Russians in the American Batht... 

I also point out that Russia and India have mutual visiting forces rights, something WE don't have.  

 

The Russians do not project Task Units overseas...they deploy single units overseas.  France could deploy a CVBG, not Russia....

 

And by deploying Marines, I mean Marines via amphibious insertion....A US ARG is a battalion-sized element...about 1,000-1,200 troops.  The US would have a struggle to deploy a MEB, quickly....

 What capacity? (CREF above) Etentards were not that good against Mirages or Skyhawks and the Squall's don't at the time exist.. 

"

We had F8 Crusader with magic1  at this time.Still better than an old Argentine MIII with old AM9B and short of fuel.

France would have done much much better than British in Falkland war.Moreover most British ship did not have minimum antimissile capability while our 100 mm gun (68 round per minutes) dual use gun (anti air anti sea or ground) have antimissile capability for 30 years.France consider its 100 mm gun close to 76 mm gun or even a Phalanx.

Falkland war had a good effect on France

It persuaded former (socialist) president F Mitterrand to fund CdG nuclear carrier and a navalized Rafale.

Sad, that post cold war reduction by Chirac and A Juppe his prime minister in 1996 cancelled its sistership as the 7th SSN and delayed procurement of Barracuda class SSN.

Our native Americans are Americans and they ARE CITIZENS. Guyanese are not French, in the way that Algerians were not.

Scenario No. 3

FS, are you serious or just crazy? Are you suggesting that France would actually attempt to use nukes against the USA? Good grief, you do realize if so much as ONE nuke came from your subs at the US, France would no longer exist right? We can, and if you used nukes against us for ANY reason, would wipe France off the map forever. Within a couple years you would simply be part of the newest history books teling about a country thats used to be named France but played the fool and picked on someone they had no business even looking at wrong and were hence wiped from planet earth. Every man, woman, child, dog cat and all that good wine. Gone forever.  

I actually was enjoying kind of reading this thread until that nonsense. Although I have absolutely no use or respect for the French in any way, I simply cannot believe any French leader would ever be such a fool as what you have just said. How the hell can anyone take anything you say even remotely serious when you start making claims of French useing nukes against the USA? I'd be willing to bet IF they did, the familys of those making that suicide call would not have so much as ONE family member on French soil at that time. They'd all conveniently be on vacation somewhere no doubt!! gawdddddd

 

I said that if USA side our ennemies and impeach us to retake our overseas department we would use nuke.

it is officially in our doctrine: tout azimut.

Of course we would use nuke against agressor first (and not USA) to make it renounce.

Now if USA attempt to blackmail us or strike us conventionnaly we would use nukes.

It is up to USA to take decision.USA would be first the agressor of France.Not France.

France and USA are allies.However we have the right to defend ourselves against anybody including USA if they threaten us and ally with our ennemies.

 

Now if USA try to use conventional power against France, yes we would use nukes.As it has always been in our doctrine.Deterrent is for everybody.

Easiest targets are your surface battlegroup or Norfolk.

For good reason we have the ASMP

Here a link on it:

 

Do you think we taylored ASMP for only few Russian cruisers?

If you want to retaliate on France civilians , don't forgot we have 300 nukes able to reach USA and to kill more Americans that France have inhabitants, and 60 to reach your allies in Europe.

Our deterrent have always been taylored to resist to a USA blackmail.

It is not for Russia and its few operational Akula subs or noisy chinese SSN, we modernized our deterrent.

It is to be sure that in any circumstance, USA can not chase it and prevent us to use it against any adversary.

Our strategy is very clear, we use ASMP (eventually one of our SSBN since they have precise enough warheads to target an airfield or a plant or a army depot, especially M51 in a near future) to negate conventional military power of an adversary even a superpower, and keep 2 to prevent nuking our population.

I don't know what would USA think if we destroy several US battle group and ships in harbors and few dozen airfields including those having B2, B1 and F22, but they can say good bye to their military projection power.For sure USA can also target our harbors.At the end France and USA have no military power and few million dead (since we destroy San Diego, Norflok, Pearl Harbor and you Brest and Toulon).

Now if they add targeting our population in revenge, we have also means to avenge.Just think about 192 ten time Hiroshima warheads!

read
and keep 2 SSBN to prevent nuking our population.

I says it again, USA is an ally as long it doesn't side with our ennemies.

Hysteria and childishness., Adults do not make wild and crazy statements not based in fact.. If Petai9n would roll over and fold when he should have fought, then what French government would accept virtually guaranteed extinction as FS decribes what he pretends they would do ? Nations don't act that way Nations, at least rational ones, know their limits .

Herald

As Prime Minister Lord Palmerston once remarked "Britain has no permanent friends, she only has permanent interests."  France maintains the Force de Frappe not deter Russia, but to DETER...so too, US nuclear weapons.  One hundred years ago Britain's enemy was Germany and it's ally, Russia.  Now that is reversed.

 

Nations have interests.  Nuclear weapons preserve those interests.  They also make you a "player" on the world stage.  It not by accident that ALL FIVE UNSC Permanent Members are also Nuclear Powers.  France keeps to nuclear weapons to preserve its independence, from ANY hostile power or coalition, just as the US does.

 

Please people, FS may be an idiot about the Rafale, but on this he is quite correct.  I don't see why you guys have such trouble understanding the Realpolitik that is involved.