Well, this is all silly speculation, because it’s never going to happen, but this claim is doubtful, given anything other than a French surprise first strike. The French nuclear capability consists of 6 subs armed with nuclear missiles, plus an air wing with a combat range of less than 1000 miles. We can discount the planes right off the bat, because they don’t have the range to make it here, even if you add in the range of their missiles. That leaves the subs.
Although I’m certainly no expert on submarine warfare, if the US Navy can’t find and sink 6 subs with any kind of warning, I’d be surprised. The best French SLBM does apparently have a decent range, enough to make it to the east coast of the US when launched from French waters, but they’d be sunk in the first minutes of the war.
Even if you accept so unlikely of a scenario as a French-US war, you’d have to assume that French-US tensions would first have to drastically increase over time, which would mean that there’d be so many US hunter-killer subs waiting outside of French ports that a French sub getting free would be a longshot.
The thing is that most of the Americans who look down on the French don’t have a clue as to the history between the two countries.
So forget all that XYZ affair or Thomas Jefferson.
I was once talking to guy who hated the French and felt betrayed by them.
I asked him if he knew why there was a street in Brooklyn called Lafayette.
He didn’t know.
His ‘knowledge’ extended to the ‘fact’ that we saved their butts during WWII and they owe us.
If you want to know what attitudes we have watch the episodes of Cheers when Kelly comes back from France with a French guy who sets out to steal her from Woody. That is how the anti-French Americans feel about French people. Those who went around pouring French wine into the gutters, after buying it, couldn’t tell who Chirac is.
The 46% percent seems pretty accurate, but I’m not sure why that’s grounds for hating France (especially since, according to the same link, Japan votes against the US 58% of the time). Looking through some of those voting records, it seems that pretty much everyone votes against the US position. If anything, France votes with the US more than most countries do.
The first vote listed is “REAFFIRMING CENTRAL ROLE OF UN IN MAINTAINING INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY”
The vote is 93 for, 2 against, 43 abstaining. Only the US and Israel voted against it. Most of Europe, including France, abstained.
It pretty much continues in this vein. Scrolling down to this General Assembly document with 28 items being voted on (all passed), US voted against the majority of the world on 23 (82%) of them, by voting no or abstaining.
Vote on Assistance to Palestinian Children (only Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands and Palau joined the US)
Vote on Op Para 26(b)/Rights of Child (Botswana, Guyana, Malaysia, Nigeria, Singapore, Tonga and Tanzania also voted no)
Vote on Words ‘Corporal Punishment’ (abstain)
Vote on Rights of the Child (US was all alone on this one)
Vote on Op Para 31/Conference against Racism (43 others, including France and most of the West agreed with the US)
Vote on World Conference against Racism (only Israel sided with the US)
Vote on Right to Self-determination (abstain, along with France and most of the West)
Vote on Draft Resolution on Mercenaries (along with France and most of the West)
Vote on Right of Palestinians to Self-Determination (only with Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands and Palau)
Vote on Human Rights and Coercive Measures (along with 52 other nations, including France and most of the West)
Vote on Right to Development (only Palau and Israel)
Vote on Right to Physical/Mental Health (Marshall Islands agreed)
Vote on Human Rights and Terrorism (France and most of the West agreed)
Vote on Access to Medication (US was all alone on this one)
Vote on Right to Food (only the US)
Vote on Op Paras 10 and 11/Human Rights While Countering Terrorism (abstain, with Australia, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gambia, Israel, Kenya, Myanmar, Philippines and Rwanda)
Vote on respect for Charter to achieve international cooperation in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. (54 nations agreed, including France and most of the West)
Vote on Respect for National Sovereignty (Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, Sudan and Switzerland, agreed, most of Europe abstained)
Vote on Peace as Vital to Human Rights (49 nations, including most of the West, agreed)
Impact of Globalization on Human Rights (50 nations, including most of the West, agreed)
Vote on Paragraphs on Capital Punishment (48 agreed, but none of Europe. US sided with Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gambia, Grenada, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kuwait, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, and Zimbabwe in this case)
The US and France agreed on 16 items (57%):
Vote on Op Para 31/Conference against Racism (against)
Vote on Right to Self-determination (abstain)
Vote on Draft Resolution on Mercenaries (against)
Vote on Human Rights and Coercive Measures (against)
Vote on Human Rights and Terrorism (against)
Vote on UN Role in Democratization (for)
Vote on Eliminating Religious Intolerance (for. Only Israel was against this one)
Vote on Protecting Human Rights (for)
Vote on respect for Charter to achieve international cooperation in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. (against)
Vote on Peace as Vital to Human Rights (against)
Impact of Globalization on Human Rights (against)
Human Rights in Turkmenistan (for)
Human Rights in Iran (for)
Preambular Paragraph 4 of Draft on Democratic Republic of Congo (for)
Human Rights in Democratic Republic of Congo (for)
What I’m wondering is, what cushy deal has Palau been getting from the US?
If you mean that the U.S. couldn’t hope to invade and conquer France, you’re absolutely right. To occupy ANY country of that size would require a huge army, far larger than we’ve ever had or would ever want. We COULD, I suppose, send a large contingent of troops, grab a hunk of territory and cause some massive damage, but they’d be repelled soon enough.
The French, on the other hand, aren’t even powerful enough to launch a weak, unsuccessful invasion of the U.S.!
So, luckily, neither country WANTS to invade the other!
That covers wars on U.S. or French terrirtory. What of a war in a different part of the world? The U.S. could project force almost anywhere on the globe. The French can’t. We couldn’t conquer their armed forces on their own turf, but we COULD beat them in almost any other location.
But again, we have no desire to fight the French anywhere else, so that’s a pretty hollow boast.
The Russian people did a helluva lot and paid the price. Their government, though, sorta started off on the wrong team… I think that has something to do with it.
Oh, yeah, the Americans who know history (what few there are) recall Vietnam is another example of the Americans spending blood and treasure cleaning up France’s mess.
I wasn’t thinking of the Russians when I wrote my original post. I do believe that they contributed more to the defeat of the Germans than UK/France/US. We helped them, though; so did the UK. The 4 powers could have done more, if Stalin hadn’t been so paranoid. But the Russians suffered like hell.
My point was that the US helped France drive the Germans from France. We are proud of that, and the French are thankful. I’ve seen it many times. Ordinary people throughout Europe honor the US for what it did, and what it does.
And this has been interesting. I guess the area where I live has protected me from all this animosity.
Can we turn it around and ask what kind of relationship exists between France and the UK? Has the chunnel changed things as expected?
BTW; I like mayo on my french fries. Especially french mayo (aioli). Jules and Vincent can both bite me.
Mangeorge:“Can we turn it around and ask what kind of relationship exists between France and the UK? Has the chunnel changed things as expected?”
Again - history is not my thing - but i cant ever recall hearing anti-French muttering in Britain, and ive lived all over it. Most kids get (got?) taught French at school for years. This helps to create strong underlying links between the two countries, together with the near obsessive amount of WW2 documentaries on UK tv makes the French seem very familiar to us. For proof look at Eddie Izzard ( v british comedian) when he does bits of his act in French - we love it - i reminds us of our school days - Where is the monkey? The monkey is in the tree. Fucking class.
I think the average Brit sees Spain and France as a bit of a home from home. Like Britain, but with better weather and cheaper wine - which, after all, is what we’re really interested in ! Trade and traffic between the two countries was boosted by the chunnel, but much of that is just transit vans bringing beer and cigaretts back to blighty.
Songatt (sp?) refugee camp ( right next to the entrace to the chunnel )did cause a lot of friction recently, with the UK feeling like the camp was put there almost to help asylum seekers get to Britain. And the relationship between our fearless leader and Chirac had blown hot and cold to say the least. But generally i think most Brits would be dismayed to hear the French being dissed.
As to what the French think of us - i really dont know, but i’d be suprised if there wasnt a lot of mutual respect. However, there is always the nagging feeling that some French people who say they cant speak English, actually can… Maybe this is British paranoia, or maybe its French pride - dunno. But its a interesting wee note. Vive la difference!
If anyone in the UK has diferent feelings, id love to hear them.
Palau, the Marshall islands and Micronesia (hello what country is this?..There is more then one country in Micronesia!).
Look at countries “supporting” whaling. Many Pacific nations take ‘encouragment’. They don’t have the financial option not to. I support the UN generaly but this shows its flaws.
America can be afford to be choosey on who they slag off and who they consider allies. America knows if they were seriously attacked France would be onside. So they can afford to lose the small battles. France knows this as well.
I don’t blame France at all for not partaking in the Iraq war. However I do blame Chirac for personally selling a nuclear reactor to Saddam Hussein. I’d rather Chirac retire from the world stage.
Change ‘if’ to ‘when’ and ‘would be’ to ‘was’. Remember 9/11 and the rest of the world (including France) joining in to go to Afghanistan, supporting the US in the pursuit of justice? You know, the real war on terror?
Problem is, the impression I get is that most Americans (most of the ones I grew up around, anyway) don’t know this. Zebra pretty much summed it up perfectly.
Firstly you yanks are just johnny-come-lately to this one. we’ve been at daggers-drawn with les singes toujour surrenderant et fromage mangent for over 1,000 years. We’ve even had a war with them that lasted 100 years. So trust me on this, you have no idea. They’re only 22 miles away from us too.
The primary gripe in the UK about the French (actually it’s the French Government) is that they cynically pursue a policy of doing what is in France’s best interests, regardless of any other bugger. For example when Britain was at war with Argentina, the French supplied the Argentinians with the appropriate bits of hardware to allow them to air launch the exocet missiles that they had sold them (during peacetime). Similar shady behaviour is now coming to light regarding Iraq.
Actually we get on quite well with the french at a person-to-person level and for many of us (inc your’s truly) it is the leisure destination of choice - it really is a lovely place.
The Iraq war hasn’r really changed things here. We’ve always called “french fries” chips anyway - and we still call condoms “french letters”.
And mayonaise on chips is how god meant them to be eaten. Accept no substitute (and they were invented by the belgians anyway).
Another strike against the French, they don’t read the Straight Dope!
My family had a French forgien exchange student when I was growing up, we got along fine, but he insisted they would have been just fine in WW1 without us.