Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: THIRD FRENCH EMPIRE: Can the UK stop it?!?!?!
Godofgamblers    8/24/2006 4:42:38 AM
Wishing to write his name into the history books, Jaacques Chirac resolves to establish the THIRD FRENCH EMPIRE. He secures the agreement of some major Arab states (Lebanon, Syria and Palestine) to join a French commonwealth leading to a merger of states. Many other Arab states consider the motion, hoping to create a counterweight in the region to the US/Israel bloc and considering the sizable number of Arabs living in France. As for Africa, Chirac decides to take it outright as part of the new French empire. Some Arab countries such as Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia will be allowed to maintain puppet goverments for historic reasons, however. As a sign that he means business, French marines land at Valletta with CAS from 70 Rafales from the CdG. SEAD neturalizes Malta Int’l Airport. Malta’s Bulldog fighters are no match for the French airforce. Sorties are launched from Corsica and CdG to destroy Malta’s military capability. French Legionnaires from Djibouti land and take Hal-Far and other important military objectives. Once air supremacy is achieved, Malta’s military forces are identified, targetted and neutralized, and regular French army units supported by 100 LeClercs land at the ports of Birrzebbuga and Marsaxlokk, sealing Malta’s fate. Africa watches in shock as the French Tricolore flies above Malta’s Parliament. Chirac publicly proclaims that Malta will serve as the stepping stone to ops in Africa should some countries be non-compliant. Coffee literally flies out of Tony Blair’s nose as he reads the morning paper: FRANCE TAKES MALTA IN LIGHTNING ATTACK. For historic reasons, he would like to free Malta. However, a few quick phonecalls reveal that the EU and the US will not interfere in this matter. In fact, the US is glad that the French will be taking a more active role in the ME and too many of their forces are engaged in Iraq to help out the Brits anyway. This will be another Faklands type war, Bush advises. Chirac calls and tells Blair that he must condone and accept the French invasion publicly. Chirac will be beginning his Africa drive and doesn’t want any hiccups. Blair stares into space wondering what he can do faced with this ‘fait accompli’… If he chooses to rush to Malta’s aid, it won’t be the Belgrano he’ll be facing but the CdG in a warzone dotted with French military bases… should he really stir up the hornet’s nest? The Question IS: Does Britain have the military wherewithal to wrest Malta from the French without (1) going nuclear (2) receiving aid from other countries (3) attacking France proper (for fear of escalation)?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14   NEXT
rayott34    Tom Clancy   8/25/2006 3:12:53 AM
“and about naval air, harriers were already no match for French super etendard (within fuel range, not like argies ones), they are jokes for rafales, with hawkeyes support it would be a slaughter.” Don’t take it so seriously, it’s really more of a stab of fictional writing for fun. I was just really inspired to write by this thread. Anyways, In general, yes, the super etendards are better. But, this is a “what if” thread, and these were imaginary SUPER harriers that had AESA radars put in them (and big red S’s on the side, S for super; probably could not happen in real life, but stranger things have happened) and modern long range rockets (amraam, or the meteor that has now been perfected in this what if future). Also, I imagined the bulk of the RAF to be Eurofighters, not harriers. Also, doesn’t the CdG plan on mainly having Raphaels rather then super etendards? I was more concerned about the match-up between the Raphaels and the Eurofighters, that’s a match up that’s more key here, and one I’m not so sure about. As far as the Hawkeyes go, I assumed the RAF would also have their equivalent AWAC based in Spain. “This thread is as entertaining as any thread YAKEEPI would start. ;)” I agree, I think that we should start a creative writing thread, write up the novel jointly, and publish it as a Tom Clancy book.
 
Quote    Reply

jean    very funny !   8/25/2006 3:22:40 AM
Hey buddies , it's only a fictive scenario, don't spit your venom ! Let's be obvious , UK has more than the edge on military statistics than france...but ! I remember a sentence of an old french rugbyman " england always wins but sometimes we beat them". In this scenario i think France could have its edge to UK. But this war could be a massacre with losses of men and equipements. It's not like Israel attacking Hezbollah. GoG forgot to mention Corsican airforce base ( solenzara) to be added. Malta is closed to tunisia , a french ally in this scenario, so that could count. Can Morrocco attack Gibraltar by air ? Do the spaniards invade Gibraltar to get it back to Spain ? ( he , he , that can count). Cyprus has UK troops , no ? so they can attack from the east. What about the knights of the order of Malta ? the maltese resistance ? and so on ......to be continued .....for fun !
 
Quote    Reply

nominoe    RE:Tom Clancy   8/25/2006 3:28:11 AM
I don't take it too seriously, and i actualy find this thread very fun ;) anyway we all agree that any western country is not likely going to fight another. but it's always fun to compare materials! it's like during middle age, when innocupied knights fought tournaments, during (the short middle age) peace time. I'm pleased to see RN ships operating with CDG and MN ships operating with ILLUSTRIOUS. If robert Surcouf knew a ship under his name was sailing with an english battlegroup he would turn in his grave ;)
 
Quote    Reply

nominoe    RE:very funny !   8/25/2006 3:37:24 AM
Gibraltar would be the crucial battle. yesterday i was watching the best submarine movie ever, "das boot". the U-boat attempt to go through Gibraltar is one of the best part. nowadays, what is gibraltar up to? what kind of equipments (radar, sonar, missiles batteries) are in?
 
Quote    Reply

Godofgamblers       8/25/2006 4:12:42 AM

Exactly, nominoe.... the battle at the Straits would be the critical battle. And as so many naval battles have demonstrated, it is control of the air that is the deciding factor. from Pearl Harbor to the Falklands, the lesson everyone claims to have learned is that air power is the deciding factor. In the straits i think it is simple logistics that make France invincible in this scenario. the RN would not do well in its trip to Malta. It wouldn't reach Malta at all, in fact.

There would be no battle of Malta...

 
Quote    Reply

Godofgamblers       8/25/2006 4:27:26 AM
Rayott, a great read! i want the film rights....! chapeau!
 
Quote    Reply

neofire1000       8/25/2006 8:56:55 AM

"the falklands showed the effectiveness of french kit against UK surface targets"

 

The Falklands was a long time ago and the UK changed everything after that war and learned so many lessons. Materials for sailors kit was even changed after the crewmans uniforms on HMS Sheffield were less than fireproof, so we are not the army of 1981, very much improved.

"unless britain can bring some frigates" strange statement, there are 13 type 23 frigates and 4 type 22. Their primary role was ASW but have been adapted to work as air defence as well, also you forget the 8 type 42 destroyers. In the future the type 45 destroyer will be one of the most advanced in the world, current roports state that there will be 8 - 12 hulls, so it's not all bad.

I agree with the Harriers being underdogs here, again this is all changing in the future, to what extent no one knows, and anyone that claims to have hard facts here is talking crap. Remember harriers are old but mega versatile jets, in the right hands they are lethal in dog fight senarios. DO NOT compare anything with the Falklands, that was 25 years ago and times have changed, if it wasn't for the Falkland we would have no carriers at all, so again, lessons learned.

As far as subs go......... I think France would be in trouble here. The UK has 11 SSN, combined with one of the best ASW forces in the world........well I don't need to say anymore on that. Less comment on the Falklands because it can't compare to todays force, and even with the crap forces we had then remember that war was fought in the SOUTH ATLANTIC, took our ships 3 weeks to get there and in the face of terrible logistical problems, poor supply lines, our soldiers still yomped from one side of the Islands to the other and still managed to win in the face of much greater numbers and against a force close to their own home. Could the French comtinue a sustained battle against any opponent with grit and determination like the brits?? No one knows.

 
Quote    Reply

neofire1000       8/25/2006 9:11:03 AM
rayott34 - you should write a book!! great read. Too many people getting wound up!! its good fiction.
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot       8/25/2006 2:37:49 PM
Two questions.

1.   why the fcuk would Britain go to war over Malta. It's bugger all to do with Britain ans han't been for a long time.

2.   Why mess around with the Med. Paris is a lot closer.


 
Quote    Reply

Godofgamblers       8/25/2006 7:20:25 PM

Two questions.

1.   why the fcuk would Britain go to war over Malta. It's bugger all to do with Britain ans han't been for a long time.

2.   Why mess around with the Med. Paris is a lot closer.



1. for 'historic reasons'. Malta has requested help and Britain would like to... WWII and all that...

2. Why not nuke Buenos Aires during the Falklands? Britain doesn't want any escalation.

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics