France, that would be the country that lost 1.5 million soldiers defending itself in WW 1, Stopping the German advance on the Marne (i.e. in defence of Paris having suffered 300,000 casualties in six weeks), bleed the German army white, almost expiring itself in the process, at Verdun, only passing responsibility for the Western Front its closest ally late in the war. This ally did, of course heroically defend Paris again in 1918 making particular use of its two most effective corps who went on to win victory after victory (the 100 days). Who were the most effective 'British Corps' on the Western Front in 1917 and 1918? They of course would be those provided by Canada and Australia.
France then had to try to fight on after the pathetic little army its closest ally put into the fray in 1940 fu**ed off across the beeches at Dunkirk leaving it in the lurch. And stabbed it in the back by sinking it's fleet a few months later (causing more casualties than the Japanese at Pearl Harbour) and who then couldn't be asked to put most of its army in the field until the last 11 months of the war, after 18 million Soviet citizens had died having accounted for 80% of all Germans killed or captured and then only holding the hand of their American friends. Its easy to run away and fight another day when you are surrounded by a 20+ mile wide moat.
I don't agree with the current French stand over Iraq, but I dont agree with denigrating them either. We have fought as allies in the past and I am sure we will do so again. The last time we were seriously let down by a friend during military action was Suez in '56, and they weren't as helpful as a true friend might have been during the Falklands in.
