Why does France have nukes?

Great Debates
1

Very simply:

Pakistan has nukes because India does. India has nukes because China does. China has nukes because the Russians (well, Soviets) have them. Russia has them because the US has them. We have them because we were fighting the Japanese, but we keep them because we are still threatened by others. Israel has nukes because many would like to wipe them off the face of the earth. Iran want nukes because it lives in a dangerous neighborhood, and, like Iraq and N. Korea, it wouldn’t mind altering the balance of power in its favor by threatening its neighbors.

Although some of these reasons on having or expanding a nuclear arsenal are immoral, at least I can understand WHY some countries need or want nukes.

This leaves France. Why do they have nukes? Who, now, threatens them with destruction of the type that they need a nuclear deterrent? Does France need nukes to threaten others?
I don’t understand de Gaulle’s “force de frappe” argument. If the Cold WAr ever went nuclear, and the US lost, France would have been toast, whether or not it had its nukes.

What purpose does France’s nuclear capabilities have, now or in the past? What’s France’s nuclear doctrine?
I understand Pakistan’s justification better than France’s.

Frankly, nukes are a scourge, and France doesn’t need them, IMHO. Seen in this perspective, France is the most rogueish nation, nuclear wise… they don’t need them, they can’t use them, and they serve no purpose to them – All the more reason that nuke disarmament start with them. I don’t think I can tell Pakistan, or India, or Israel to give up their nukes, when I wont tell France that.

To France, their nukes are no more than a plaything to showoff, with no use. It’s hypocritical for the West not to criticize France’s policies while doing the same to others who may actually need them…
(no, I haven’t forgotten the UK or Brazil’s recent saber-rattling regarding its nuclear program, but my post is already too long)

2

France isn’t likely to go to war soon. Worry more about those nuclear-armed states that are. Nuclear non-proliferation efforts are aimed more at those countries that are deemed current or potential enemies or those viewed as more likely to use them in anger. France doesn’t fall into those categories. I’m also not sure why the UK is any different to France in terms of your argument.

3

France isn’t a “rogue nation” precisely because it’s not threatening to use those nuclear arms, nor is it likely to become a wartime enemy of the US in the near future. It’s not hypocritical to criticise irresponsible arms ownership; it’s certainly hypocritical to single out France rather than the UK.

4

Apologies. Damn browser ballsed up the first post; the second one is more succinct.

5

Why does France have nukes?

They wanted them.

6

France also has nukes (with the tacit consent of the US) because it is relatively easier for France to deploy them against European and Asian targets than it would be for the US.

7

To keep out the Germans once and for all. :smiley:

8

Cite?

9

Yes, I know France isn’t going to war. I don’t mean to say that they’re a greater threat. They are not.
What I am saying is, FRANCE DOES NOT NEED THEM. Therefore, they should give them up, and since they don’t NEED them, it should be a small problem for them to give them up compared to say, asking Israel to give up its nukes, or India, which has fought wars with China…

Hell, that they are not going to use them misses my point. I wish I had a nuke of my own, I could go down to Eddies Guns & Ammo and buy me one, and since I am a law abiding citizen, I should be allowed to have a nuke, for the hell of it, since I am not threatening my neighbors. Sounds silly? That is what France is doing.

As far as the U.K. I stated that my post was getting too long, to explain in detail, but their situation is a little different, given that they have always formed an integral part of NATO’s nuclear deterrent – unlike France. Nontheless, the UK can be similarly (though not exactly) criticized.

But I am no hypocrite, my friend. I’m just focusing on one thing at a time.

10

I am curious as to why you think you are a superior arbiter of French national “need” than the French themselves.

11

I am not at all. If you read the title to the thread, it was “why does France have nukes?” I speculate on the justification, and I find none. But I am asking.

So if you know, 'fess up.

Please justify France’s need for nuclear weapons. That was the intent of this question. I don’t want to turn this into a flame war, I was actually hoping someone would tell me what Franch nuclear doctrine was (if you read my original post).

So like I said, fess up.

Otherwise I will remain as ignorant as when I first posted. I really don’t want a debate, I was going to put this in General Questions, but i figured it would turn into an argument anyway. Again, if you understand the doctrine of the “force the frappe”

Please explain it.
Thank You.

12

I have NO frikken Idea… Why does France have anything?? I know France USED to be a superpower, but that was before England kicked thier ass all over Europe. The Nazis just did it to emphasize the point.

Even the point about France being a base for a nuclear strike in case the Soviets attacked is not that valid. Theyre far away! A nuke sub can get closer, fire more and is more cost effective and we dont have to deal with french snobbery. Heck, what do they have to be such snobs anyway?

I think the only reason France have nukes is they whined and cried about it in the beginning and some country (mistakenly) gave them nukes just to shut them up. We dont take it away from them now because theyre generally harmless and they might start crying again…

13

I know… not PC or maybe even accurate in any way but.

LMAO…

14

Malarky. If this were truly the case, why did you post this:

There are scores of French policy documents available on the internet. I suggest you rub two brain cells together and read them. For your convenience, I suggest the following:

The Future of the French Nuclear Posture

French Nuclear Policy After the Cold War

France’s Nuclear Doctrine

Force de Frappe

Read up.

15

France needs nukes … for reasons Americans have a tough time understanding.

Basically, France was once the total center of world civilization, right? Assuming you ignore the Chinese, which we’ve been doing successfully for millenia.

No, seriously. If you wanted to know What Was Happening In The World, you went to Paris. If you wanted to do international business, you either spoke French or hired someone who could. Man, the French were IT!

Then, somewhere in the colonial period, things went to hell. While Spain, England, and even Germany developed successful colonies overseas and got rich exploiting the locals, France got kind of screwed by having a revolution in which it was necessary to start by trying to kill all the aristocrats, and end by trying to kill nearly everyone else.

They… fell behind, you know?

When it was over, they weren’t the center of world civilization any more. You could do business just as well in English as you could in French. Furthermore, the English had a vested interest in elbowing France out of the Number One slot. True, the French still had great cooking, but so did the Italians. True, the French still had awesome wines, but so did the Portuguese.

And then, along came Napoleon, who screwed everything up all over again for the French. Admittedly, if he’d succeeded, France would, once again, be the capital of the Earth, but he didn’t. France is still mourning that fact.

…and by the time they were really beginning to recover from all that, along came World War I, in which the French got the unholy crap kicked out of them.

…and then came World War II, in which not only did they get the unholy crap kicked out of them even WORSE, they looked like complete fools because of the Maginot Line, the second most insane bulwark against invaders ever built in human history, right behind the Great Wall Of China.

Of course, the Great Wall Of China delayed foreign invasions by more than, say, ten minutes or so. The Maginot Line didn’t even manage that.

So, finally, it’s the Postwar World. France is still reeling from having the crap kicked out of it. It’s operating on sheer balls, which were provided largely singlehandedly by Charles de Gaulle.

England is rebuilding. So’s Holland. Hell, so are France, Italy, and Japan, due to the Allies’ belated realization that letting them rot will simply set the stage for ANOTHER world war.

…but aside from some Marshall Plan money, no one is paying much attention to France, Doormat To Europe.

Now, as Americans, we can only imagine what that must have felt like. Maybe a little like when we found out we were bugging out of Vietnam, but… worse. Much worse. It’s not like we had to put up with several years of the Vietnamese Gestapo showing up and confiscating our cars and stuff, right?

But we knew what had ended the war. The Bomb, of course. The biggest, newest, most powerful thing ever invented. The Thing That Shaped The Postwar World.

Now, France doesn’t have a whole lot aside from their food and their wine and their culture and such. I mean, not in comparison to what North America pumps out every two weeks without even thinking about it. Could they rebuild themselves into a major world power like they once had been?

Maybe. But this new world had a whole bunch of new players. How is France supposed to compete? Hell, how are they even supposed to be taken seriously? I mean, come on, it was starting to look like they’d drop everything and surrender if you or I showed up and began making a ruckus in the AIRPORT, for potato’s sake!

…but if you have a Bomb, people HAVE to take you seriously.

Because… well, hell, because it’s the Bomb.

It’s new. It’s powerful. It’s the most powerful new thing in the world. It can destroy entire cities. It can vaporize thousands of people in one nuclear pulse.

It is Power Incarnate.

Man, can you BLAME the French for about busting an O-ring to get the Bomb?

16

Here’s a summary I found of the origins of the [Force de Frappe]](http://www.acdis.uiuc.edu/homepage_docs/pubs_docs/PDF_Files/Peder%20OP%20Folder/dreamweaver/contents/sect8.html), which states that the nuclear force arose partly from de Gaulle’s bitterness over the occupation by Germany and partly from his desire to ensure maximum leverage for French political influence in the region, in the face of US, British and Soviet nuclear capability.

I’m not saying this is entirely the reason, or even the most important, but there is (or rather, was in the '40s and '50s) a certain cachet to having the scientific chops to create nuclear weapons. In one sense, France, considering itself a leader in technology, would have lost face if it didn’t develop such weapons when the US, Soviets and British had.

It’s my understanding that the French desire to develop its own nuclear force grew out of the same motives as its initial reluctance to participate in NATO; fear of loss of its sovereignity in postwar Europe. My impression (sorry, no cite) is that even in France, the Force de Frappe is seen as mostly superfluous since the fall of the Soviet Union, and (feel free to correct me if I am wrong) has become something of an orphan in France’s defence planning.

17

Thats precisely my point. They whined and cried and someone gave them the bomb. Why? To shut them up!! They havent been a real power since Nepoleonic times. The french just think they still are, and all ‘powers’ must have the bomb right?

:smack:

18

It’s so they can stay one up on Belgium.

19

Actually, you’re right. Given their rather humiliating surrender-monkey impression of 1942, why is it surprising that France would want nukes to discourage any future invasion?The “tous azimuts” (all directions) defense policy of the postwar de Gaulle administration was meant to ensure France would be able to defend itself from all attackers.

Interesting artice on the subject from those wacky guys at the RAND Corporation.

20

…and I see that while I was cogitating, a whole bunch of posters have made my points better than I have.