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
Claret       8/30/2006 3:21:17 AM

Godofgamblers,

 

  is it really possible to blockade France in its own backyard ?

 

I judged your first post and came to the conclusion that an instant deployment in as you say Frances backyard would be near impossible for the UK to maintain air superiority. That???s why I attacked the problem from a different direction.

The UK would be best able to counter France by stopping the flow of oil, this would have social, economic and military implications for France. How long would the French people put up with petrol/diesel shortages ?

 

The RN and RAF would be under orders to maneuver/patrol as aggressively as possible but not force any engagement, hopefully forcing the French to maintain her ships at sea and her air force at a high state of combat readiness.

 

Another factor I considered here was the French navy and air arm???s ability to operate under dwindling oil supply, at what point would the RN and RAF gain an advantage large enough to push into the Western Med  due to lack of French resistance (I looked at the example of US blockades against Japan in WWII).

 

Overall my plan is sees Britain stalling using as much International; backing and pressure as can be made available to than enforce a blockade. Pushing into the Western Med is not an early option for my proposal. However when you then factor oil shortages into the equation the plan could then possibly become more feasible.

 

Another point I???d be keen on you clearing up is what exactly did France do to stop some of the best signals traffic intercepts in the Northern Europe and the Med from missing French military build up ?

 

Regards,

 

Claret

 

 
Quote    Reply

Bigfella2       8/30/2006 8:32:53 AM

Some of these points have already been covered (the ever reliable GF, among others), but I will try to present as best a case as I can as to why france is not going to rise again based on this little scenario.

France manages to cobble together an alliance of Syria, Lebanon & Palestinians. Sounds like more of a millstone than a milestone. Expect Turkey to suddenly rediscover an anglophile streak, while the ever-present threat of Israel will keep the alliance from deploying too many resources beyond their own borders. Beyond these nations, does France really think it can gather much together?. Sure, some francophone African nations may come on board, but they are more of a liability than a help & are easily balanced by their neighbours. Remember that a tiny but well trained & motivated anglophone army from Rwanda managed to disintegrate Congo.

Britain won't need to mess about in sub-saharan Africa, let them fight it out. All she has to do is isolate Djibouti & Malta. Easy. Ethiopia has been after a port ever since Eritrea declared independence. They may well come on board with some help (more anon.). As for Nth Africa, what on God's green earth makes anyone think that any Nth African nation is going to sit back while France rebuilds the empire? Those nations that were French hate the frogs, while Libya has bad memories of the war in Chad. Even a moron like Bush could cobble together an alliance here, so I'm betting the much cleverer folk at the Foreign Office can do it without any trouble.

With bases on Gibraltar & Cyprus, Britain already controls the approaches to the Med, so any French units left outside are staying there. Using existing airfields in Nth Africa, the Brits can set up a string of airbases & provide air cover from a much closer range than France (until you get near Malta, anyway). I'm betting that the Brits can blockade Malta & starve the French out, but I'll make it more interesting in a moment.

Britain will have one more ally that no one has considered yet - Australia. Why, you ask. Well, its not for the obvious reason, as our PM's head is so far up the US President that he doesn't have time to do Blair as well. No, it is because of our ties to Malta. it is a little known fact that we have the largest Maltese - derived population outside Malta. At 180,000 it is equivalent to over 50% of the actual population of Malta (which is only 380,000), and includes the 2 largest Maltes cities in the world - melbourne & Sydney (with 50,000 Maltese each, both are more than double the size of Malta's largest town). The Maltese are one of our most productive & best loved minorities - they are not noisy, bombastic or given to delusions of grandeur. On this occasion, however, they make a LOT of noise, and we listen. Australia is on side.

France decides to act pre-emptively to stop Britain gaining a foothold closest to Malta by invading & occupying part of Tunisia. This is successful, but at a cost. The combined airforces of Nth Africa add numbers, if not skill, but they provide plenty of decoys while the Brits do the hard work. On the ground the Tunisians fight hard, but are easily outclassed. Libya suffers from long range raids in the Sth, as does Algeria. It takes Britain time to establish a decent ground presence in Nth Africa, but when they do those forces are more than a match for French forces. While the Brits can move supplies inland if needs be - out of range of French air power -the French have to run the gauntlet constantly due to Italy's insitence on remaining neutral.

Meanwhile, an Australian force, supported by British logistics, moves into Ethiopia via Kenya. Their job is to expel the French from Djibouti, or pressure Djibouti to do it for them. Without going ito too much detail, the mission is a success, with the newly-recriuted units of young Maltese-Australians performing with particular distinction..

In Tunisia the French are outnumbered & outmatched. The Nth African forces, again with some logistical help, are the equivalent of a medieval peasant massed army, whilt the Brits are the equivalent of the kinghts. The French only have the knights, and they have to contend with an unhelpful local population & an unreliable supply line. The battle is nasty, but the result never in doubt.

As for Malta, with the Brits holding Tunisia they can blockade malta. They might try to re-take it by force, but by this stage NATO, the EU, G8, UN, USA & every other significant group or nation in the world are leaing on France to withdraw. The 'Arab alliance' begins to fall apart as soon as France starts invading other Muslim nations. Britain, on the other hand, is able to present itself as defending Islam (complete with testimonials from grateful Tunisians & Nth African leaders). Further, France's own muslims are unhappy at the prespect of France invading their nations

 
Quote    Reply

ProDemocracy    Bigfella2   8/30/2006 9:55:37 AM

Bigfella,

I thought your scenario was well-thought out and well-balanced.

France has not won a war with a great power in almost 100 years. In some cases, they slink away from fourth-rate powers rather than fight.  France could not mount the attack described in the original post, let alone hold on to any lucky gains.

Contrast that to Britain who has not shrunk from fighting the war on terror, Iraq, Argentina (none of these great powers), but also fought until winning in WWII. 

France had no influence on Iraq - Hussein had no respect for French "power" or he would have done what France advised and given the inspectors unfettered access.  French troops go in and beat down a few African tribes and some posters on here thinks that qualifies France to be a world power.  The peacekeeping mission to Lebanon is a good practice run for French troops - but it's far from the hard battles the British have been fighting.

 
Quote    Reply

soleil9       8/30/2006 12:46:28 PM



Godofgamblers,





 





 



is it really possible to blockade France in its own backyard

?




 



I judged your first post and came to the conclusion that an instant deployment in as you say Frances backyard would be near impossible for the UK to maintain air superiority. That???s why I attacked the problem from a different direction.



The UK would be best able to counter France by stopping the flow of oil, this would have social, economic and military implications for France. How long would the French people put up with petrol/diesel shortages ?




 



The RN and RAF would be under orders to maneuver/patrol as aggressively as possible but not force any engagement, hopefully forcing the French to maintain her ships at sea and her air force at a high state of combat readiness.




 



Another factor I considered here was the French navy and air arm???s ability to operate under dwindling oil supply, at what point would the RN and RAF gain an advantage large enough to push into the Western Med  due to lack of French resistance (I looked at the example of US blockades against Japan in WWII).




 



Overall my plan is sees Britain stalling using as much International; backing and pressure as can be made available to than enforce a blockade. Pushing into the Western Med is not an early option for my proposal. However when you then factor oil shortages into the equation the plan could then possibly become more feasible.

 
Quote    Reply

ProDemocracy    soleil9   8/30/2006 2:23:49 PM

ProDem:"The peacekeeping mission to Lebanon is a good practice run for French troops - but it's far from the hard battles the British have been fighting."

Soleil9: "

ps: for the jackass who speak about lebeanon like an easy mission i want say that i had lost my brother in 82 in this training operation.

 

---Soleil9, I was not implying that peacekeeping in Lebanon is easy - since the UN refuses to grant permission for the mission to be disarming terrorists, the shooting should be minimal.  Peacekeeping missions (under UN) by nature are not going to be as difficult as fighting a war such as Afghan, Iraq, etc.  However, as in any military mission, there is a risk of loss of life - and I am sorry that you lost your brother in Lebanon.

 
Quote    Reply

soleil9       8/30/2006 4:16:02 PM


ProDem:"The peacekeeping mission to Lebanon is a good practice run for French troops - but it's far from the hard battles the British have been fighting."


Soleil9: "

 

ok prodem maybe you're right, and maybe i've overreacted...sorry

but i must ask you something, do you think that the future fight between finul and hezbolah will be an easy one??? france go with an armored brigade and counter fire radar, cause they know that it will be hard and deadly...i don't know that is your nationality, but listen that...

in 2000 some of our platoon commander ( not me at this time i was in command of an FFL trainnig platoon in corsica backing of 18 months in africa) were transfered in UK for "urgent meeting".the british question  was, "what must we do to do a good job"in Sierra Leone  why? cause we are better soldiers? no cause some of our regiments are specialised in city control, riot and civilian violence menace especialy in Africa. in september 2000 during operation barras british lose 1 sas commando and some wounded( i don't remenber exactly) not because the operation has failed but because uk doesn't have the good tools, in the same ways when france lose pilot in bosnia it was british who make most difficult rescue.

it's funny to read (not from you) that in africa we fight agains tribe, i remember Manta agains lybia in Chad or somalia in 93 brazza in 37 and before us kolwezi that was beautiful fight and the anciens could be proud of our fight....

 













ps: for the jackass who speak about lebeanon like an easy mission i want say that i had lost my brother in 82 in this training operation.



 

---Soleil9, I was not implying that peacekeeping in Lebanon is easy - since the UN refuses to grant permission for the mission to be disarming terrorists, the shooting should be minimal.  Peacekeeping missions (under UN) by nature are not going to be as difficult as fighting a war such as Afghan, Iraq, etc.  However, as in any military mission, there is a risk of loss of life - and I am sorry that you lost your brother in Lebanon.




 
Quote    Reply

soleil9       8/30/2006 4:18:39 PM
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack       8/30/2006 4:39:57 PM

"I was not implying that peacekeeping in Lebanon is easy - since the UN refuses to grant permission for the mission to be disarming terrorists, the shooting should be minimal"

I honestly think you are understating the difficulty of peacekeeping.  Armies are designed to deal with people shooting at them.  Where it gets hard is when you start applying significant levels of politics that affect the ROE.

Things like you cant use armored vehichles because it "looks too agressive..."

Don't shoot the bad guys unless they getting rather close to successfully shooting you first.

Those sorts of things...

 
Quote    Reply

skrip00    Europe needs another World War...   8/31/2006 5:28:21 PM
Seriously... you guys need to tear each other apart a 3rd time... maybe this time you'll realize that your all a bunch of nothings on the world stage.  But united, you are a formidable force.

Stop with your nationalistic French crap.  You're not an empire.  You cannot project power.  You offer nothing lucrative to your allies.

You make all this talk about allying with China, when the Chinese are deeply involved with the US economically.

You talk about an "Islamic Alliance" when it is Islamic fascists who are your greatest enemies.

Your nation is a powderkeg, that, thank God, has not gone off. 

I predict this:  Eventually, within the decade, there will be a major terrorist attack on French soil.  This attack will probably be a bomb on the TGV, or the destruction of the Eiffel Tower.

At first, France will lash out and lock down its moslem population.  Someone will evetually get hurt or wrongfully accused.  And then we will have a repeat of the riots we saw earlier this year.

France is at the edge of a precipice, awaiting someone to light off the powder keg that will tear it apart inside.

 
Quote    Reply

TDidier       8/31/2006 5:55:06 PM

Seriously... you guys need to tear each other apart a 3rd time... maybe
this time you'll realize that your all a bunch of nothings on the world
stage.  But united, you are a formidable force.


Stop with your nationalistic French crap.  You're not an
empire.  You cannot project power.  You offer nothing
lucrative to your allies.


You make all this talk about allying with China, when the Chinese are deeply involved with the US economically.


You talk about an "Islamic Alliance" when it is Islamic fascists who are your greatest enemies.


Your nation is a powderkeg, that, thank God, has not gone off. 


I predict this:  Eventually, within the decade, there will be a
major terrorist attack on French soil.  This attack will probably
be a bomb on the TGV, or the destruction of the Eiffel Tower.


At first, France will lash out and lock down its moslem
population.  Someone will evetually get hurt or wrongfully
accused.  And then we will have a repeat of the riots we saw
earlier this year.


France is at the edge of a precipice, awaiting someone to light off the powder keg that will tear it apart inside.


What are you talking about? No one french poster ever spoke about a futur "french empire" or challenging US or anybody else in the world, that is mainly angloX fantasies not ours...

But I really thinks that our next major war will be against US due to the total corruption of theire political class and to the miss-informations of the mass by all those media biased US people is feeding with. Sad but it is our fate.
 
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