Thanks to our allies - updated

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
Lots of nations sent forces to Afghanistan, though only a few sent forces for actual combat (USA, UK, France. perhaps Canada as well)

IIRC, of the four you named only the US and Canada sent regular gound forces in a combat role. Did France even send spec. ops troops? Did they run away or did they simply busy themselves by blowing up whatever Greenpeace demonstrators they could find?

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Special troops ? Humm maybe for information, but not sure.
Logistic troops yes. We have still men in Afghanistan.
We sent some ships and one Nuclear Carrier (around the 20/30 september).

Don't forget we have better than sinking ecologist ships :
Eat cheese, frogs and snails, drink wine, sing songs, pretending to be more cultural advanced, and do sex with person of other sex.

Another stereotype ?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
Lots of nations sent forces to Afghanistan, though only a few sent forces for actual combat (USA, UK, France. perhaps Canada as well)

Canada sent 750 ground troops to fight along side the US troops, as well as spec ops (JTF2) and logistcs ships/planes. I think all of the other countries just contributed in logistics or spec ops only, or air in Britain's case.

[Comrade Tribune]

Austria sent 60 soldiers to Afghanistan. In my opinion this is 60 too many. Helping America consolidating its worldwide hegemony is not worth a single drop of Austrian blood.

So no need to thank me, LOTM: If it depended on me, they wouldn´t be there.

[Saint Marcus]

IIRC, of the four you named only the US and Canada sent regular gound forces in a combat role. Did France even send spec. ops troops?

Both France and Britain sent special ops units. The Britons even got in a fire fight (first of the war). And I also believe the UK sent forces to secure some key positions (thus making them combat troops and not peace keeping troops).

[Felch]

ZoboZeWarrior, no offense to you personally, but the French military has about the same glorious history as the ARVN. In fact the same jokes could be told about it. "Excellent rifles, never fired and only dropped once."

However, I'm sure that the forces they are contributing will refute history.

[Saint Marcus]

The French have a very long and proud military history, mind you. Far, far longer than that of most nations on earth, and with far more accomplisments.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

I acknoweldge that Since Napoleon, we haven't ... heu ... an efficient militar ...
Yes, we must admit it ... By the way, we are making good weapons, too bad we have problems to use them

What hurts me, it isn't our lake of good generals, it's all stereotypes about french, I can read on this forum.

It remember western racial bull**** at the begin of the XX centuries just before the WW I.

[Saint Marcus]

How about WW1? The French didn't do bad at all. And prior to WW2, France's military was considered to be the world's most powerful. Furthermore, the French still make very sophisticated weapons and other military equipment.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
The French have a very long and proud military history, mind you. Far, far longer than that of most nations on earth, and with far more accomplisments.

Not exactly. For the entire Rennaissance period, France was the biggest power in Europe and was unable to project its power. England almost conquered the whole thing in the 15th century. They also got their collective butt handed to them in three successive wars with Germany.

[Felch]

Also note that even Napoleon wasn't really French. Corsica had only been conquered for a short time before Napoleon was born there.

Also, I don't think anybody is really critizing the French for bravery. Their chief problem historically has been an insistence on using ancient and obselete tactics. Thus, battles such as Agincourt and Dien Bien Phu predominate in the public perception of French ineptitude.

So in short, France's reputation is mostly because of uninventive leadership.

[Lonestar]

You beat me to it, Felch X, the French haven't been packing heat since Charlemagne.


It's worth noting that the ONLY French fleet victory EVER occured off the Virginia Capes in178?.


The Victory prevented the British from evacuating Cornwallis from Yorktown.

[Ecthy]

On another sidenote, some people in Germany feel offended because the fact that German special commandos are in Afghanistan has only been published several days ago. What a bullcrap I say, why should they tell us what exactly they are doing there? We knew there are German soldiers in Afghanistan, so what the heck. What next, will they be just as enraged when they find out about our soldiers actually wearing uniforms over there?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by ZoboZeWarrior
LOTM, your list is far from being complete !

I did not intend it to be complete but to highlight the most important contributions, - I did expect people here to add their own national efforts.

Re: Canadian casualties - considering how few US casualties there have been, it is hardly surprising that smaller forces have not had any.

Re: German diplomacy - Germany has a tremendous Afgan exile community, has had close contacts with many key afghan exiles. I dont have sources handy, but back in December there was extensive description in the press of the importance of Germany's role, not just as host of the Bonn conf, but in helping reach agreement.

Re:Brit diplomacy - has been very effctive and important, whatever names anyone chooses to call Tony Blair

Re:Smaller special forces - I note the contributions people have posted about here - ie Norway, Germany, and NZ. I mentioned UK as they are far larger and morfe significant, and Germany's main contribution has been diplomatic. Norway's troops presumably add special mountain expertise. I was hesitant about adding AUstralia, as there are others with propably equally large contingents, but my impression is that they were on the ground back in early November, before the fall of Kabul.

Re: Picking up slack for US forces in gulf. Not only in the Persian gulf, but also in Bosnia and Kosovo. IIUC that has been France's principle contribution, though they also have a few troops in ISAF.
And then there was the NATO AWACS planes that flew air defense over the US in the fall. Definitely dramatic, to anyone who know the history of our alliances.

Re: Contributions in terms of arresting people, cutting finances, etc. That is really a different front of the war, and deserves a seperate thread. Let us simply note here that many countries that are not involved in afganistan are very important in the covert/police war.

LOTM

[lord of the mark]

Re:france - despite the controversy about the performance of the French army in May-June 1940, france certainly has an extensive military history. French forces are large and well-trained - i left them out becuase they have no particularly visible role in the current war. they sent a carrier, but AFAIK, never dropped any bombs , unlike brits, who at least launched a few cruise missile, and unlike french air force in gulf war. I understand they have some peacekeepers in ISAF, but far fewer than UK. And I see posted here that they sent some special forces, but not enough to put them in a seperate class from Australia, Germany, etc.

France's main contribution thus far has been in taking up slack in the balkans, and of course their key role in breaking up al qaeeda cells in europe. (but as i said above id like to discuss that elsewhere)


LOTM