France will not send any more troops to Afghanistan

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Punk_trooper, Oct 15, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I don't blame them. They're probably very amused watching us and the Yanks thrash round in the south in a badly thought out and resourced war.
  2. What? The French? War dodging? Who'd have thought it?
  3. How do you dodge a war you're already a part of?
  4. Can we keep our troops here too please?!
  5. We may not all agree as to our role as an active combatant in the Afghanistan war. However, at least we do not shirk our responsibilities (as part of NATO who have a mandate there) or a call for aid from our allies. The horrible thing is if Italy, Germany, France or Spain were attacked tomorrow. The UK and the US would in all likelihood be the first forces on the ground as part of the defence!!
  6. napier

    napier LE Moderator Reviewer

    Isn't there a quote along the lines of "Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without an accordion"? No great loss based on their relative lack of activity so far
  7. Back round the same old bouy for the umpteenth time.

    How dare those pesky Europeans not provide further fodder to bail 'us' out of the policy mess and strategic disaster 'we've' created and refuse to resource 'ourselves'.
  8. Well we did fight alongisde the French in World War I and bled with them on the battlefield. They stood and fought for the most part. Although there is a distinguishing feature I feel, which distinguishes the 'British character' if you will from that of the French. Which is a sterner and more robust constitution. I believe in a certain point of the first World War, the French Army nearly mutineed as they did not want to be involved in further 'fruitless' attacks (and so preferred to defend their borders). Whilst the soldiers in the British Army (and Commonwealth) did not threaten to stray. Despite being led by imbeciles who dogmatically applied prior century tactics to a new kind of warfare. Despite being slaughtered on the Somme, Gallipoli and other killing fields. The soldiers of the British and Commonwealth armies never threatened to mutiny. Despite living in squalid conditions and forced to exist in dreadful conditions (some times by the threat of a bullet from the CO). In essence, even if the British Army is given contempuous orders, it carries them out nonetheless. This is a sincere and humble devotion to duty. Which I truly feel is not equalled by any other armed forces. As for the French and other 'allies' (bar Canada and the US); well frankly shame on them. Excuse my far from erudite posting. I simply had to convey my feelings on the matter. Adieu!
  9. well they wouldnt want to wave the white flag agian would they
  10. I think the families of the 36 French KIA (last one was last week) and about 3,700 troops (not 2,900 as wrongly stated in the article) engaged in active operations in RC-E disagree with the above written tripe.

    This statement is purely meant for internal French consumption (population opposes the French presence there) as the French are currently building a Brigade-size unit in RC-E (Brigade Lafayette) under US command (82 Airborne). In the past few months, the French have sent combat helicopters, 155 mm artillery and Cougar helicopters to A-stan and more AFVs are on the way.

    What is done is figure juggling; for example, sailors who were counted as part of the Afghan mission while they were sailing the Gulf of Oman are now removed from the total and soldiers are added on the ground instead.

    So figures are constant but boots on the ground are climbing.

    And finally, here is an example of French "relative inactivity" in the "quiet" RC-E of Afghanistan:
  11. France, dutch & few others have already stated there don't intend to increase troops numbers (according to the media)

    Surely if your a member of NATO then all member countries are to contribute? But do we see that?????

    Yes it's a conflict, yes there will be many casualties & fatalities, Backing down or even withdrawing troop numbers due to certain countries/nations not handling the downsides is part in parcel of the situation.
  12. Didn't Brown say he'd only send the extra 500 if our allies sent more too? Is this an excuse for Cyclops to say"Oops, sorry fellas, stand down"?
  13. I fully agree (even if it does pi$$ off many others) that conditions should be put before a extra troop commitment is deployed, There are plenty of countries simply not pulling there weight & this has to change!

    The trouble is, the effect is harming the situation out in Theatre still
  14. I don't know who said that, but Patton claimed he would rather have a German Division in front of him than a French Division behind him.