualifies any war as an unqualified success. War by its very definition only exists because of the failures of statesmen. We erase their mistakes with the blood of our young.

[Super_Dave_D]

RPKESQ - you are really going to defend the de Gaulle??? It cant compare to a Nimitz class carrier!!! What a POS and it even looks ugly!

The Charles de Gaulle has suffered from a variety of problems [see James Dunnigan's "How NOT to Build an Aircraft Carrier"]. The Charles de Gaulle took eleven years to build, with construction beginning in 1988 and entering service in late 2000. For comparison, constructino of the American CVN 77 began in 2001 with a projected delivery in 2008. The 40,000 ton ship is slower than the conventionally powered Foch, which she it replaced. The propellers on the CDG did not work properly, so she recycled those of the Foch. The nuclear reactor was problematic, with the engine crew receiving five times the allowable annual radiation dose. The flight deck layout has precluded operating the E-2 radar aircraft.

I did a little comparison with the de Gaulle and the George Washington. Keep in mind that the Washington is two times larger than the de Gaulle

GW de Gaulle
Laid down 1986 1989
Commissioned 1990 1994
In Service 1992 2001

4 years for the GW from start to commission (bottle broken over her) and 2 years into service

The de Gaulle took 5 years from start to commission and another 7 years to work out the issues.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by Super_Dave_D

Heres one!

They won French Revolution, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

I never saw that coming!

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

And of course your source is?

BTW many thousands of Algerian women are not of North African stock, as they or their French families colonised Algeria and then returned to France after the Algerian war. But you knew that and that's why you posted a breakdown on what Algerian-born meant, right?

For such a smart guy, you sure don't know much about stuff you write about with such confidence. Try reading books.

http://www.amazon.com/Integrating-Islam-Political-Challenges-Contemporary/dp/product-description/0815751516



The book is referenced in this article:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/694a6eb0-4eb5-11dc-85e7-0000779fd2ac.html



Here's a freebie for you, you might learn something here:

http://www.ined.fr/fichier/t_publication/540/publi_pdf1_pop_et_soc_francais_400.pdf

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by old man neri

Okay, so what are you guys arguing about? I tried to read through this thread and it really jumped about. One guy is talking about the sad loss of life, there is a complaint about stealing some grapes, an argument about who's wine is better, then there was talking about WW2, some talk about ICBMs and an aircraft carrier....etc.

What's next? Which is better a German Sheppard or a French Poodle?

some of the less well educated are venting their anti-French attitudes - that's all.

probably the same people who don't realize that "French fries" are actually Belgian and supported changing the name to Freedom fries.

[RWebb]

Yes, the French more or less invented modern armor usage and doctrine, but then fell to the combined forces rapid thrust (Blitzkrieg) of the Germans. Of course, then Patton taught the Germans what it REALLY means.

Certainly, the French area major world power. If you exclude them, then you only have 3 or maybe 4 countries left... maybe 5 if we include the Germans.

In modern times, a lot of the fight has gone out of the French. That is not a bad thing.

The carrier was designed to operate with NATO. And... remember you can do a whole of fun things with a carrier group than just project air power.

The point re 3 carrier groups must have meant 2 groups to carry out 24 hour a day bombing as US CSFs can do, with 1 group on rest/rotation/reserve. But, you can project air power w/o 24 ops.

[RWebb]

And... finally:

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

Let's list some of the US military opportunities since WW II.

Korea = Stalemate
Hungary = We could not help them
Viet Nam = Stalemate leading to Complete Loss
Czechoslovakia = We could not help them
Granada = Yea! We're Number 1!!!!!!!!!
Panama = Yea! We're number 1, again!!!! (We sure kick ass on minuscule countries)
Gulf War 1 = Yea! We're number !!!!!!!!!
Afghanistan = Stalemate/slipping into loss at present
Irag = Work in progress/to soon to tell
Georgia = We could not help them

Not all that impressive for the world's number 1 power now is it?

Well.... sorry! It's kinda tough to be world policeman. We tried to completely avoid "foreign entanglements" and it worked for a long time, but then those nasty, fractious ol' Yur-O-Peons pulled us "Over there." We were comin' (often in French farm wives) and we thought we'd solved ever' thing, but then the Huns (who are either at your feet or at your throat) got all antsy again and we had to 'splain to 'em to just stick to making kick ass cars. We'll buy 'em and you can crush the 'talians too. Then after transforming the entire (dismembered) German Nation intoa mercantile class, lordy bee but the dang Commies went crazy on us and even stole our nuclear secrets. So then we contained them for.... y'all said we were impatient, young upstarts... but for half a dang century and then they collapsed (turns out only part way).

Anyway this world policman gig is gittin' old - so WHO ELSE WANTS TO DO IT???

Eh??

And who else do you trust to do it.

Anyway, sorry about all the napalm. We do make mistakes sometimes.

[Super_Dave_D]

Originally Posted by RWebb

Yes, the French more or less invented modern armor usage and doctrine, but then fell to the combined forces rapid thrust (Blitzkrieg) of the Germans.

Modern armor is usually credited to the British and Leonardo da Vinci is credited with the armor vehicle concept. I seriously question their doctrine as well.

The early tanks of Germany were technologically inferior to many of their opponents' tanks in the areas of armour and firepower. It was in their tactical employment that German tanks dominated all rivals early in the war. German doctrine stressed the use of combined-arms involving mobile infantry and air support, and, after its surprising success during the execution of Fall Gelb, the tactic of the Blitzkrieg (lightning warfare). This doctrine required the Germans to equip their tanks with radios, which provided unmatched command and control. In contrast, almost all light French tanks lacked radios, essentially because their battle doctrine was based on a more slow-paced, deliberate conformance to planned movements. This required fewer radios at all levels. French tanks generally outclassed German tanks in firepower and armour in the 1940 campaign, but their poor command and control doctrine made these advantages irrelevant to the final outcome.

[svandamme]

I think the modern armor usage and doctrine ain't it

but i think they were leading edge , in Napoleon's days, when it came to artillery
He was an artillery officer early in his career, and it stuck with him later on when he was the big man...