NATO

[Jonzjob]

I think there are a couple of interesting bits in this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7942086.stm

Oh with friends like de Gaul [blink][blink]

[JMB]

Tip of the iceberg.  Read 50 Reasons to Hate the French by Jules Eden

& Alex Clarke.  Also The Discovery of France by Graham Robb in

which he argues that France as we know it is a recent construct.  

[Abertawe]

Ditto. Excellent article and what we all knew except the French it seems.

[Quillan]

It's just politics. In 2004 the EU created its European Army for 'peace keeping purposes' and the Americans in particular didn't like it very much. The reason was that they felt that it would not be long before EU countries dumped NATO in favour of the EU army. The impact this would have on America is that as more countries, like Turkey, joined they would loose their ability to place weapons on European soil not for the protection of Europe but America.

The question of course is do we still need NATO after the fall of the communist states? The Russians do get a bit funny at times but I think the dark days of the cold war have gone. Sadly the Americans with their anti communist leanings don't hence their placing of missiles on Turkish soil shows. Perhaps they should remember how they reacted when Russia tried to put missiles on Cuban soil (Bay of Pigs) back in the 60's, to me putting missiles in Turkey and pointing them at Russian is the same thing.

Europe has the potential to become a greater 'power' than the US and that is something they fear.

Europe does have a debt of gratitude to America for its modern freedom (WW2) because without them nobody would have had access to the vast resources of materials and later manpower to defeat Germany. Nobody can deny this. This came as a price as in money, I think if memory serves, the UK for example made its final payment to clear its WW2 debt with America about 5 years ago. I have no idea what level of financial debt France had or has with America for WW2.

America should also remember that France played a large part in their independence, one of the things France did was to lend them huge amounts of money to fund their war of independence. De Gaul was no fool either and in a way predicted today's financial problems in America and the value of the dollar. When America dumped the gold standard back in the 60's de Gaul immediately exchanged all dollars held by the French government back in to gold.

As I said at the beginning its politics and helps take the eye off the current financial woes of the world.

[Ron Avery]

[quote user="Quillan"]

It's just politics........... As I said at the beginning its politics and helps take the eye off the current financial woes of the world.

[/quote]

Nothing to do with French soldiers fighting and being killed ( 10 in one incident) as part of the NATO forces in Afghanistan and the French having no say in how and where they are deployed then???

[Abertawe]

In general, the French seem to have a strong sense of autonomy which has to be admired. The post war UK/US relationship has always been biased in favour of the latter - have a read of 'Brittania Overuled' by David Reynolds. Anybody who thought that our Prime Ministers ever had just their own fingers on the nuclear button should think again - we could never have launched without the permission of the US but they could have launched without even a nod in our direction.  DeGaulle's insistance on France having their own 'Force de Frappe' made a lot of sense and released them from covert US influence.

 

 

[Pierre ZFP]

I caught a snippet on the BBC this morning that there is to be a debate about this today and there is opposition on all sides.  Not only that  but the vote would be one of confidence so Sarko's got a lot riding on this.

 

[Quillan]

[quote user="Ron Avery"][quote user="Quillan"]

It's just politics........... As I said at the beginning its politics and helps take the eye off the current financial woes of the world.

[/quote]

Nothing to do with French soldiers fighting and being killed ( 10 in one incident) as part of the NATO forces in Afghanistan and the French having no say in how and where they are deployed then???

[/quote]

I think I am right in saying that they are there as part of the EU 'Peace Keeping' Army along with other EU member states armies which of course works alongside the American army who I suspect are 'pulling the strings'.

[just john]

[quote user="Quillan"]

 The question of course is do we still need NATO after the fall of the communist states? The Russians do get a bit funny at times but I think the dark days of the cold war have gone. 

As I said at the beginning its politics and helps take the eye off the current financial woes of the world.

[/quote]

I hope you're right Quillan, never say never, how quick would Russia expand borders if there was no presence?, NATO or otherwise; but hey maybe nothing would develop, for ages . . . [:-))]

 Russian-president-orders-military-rearmament.

[Quillan]

See you have to look at things from both sides.

America has placed missiles on Turkish soil pointed at Russia a couple of years back. Now as I said before to my mind its like the Russians trying to put missiles in to Cuba and that nearly bought us to WW3. So from that point of view and of course Chechnya etc (their version of Northern Island?) they feel a need to protect themselves and who could blame them.

We have had about three different Russian couple stay with us over the last 5 or years and its very interesting talking to them. You have to keep in mind that like many in the RAF we were taught how to go over and Nuck the b@stards should they start anything which of course they would, those nasty communist, lets take over the world swine.

My personal experience has been that they are nice people and want just the same as us, roof over our head, car, decent schools (their universities are very good but only for the elite), health, job, decent wage etc. Now you see they were brainwashed in to believing that it was us that wanted to take over the world and kill them. As I said politics yet again.

Personally I think with modern communications, Satellite TV, Internet etc people are far more informed than they used to be and because many of us are better educated now we can usually spot the lies and propaganda from a long way of, well I hope so.

[spectateur]

[quote user="Quillan"]Europe does have a debt of gratitude to America for its modern freedom (WW2) because without them nobody would have had access to the vast resources of materials and later manpower to defeat Germany. Nobody can deny this. 

[/quote]

The Soviet Union would have beaten Hitler eventually - and they would have also annexed Western Europe. Surely it was that possible scenario above all else that got the USA involved in the war against Hitler. After all it was the Japanese who attacked them and were their prime enemy.

[JMB]

Surely you are not implying that America would have entered a major war in Western Europe just to stop one of its major markets from being taken over by the Soviet regime.  My goodness how cynical.

I thought it was because Winston Churchill went over to Washington and charmed old Franklin D. and threw in most of Britain's silver (patents - the intellectual property of an industrial giant) to sweeten the deal.  Anyway whatever the reason, it saved us from speaking Russian - which I believe is even more difficult than French.

[Jonzjob]

"it saved us from speaking Russian - which I believe is even more difficult than French"

If Russian does not have subjunctives then even with a different alphabet I can't see anything that could make it more difficult than French!

I am just gratefull that we aren't all talking German!

A German pilot in a Lufthansa aircraft at Frankfurt spoke to air traffic in German.

Air traffic answered him telling him that he had to speak English on the radio!

He replied saying that he was a German pilot in a German aircraft at a German airfield, why the hell did he have to speak English!

A very cultured vioce came back from another aircraft, they all talk on a common freqency for the air traffic control, and said quite simply

"Because you lost the bloody war!!!"

[JMB]

lol

[just john]

Take a look at the Russian alphabet for starters, before you get to the language![:)]

There are several other wars going on and one on our doorstep seems a bit more serious each time I read an article like this.

Put simply, Pakistan represents the first realistic prospect for a jihadist movement to capture a nation-state in 18months![:-))]

Why-the-West-should-fear-the-Taliban-and-al-Qaedas-hold-on-Pakistan.

[chessie]

Uhhm - excuse me Quillan but...'...financial debt France ...with America for WW2'..

The UK was bombed, battered, bruised, damaged, destroyed by WW2; the Americans arrived late (with Joseph Kennedy the US Ambassador to the UK saying that America shouldn't support us, that Hitler would win).

The UK was also destroyed and suffered rationing after the War because we received no help from the Americans. We were 'lent'/leased military equipment...but we owed America money to pay them for their help in the War - as you correctly mention - The War Loan.

What did France owe America ? What did Germany owe America ? - NOTHING....what the Americans did for Europe after the war was called - I believe - the MARSHAL AID plan.   The Americans gave the Europeans money - money to the countries who had Started the War. But to the small little nation that stood up to Hitler, gave Europe back it's freedoms - the Americans LENT money and help and expected the money to be repaid..

That's why the Germans were able to rebuild, why the French were able to rebuild, why the Italians could rebuild - they had the American money.

What did the UK have - NOTHING !!!! - we had no help. We rebuilt the UK ourselves, and we paid off our financial debt to the Americans.

[just john]

[quote user="chessie"]Uhhm - excuse me Quillan but...'...financial debt France ...with America for WW2'..

The UK was destroyed by WW2; the MARSHAL AID plan gave the Europeans money. But to the small little nation that stood up to Hitler, gave Europe back it's freedoms - the Americans LENT money and help and expected the money to be repaid..

That's why the Germans were able to rebuild, why the French were able to rebuild, why the Italians could rebuild - they had the American money. We rebuilt the UK ourselves, and we paid off our financial debt to the Americans.
[/quote]

Absolutely!, and of course De Gaulle was so grateful to the US; don't forget, paying back gives us a special relationship though eh[blink] but it butters no panais. I think we got first crack at the sub-prime SIV opportunity though.

[Quillan]

Sorry Chessie but you are wrong.

The European Reconstruction Plan, which was its proper title was formulated by Secretary of State George Marshall (hence often referred to as The Marshall Plan) was signed off by President Truman and put in effect from 1947 to 1951/2. It was was offered to the whole of Europe including the UK and Russia, the latter refused the money for its self and its 'newly acquired' communist states.

By far the greatest beneficiary was the UK with some $3297M over 4 years followed by France with $2296M and then Germany with $1448M. There were 18 countries that received aid with Iceland getting the smallest amount, just $43M. Many of these countries also became members of Nato.

The money was given to stimulate industry thus creating jobs by getting Europe back to work. Some sceptics would claim that the real reason was to freeze out Russia, stop the spread of communism and give America badly needed trading partners. The latter is probably more closer to the truth as America had a massive labour force (previously used for weapons production), growing every day as troops returned to civilian life and needed jobs. At the end of the deal industry in Europe had grown by some 30% plus.

France was given so much because of the damage done to it during the invasion and the subsequent battles as the Allies pushed the German army back towards Germany. The Russians were offered quite a bit because without their 'First Front' and the subsequent damage done to their country the Allies would probably not have been able to invade France thus opening the 'Second Front'. Likewise it may be true to say that without the 'Second Front' Russia would have survived and of course the physical help by Britian and America with the huge amounts of arms and food sent to Russia was a big contribution.

My wife's parents were from the East End and her father worked in the docks during the war. As you know along with Coventry they suffered the most through bombing during the war. My mother-in-law only ever visited us once in France when she was alive. She, and many of her friends still will not forgive the French for, in her words, giving in to the Germans so quickly and not putting up much of a fight. Of course this is wrong, they fought very bravely but with old technology and many escaped at Dunkirk (out of  338,226 troops evacuated 139,997 were French) to fight another day. Many French pilots escaped too (about 500) and formed the Free French Air Force (based in the UK, Middle East and North Africa) which finally grew to around 900, many fought and gave their lives in the Battle of Britain and protecting London.

If you would like to read some more you can find information HERE, HERE and HERE.

 

 

 

[Quillan]

I forgot to add that the reason I thought France may have had a debt to America is because the Free French Army and Airforce was supplied directly or indirectly by America as were the partisans.

The Marshall Plan was aid not a debt.

[just john]

A slightly different story here about the French, Belgians, their armaments, their generals and desertion;

 Dunkirk-Fight-Last-Hugh-Sebag-Montefiore/

Edit; out of  $13 billion paid to Europe as a whole; UK on its own repaid $5 billion,  www2. lendlease

[JMB]

Quillan, I must call you up on your claim about the French and the Battle of Britain.  Seven Free French pilots died in the Battle of Britain.  Only 13 French pilots fought in BoB!

1500 Czech pilots managed to make it to Britain from a little country to the east of Germany, how bloody difficult could have been for the French to make it across the Channel.

More Norwegian combatants died on D-Day than French.  Shameful.

[Quillan]

Your quite right in that the official figure of French pilots in the BoB was officially 13. However there are some anomalies in the official figures due to parentage. One figure that comes to mind as an example is Australia who officially had 32. In Francis K.Mason's book Battle over Britain, it is stated that 22 Australians took part. In more recent times it is believed that although not recognised officially there was in fact some 52 according to Australian State Archives. I use Australian as a simple example of how the errors could be made, with French pilots it was a bit more complicated.

In the case of the French pilots some where actually officially recorded as being British because they were the legitimate or illegitimate children of British soldiers from WW1.

The reason for this is that the French pilots were first 'processed' at Camberley in what was then classed as the RAF Staff College (after many name changes its now the Joint Services Defence College). This was to ensure that there were no German sympathisers hidden in their ranks and that they could all speak English. Naively, although not a problem fortunatly. they thought anyone who was 'half English' would not be a threat and were sent to Central Flying school for conversion to British aircraft as they had basically been flying WW1 biplanes in 1940. The rest went through quite a bit before being trained and allowed to fly and missed the BoB. French Pilots served in both fighters and bombers, their notable squadrons were 340, 341 and 346 and the Bomber Group Lorraine also known as 342 Squadron.

[JMB]

Very interesting.  Do you mean Cranwell rather than Camberley?  You've obviously done a lot of homework (I'm not being facetious btw).  Do you know any Free French pilots that I could photograph for my book about WWII pilots?   

http://gallery.mac.com/johnmartinbradley#100142&bgcolor=black&view=grid

By the way, my Czech general, General Miroslav Standerer, fought in the French airforce until the Germans arrived and then he sugared off to Liverpool via the Pyrenees and Portugal. Germans coming in through the front door as he was disappearing out of the back door - all that sort of stuff.  A truly great chap in my view.

[Quillan]

No thats definitely Camberley, it was also an interrogation centre as well at the time. Some pilots also joined the Russian and German airforces where they also had their own squadrons. You can therefore understand why they RAF was a bit cautious.

There is a book called French Aces of WW2, you van find it at Amazon HERE .

The highest scoring black pilot in WW2 (so its claimed) was actually a French pilot called Roger Sauvage, there is more information about him, his fellow Aces and their aircraft HERE as well.

I don't have any personal photo's of French pilots but there are quite a few around on the Internet if you poke about a bit. The last link gives all the names so you can go from there.

Nice photos by the way and good luck.

[JMB]

Many thanks Quillan.  Sauvage is an appropriate name for a successful fighter pilot.  :-)