I was in France a few years ago when the Charles de Gaulle [correct me if the name is wrong] was launched. At the launch, French noticed a little negligible thing, for an aircraft carrier: the flight deck was too short due to funds cut (a problem for every European country)... I read it on the French newspapers, it is not international gossip. Moreover, probably it is because of this that France is building a new carrier.

If you were in france during at that time, it was a national sport to have fun with the CDG without knowing the real problem. When designing the Flight deck, they didn't take into account a large safety margin for the Landing of the E2C which are on board, they noticed that only when they received the planes.... but right now building a second one is the only credible thing to do for the Marine nationale, because one Carrier isn't enought to project force correctly. 'When the CDG goes to maintenance they will be no more french carrier on the sea, and that's not a viable option for force projection)

wow - FS is going to like THAT! I do think the France-bashing is a waste of time. Yes, French people overestimate their country's power and influence and alot of their whining is just to get attention and appear as a great power. However, alot of people also underestimate French influence in Africa and the Middle East...of course, much of that influence comes from selling arms to dictators such as Saddam Hussein - not that other countries don't do the same, but for a country always squawking about human rights, and international law, it does appear hypocritical. I am surprised France did not donate more to the tsunami fund - according to the following website, it was very low relative to other major (and less major) powers...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donations_for_victims_of_the_2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake#Criticism_of_donor_response

After the US (and maybe Oz too), France is teh country which gives the more troops and logistics to help tsunami's victims.

I am surprised the cost of those logistics would not be factored in to a government's contribution. If what you are saying is true, then I stand corrected - but I would be interested to know your source on that because even in somewhat balanced publications such as the economist, I have only heard about Australian, German, Japanese, and US (I believe in that order) contributions as being top of the list.

"Yes, French people overestimate their country's power and influence and alot of their whining is just to get attention and appear as a great power." Maybe some average uninformed Frenchmen, but not French on this forum. We are still an independant world power. And we have influence as we were able to rally a majority in UNO security council on Iraq, including temporary weak members who withstand US pressure and financial offers to side us.It has obviously turned US state department mad! See my post: http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/30-45068.asp I would say that France is one of the few western country to practice covert operations involving the killing of foreign citizens. And you still forget we have independant space assets, weapon production and nuclear deterrent with counterforce ability, and 30 000 men abroad or in oversea bases. To be able to hit 200 hardened target in the world with nukes while keeping a second strike ability is not in the capabilties of a lot of countries!

This information comes from "Armées d'aujourd'hui", the official magazine of French Ministère de la Défense... It says: "Opération Béryx (12/31/04 - 02/17/05): Humanitarian operation for tsunami's victims in South-East Asia. France deployed the second largest military system after the US, but before UK, Japan, Singapore or Malaysia. 1369 mens, 13 helicopters, 2 Transall planes, 2 frigates, 1 helicopter's carrier, 1 engineer group and 1 Armée de terre's light airforce group had been deployed to supply 800 tons of material and humanitarian help."

FS - I completely agree with your last statement but let's review the threats to the world - few, if any nuclear powers would threaten France - that's probably because of the deterrant you possess but nuclear war is not a serious threat to anyone right now - short of maybe N korea - And by the way, France made financial offers to these countries that opposed the US in the UN, not the US...furthermore, you overestimate French influence if you think that those countries voted the way they did because France told them to - they voted that way because it served their national interests not to allow a great power to push a small power around without being attacked first. ALso, remember the E European countries which sided with the US - despite their close French ties and their membership in the EU? They made far more of a contribution to the war and diplomatic support than did those small African countries which simply cast a vote...I believe Chirac even said they "missed an opportunity to shut up" - that didn't help French influence very much "I would say that France is one of the few western country to practice covert operations involving the killing of foreign citizens." -I am not sure about the reasons France does this but it's hardly something to be proud of when you are again always babbling about human rights and international law.

So I am confused - is this counted in the monetary contribution of the governments? Because if that is the case, then you still did not contribute much in quantity in relation to Portugal, UK, Belgium, etc (percentage of GNP is the measurement here)...if it's not counted, then France is not getting the credit she deserves for her efforts. I tend not to take seriously stats provided by my own defense ministry (they are often biased unlike the site I referenced) but I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this one.

Also, if France considers themselves a world class first-rate power then why do they consistently shrink from the responsibilities of a world class power. Let's assume for conversational purposes that the US invasion of Iraq was a mistake, it violated international law and caused more problems than it solved. I personally do not necessarily believe that but let's just assume that is true....why would France still not offer to help beat the insurgency in Iraq? Is it not in France's best interest to have stability in the mideast? The principle might be "you got yourself into this mess America, you can get yourself out" but that's not right from a human rights perspective (given the misery of Iraqui citizens as a result of the insurgency) and it's also not indicative of a world power...not just France either, but Spain and Germany benefit from Mid East stability...it would appear that ego and pride is preventing France from taking the responsibility of a major power and helping make the middle east safe for democracy. Are they just too proud (and ticked off that America went in without UN approval) or are they incapable of such military operations? The US helped France out in Vietnam when the insurgency threatened to overwhelm the French army - and we suffered for it too...but it was our responsibility to try to work in the interests of Asian regional stability. If you are going to 'talk the talk', then you need to 'walk the walk'.