They had a few other battles in NA in which they fought much better than their allies.....One of the few bright spots for the 8A in NA(despite their victory)

PS..... I would not rank the usa first...they barely fought. they helped push the germans who were on the 'wall' over, but if you want to get technical, I would rank the participants: Tied for 1st: UK and Germany. Germany wont get first, as they never got to Paris, despite being close enough to lob artillery shells. Major factor/failure. The UK was not as large in the theater as Ger. and France, but still fought comparatively well and introduced the tank....(there is more, but that is the jist) tied for 2nd only by default: usa.....they contributed enough for the final push. In the 15 rd fight, (3 min per) they entered in the 15th after the first minute and helped give germany the final 1-2. If not, the fight might not have been won. -France....they would not rate it alone as it was their country and they could not defeat germany alone-ON THEIR SOIL(hence espirit de corps)-one would figure that with how large france was(military) the mere notion of invaders would have given them an extra boots...it did for a few months, then it wained. If you want to get technical.....France would have ranked 4th Then comes Turkey who fought off the allies at Gallipoli and the Russians when they invaded. Then Italy Then Russia Then dead last: AH empire.

I'd predict a Dien Bien Phu......Dinant/Sedan 1940.......

I predict a Kasserine Pass, Corregidor, Schnee Eiffel... French training is more demanding on infantry and in this contest we are equal on equipment. Our infantry troops do not recruit among poor mexican and youth asking army to pay for university but among French youth of village of countryside who fully volonteer. And they don't suit army if they are disabled during training..or beaten by their NCO for being to soft on training.

FS not quite sure what you are suggesting or trying to say, but......... A)those were army battles, so if you were fighting the us army, they might be good examples(except corregidor) B)we had our choisen Res. in Korea and we kicked their butts during the withdrawal to the sea despite being severly outnumbered. . You had Bir hakeim supported by the 7TH AD and were not greatly outnumbered. ...valiant, but you still lost in the end.

cont. sorry...wrong button A)and casulaties were not even comparative vs Korea B)you had DBP and lost. we had khe sahn and won-similar situations. C)All Marines are trained as infantry men first. Then as cooks, mail clerks, etc. France cant claim that(few armies can)They highly emphasis infantry tatics....You might want to check your facts and not read internet propaganda or french authors.... d)I dont know what your inferring with 'poor mexicans' Hope your not a racist. Our military is all volunteer. Period. and as a boost, we offer great incentives/pay/education, etc. What are the French incentives? low pay? inadaquate housing? protecting a socialist government? Protecting French history of continually loosing or a history of colonial conquests?(Algeria ring a bell....and just why were you DBP-thats right, a colonial territory AFTER ww2, and considering what the germans did to you, NICE morality..) any way....the FFL are good. They just dont stack up. They definitely dont have the current battle experience. You would get waxed. Wow it would be ugly. Even prior to the Iraq war, FFL would still loose (comparative size unit) and definitely the French army.....(though I would be impressed with the Leclerc MBT) Though--I think a few french army birgades might be able to get the better of a few army birgades, in the end,, they loose. --for the sake of argument say, 4 french armoured birgades with the Leclerc, (what, perhaps 320 tanks) vs 3 army birgades-or to get y, 1 us armoured division with 320-350 tanks...and similar numbers of apc/IFV.......perhaps 400+ each We have say, a sq of a-10s and you can have a sq of your jaguars(you dont have a comparative aircraft) we have our F-16 and f-15s/e and you can have your mighty mirage-2000 variants and perhaps the single naval sq of rafales you want to sacrifice. we will have a birgade of appaches and you have your mighty tigre.....we have our blackhawks and you have your pumas/superpuma(or eh101 now-do you use that) not a contest. except for a few minor victories, your equiptment is not up to par-good, but not equal, and your officers, with NO EXPERIENCE will be easily out-fought....... you still have your pride

I am not sure what you ment but the Mexican amry,Marines have harsh training in all enviroments and in the US by US trainers. Mexican vulontiers are not all poor in Mexico or US, Some are and some are middle class. P.S. If you look at boxing not even black people can beat mexicans easily, For the Record Blacks have good athlitic genes(I'm not Bieng racist). Not to mintion that there are lots of Mexican-American USMarines. I still say that a Battle Between FFL(or French Marines) and USMarines is too close to call.

In Bir hakeim 4 German/Italian divisions whom 15th Panzer division agaisnt 3700 French and FFL ( 6 bataillons including two FFL).3700 men agaisnt 50 000 !!! 1400 Luftwaffe sorties !!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bir_Hakeim More complete in French: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataille_de_Bir_Hakeim US are still to prove that they can won a battle outnumbered and in air inferiority.It never happened.For the French it happened hundred time in history.

The US has latley been attacking 3rd world countries since WW2. When the US attacked Mexico, Mexico just came out of a revolution and thus it was weak. in the Spanish-American war Spain lost its empire due a bunch of Independance wars and they were weak. Revolutionary war the French blocked any british reanforcements. War of 1812, Engalnd was fighting the Mighty French. No wander the US never got in any battles whin the Odds were totaly against them. Though I may be wrong about saying never.

...US are still to prove that they can won a battle outnumbered and in air inferiority.It never happened.For the French it happened hundred time in history.... We dont have to prove anything. Its STUPID to fight under conditions that favor your adversary. You get him to fight at YOUR tempo and conditions, and let HIM do the dying. That's the difference between the European way and the American way. And something those who claim we are not honorable because we CHOOSE to fight with our technology and NOT mano-a-mano, like the Arabs feel we must and therefore disparage. Guess whose way works best? DOesnt mean we fight stupidly and without training and tactics, but we apply our best and brightest to winning the fight before we get to the battlefield. We try NOT to put ourselves in untenable positions like that. Watch "We Were Soldiers", if you want an example. And there WAS face to face combat as well. swhitebull - Better living thru massive air and artillery support.