de Gaulle's Betrayal?

[Spiffor]

They fought for us. Some actually believed that France was a good thing for Algeria (which wasn't considered as an administrative colony, but as a French territory just like Provence). We rapatriated our nationals after the war, even those who plotted against the Republic, but we left many Harkis to die.

I fully understand why they're hated in Algeria (they're the collaboarators of the colonist oppressor). However, it is unacceptable that, as they actually fought for us and believed in us, we left them to be killed in Algeria after the war.

[Berzerker]

Were those ethnic French, or Algerians fighting for France? I do know the French left the many Algerians that had fought on their side to their fate when they gave up on Algeria. Needless to say, they were not much loved by their victorious insurgent compatriots ...

Probably the latter, which casts doubt on the explanation I heard for de Gaulle's actions - that it was soldiers returning from a guerrilla war are much more likely to be screwed up and cause problems. The guy who said this was an author who seems to know his stuff though, he was in intel for a long time.
Sounds more like Algerian allies, when the US left Vietnam alot of allies were left behind. We did bring some back but no way we could handle all of them. The a-holes who are so quick to get us into wars dont think about stuff like that, native allies who have to live (or die) with the consequences.

[SlowwHand]

de Gaulle was French. Isn't this a redundant observation?

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Berzerker


Probably the latter, which casts doubt on the explanation I heard for de Gaulle's actions - that it was soldiers returning from a guerrilla war are much more likely to be screwed up and cause problems. The guy who said this was an author who seems to know his stuff though, he was in intel for a long time.
Sounds more like Algerian allies, when the US left Vietnam alot of allies were left behind. We did bring some back but no way we could handle all of them. The a-holes who are so quick to get us into wars dont think about stuff like that, native allies who have to live (or die) with the consequences.

you mean native allies can dick around and accept no consequences if they lose? I think that would tend to send a bad message that having a strong ally allows you carte blanche to start wars, commit atrocities, etc etc.
that is unless we started it in the first place in which case i support public castration.

[Berzerker]

There are consequences for everyone involved, from the native population to their allies who abandon them after recruiting their help.

[MRT144]

i just think its a bit naive to say to our allies that asked for our help, not the other way around, to say after we've lost "well we'll just go the united states, nice try, maybe next time" its basically saying you can call us in and half ass it and leave the country worse than how it started and walk away from the whole debacle.

if we started the conflict and enlisted groups sympathetic to our point of view then we should be solely responsible for what happens to those groups if we lose.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by MRT144
i just think its a bit naive to say to our allies that asked for our help, not the other way around, to say after we've lost "well we'll just go the united states, nice try, maybe next time" its basically saying you can call us in and half ass it and leave the country worse than how it started and walk away from the whole debacle.

if we started the conflict and enlisted groups sympathetic to our point of view then we should be solely responsible for what happens to those groups if we lose.

Things were a little bit more complex in Algeria. Algeria has become French in 1830, and became independent in 1962, i.e. 130 years later. The harkis didn't "call us in": we've been there long before their birth.

Also, French colonization was very preachy everywhere, and even more so in Algeria. France is the country that adhered the most to the "white man's burden" ideology, and as such, France underwent great length to civilize the savages. This led to immense efforts of preachy education (which were also happening on the national territory).

The Algerian situation is also specific in that Algeria was the only French population-colony in the world. As a result, there were one million Frenchmen in Algeria (on a total population of 10 million), and many Jewish Algerian natives were granted the French nationality. Algeria wasn't considered a colony, but a full-fledged French territory.

There are quite a few Algerians who were led to believe that France was indeed a force for good in their land. And that the land would be better off remaining French, as it had been for 130 years.

Some force of good we were.

[Spiffor]

The Harkis shouldn't be compared to the US allies in Vietnam. As less inept comparison would be to compare them with Israeli Arabs who feel more loyal to Israel than to the Palestinian cause (this comparison isn't perfect, but sucks much less nonetheless)

[MRT144]

yeah, well the french are bastards no matter what they do.

im just thinking of a way of looking at future situations

[Berzerker]

"Our allies" asked for help? Maybe the dictator, maybe the ruling class, maybe the French, but the war went from a nationalistic war to expel the French to a civil war with horrible consequences. The Russians invaded Afghanistan after being "asked" for help, so I'm not impressed by world powers invading little countries "to help".

if we started the conflict and enlisted groups sympathetic to our point of view then we should be solely responsible for what happens to those groups if we lose.

And when we join a small conflict turning it into a large conflict?

[MRT144]

well then we're just asking for trouble

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Spiffor
... the Harkis too (Algerians fighitng for France . . .

We need to remember that, before the rebellion, Algeria was a part of France.

It would be the equivalent -- say -- if the Confederacy had won the American Civil War, and the government in Washington abandoned its southern-born soldiers to the mercies of the South.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


We need to remember that, before the rebellion, Algeria was a part of France.

It would be the equivalent -- say -- if the Confederacy had won the American Civil War, and the government in Washington abandoned its southern-born soldiers to the mercies of the South.

a confederate south would have been a utopia that any red blooded american would have killed to live in!

[Zkribbler]

...as long as that red-blooded American didn't have a black skin.

[MRT144]

i see your point but i think that it was a different time and place and while it sucked for those left behind it may have been for the best. but with the french you can never be sure