# France stepping to the plate in Afghanistan?



## McG (7 Feb 2008)

This could be good news:


> France may send troops to southern Afghanistan
> Updated Thu. Feb. 7 2008 8:49 PM ET
> CTV.ca News Staff
> 
> ...


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080207/mackay_troops_080207/20080207?hub=TopStories


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Feb 2008)

If France sends its additional troops to anywhere but the South will it make any difference?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (8 Feb 2008)

> I really wouldn't agree that only four countries are fighting," he said. "I think if you're Polish you wouldn't appreciate that. I think if you're Danish, Estonian, Romanian or Australian you wouldn't appreciate that because they're all fighting down in the south."
> 
> And France and Germany are among countries who have indicated they are willing to send troops to the south in an emergency situation, he said.
> 
> Appathurai said there are actually 11 countries involved in the south, and the total number of forces in the region has increased by 10,000 in the past year alone.



I disagree with NATO's talking head - "involved" hardly equals fighting.  Aside from the Danes (who seem to be capable of "doing business" in a variety of theatres) and the Aussie SF, I would hard pressed to describe any real combat operations undertaken by the other nine countries cited by NATO (or by the Dutch and Romanians for that matter).

NATO is loaded with flag-hoisters looking to cash in politically by "participating" in the mission.  A company or less of "combat" troops surged in for a very limited period hardly contributes to overall mission success.  I'll ask the question I've asked before:  when is a German, Italian, Spanish, Turkish or French battle group deploying to RC(S) to undertake sustained operations?  Oh yeah....  :

If the French actually reposition south, I'm actually quite confident that they'll be effective.  It is the political will France lacks.  As for the rest of the Eurotrash, I've stated my opinion often enough.


----------



## AIC_2K5 (8 Feb 2008)

They might be sending them to the south.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (8 Feb 2008)

Thanks Teddy that's what I was implying.  You've stated it more eloquent then I.

Bubbles what makes you think that?


----------



## Lard of the Dance (8 Feb 2008)

Quite simply, we've stepped up to a much bigger plate than most. Our NATO "allies" chose their well  planned seats at the table, to save face, not show force. If this does continue, or the heel dragging by our "allies" is prolonged then the membership in NATO that we should question isn't ours but that of France and Germany. BTW, kudos to Holland, Poland and the UK.


----------



## geo (8 Feb 2008)

Lard of the dance

Gotta remember that we got into this pretty pickle because we were probably the last country to choose an Afghan province.  If we had been one of the 1st up to the place, then it might have been someone else asking Canada to put additional troops into the hot seat.

Between 1967 and 1995, Canada's contribution to NATO was a little bit on the thin side - to the embarassment of most members of our military.


----------



## OkotoksRookie (8 Feb 2008)

Lone Wolf Quagmire said:
			
		

> Bubbles what makes you think that?


1st line they hint to it.


> Senior Canadian officials are headed to France to negotiate the details of a plan to augment Canadian troops with French soldiers in southern Afghanistan.





			
				geo said:
			
		

> Gotta remember that we got into this pretty pickle because we were probably the last country to choose an Afghan province.  If we had been one of the 1st up to the place, then it might have been someone else asking Canada to put additional troops into the hot seat.



One would like to believe you would be wrong geo, but I somehow doubt you are...


----------



## Blakey (8 Feb 2008)

Soooo, an announcement to be made at the Bucharest Summit ???
It would seem that France will indeed be helping Canada, all that remains to be seen is, in what capacity?
http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=cbc047f6-7b67-43b8-9537-2c1b4623ba97


> "I said that we would help Canada," Mr. Morin said, adding that French President Nicolas Sarkozy had "extraordinary relations" with Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
> 
> "And I indicated to him that all this must be done as part of a global reflection on the reorganization of NATO forces," Mr. Morin said.  *"If I had a message to address to Canadian public opinion, it's to have a little bit of patiencesince late March is close to early April, and early April is the time of the Bucharest summit.*"



http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/301691


> "Give it a few more days and it necessarily wouldn't be a bad thing," Morin added.



http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=cbc047f6-7b67-43b8-9537-2c1b4623ba97


> French Defence Minister Hervé Morin indicated after a meeting with Canadian Defence Minister Peter MacKay that France would come to Canada's assistance, *although he played down reports that 700 paratroopers could be deployed to help the effort in Kandahar*.



EDIT: I grabbed this from another thread.
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/70640.0.html


			
				DavidAkin said:
			
		

> The Afghanistan motion will be voted on at the end of March. It will be the third and final confidence vote of what will likely be at least three confidence votes in March.


 Does anyone else see a correlation between these two time frames (announcement from France)?, or should I just wander off to the padded room?


----------



## Eggy (10 Feb 2008)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> I disagree with NATO's talking head - "involved" hardly equals fighting.  Aside from the Danes (who seem to be capable of "doing business" in a variety of theatres) and the Aussie SF, I would hard pressed to describe any real combat operations undertaken by the other nine countries cited by NATO (*or by the Dutch* and Romanians for that matter).


Is this a joke? Maybe you need to inform yourself alittle better.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (10 Feb 2008)

Care to enlighten us then there empty profile poster?


----------



## Gimpy (10 Feb 2008)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Care to enlighten us then there empty profile poster?



He could of said it a little more eloquently, but I think he took issue with Mr. Ruxpin saying that the Dutch haven't been in any real combat operations, when they have been. For example the Battle of Chora


----------



## Eggy (10 Feb 2008)

Not just Chora. Operation Spin Gahr was another combat operation and there have been several smaller scale operations in Uruzgan (mainly deh rawod district) as well. There is barely any international media coverage though, unless Dutch KIA are reported.


----------



## TN2IC (10 Feb 2008)

Eggy said:
			
		

> Not just Chora. Operation Spin Gahr was another combat operation and there have been several smaller scale operations in Uruzgan (mainly deh rawod district) as well. There is barely any international media coverage though, unless Dutch KIA are reported.



Mostly that's what the media feeds onto these days.


----------



## FascistLibertarian (10 Feb 2008)

People are sometimes too hard of the French.
They have a lot more international commitments than Canada does.
We have everything we can send in A-Stan, France doesnt.

That being said, I hope they send more troops, after all since they are French troops, they would get along great with the Quebecers. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (10 Feb 2008)

My opinion _vis a vis_ the Dutch is based on my previous experience (in Afghanistan but _not in RC(S)_) and by multiple reports from those with first hand knowledge working with and for them when they had command in RC (S).  I have indirect (ie: second-hand) sources from another country operating in Uruzgan as well.  I'm quite well informed, thank you.  Don't like it?  Not much I can do...it's an opinion and only that.

As for the French, I'm quite sure the Paras or one of the FFL battalions would acquit themselves quite well.


----------



## honestyrules (10 Feb 2008)

I think one of the reasons behind asking the French to step up to the plate (from our point of view), would be to try to change Quebecer"s opinion on our contribution to the war in AFG. They are the most "against it" of Canadians, I think and to have the French joining in COULD change their opnion a bit.
Just a thought...


----------



## George Wallace (10 Feb 2008)

delavan said:
			
		

> I think one of the reasons behind asking the French to step up to the plate (from our point of view), would be to try to change Quebecer"s opinion on our contribution to the war in AFG. They are the most "against it" of Canadians, I think and to have the French joining in COULD change their opnion a bit.
> Just a thought...



I think you are really stretching it there and still not far enough to grasp the straws.  That is highly unlikely, in my eyes.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (10 Feb 2008)

It is MY OPINION that the Dutch troops would do fine.  It is the contraints imposed on them by their government that doesn't allow their Apaches to break the 3000 ft ceiling for ground support (while the Americans get as low as required) and allowing their troops to operate much in RC south.


----------



## GAP (12 Feb 2008)

France to announce Afghanistan plan in April
Last Updated: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 | 6:12 PM ET  CBC News 
Article Link

France will not announce a decision on whether to offer additional troops to help Canadian soldiers in southern Afghanistan until April, according to French diplomats.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy is expected to announce a decision on whether his country will send troops to southern Afghanistan in April.
(Francois Mori/Associated Press) 
Daniel Jouanneau, France's ambassador to Ottawa, said French President Nicolas Sarkozy is considering a number of options and will announce his final decision at a NATO summit in Bucharest, scheduled for April 2-4.

Deploying French soldiers to southern Afghanistan's Kandahar region, where 2,500 Canadian troops are already stationed, is just one of a number of possibilities for the western European nation.
More on link


----------



## Mike Baker (26 Feb 2008)

France to send more troops to Afghanistan: report



> France to send more troops to Afghanistan: report
> Updated Tue. Feb. 26 2008 12:57 PM ET
> 
> CTV.ca News Staff
> ...


----------



## Yrys (26 Feb 2008)

For anyone curious,

Le monde article, french newspaper

La France va accroître son effort militaire en Afghanistan

Radio-Canada

Lors du prochain sommet de l'OTAN, en avril à Bucarest, le président français, Nicolas Sarkozy, devrait annoncer l'envoi de plusieurs centaines de soldats en Afghanistan, plus précisément dans les zones de combat.


----------



## GAP (4 Mar 2008)

French troop plans for Afghanistan
 Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Article Link

The latest news coming from French officials (and attentively reported by Canadian media) is that France is very likely to answer the Canadian and American demand for more troops in Afghanistan, though the exact manner of this support remains to be set in stone. Everything should become clear at the NATO Bucharest summit on April 2-4. According to a spokeswoman for the Foreign Ministry today:

"We have certainly heard the call of Canada. As I said to you, we are in the process of preparing a decision that will be announced in Bucharest."

Kouchner also added today that he "will express the need for the alliance to develop a true strategy in Afghanistan." If this is more than just diplomatic stalling it should be welcomed. While the current strategy is hampered by a need for more boots on the ground, it is still far from success after years of growing casualties and Taliban resurgence.

Last week Le Monde reported that Sarkozy is considering sending more troops to the east, where American efforts are focused, and not to the south, where Canada is feeling the heat. France denies that this is out of a desire not to play second-fiddle to the Canadians:

...one official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said France's interest in locating more troops in the east has far more to do with operational and logistical issues and less to do with enhancing French prestige...He also confirmed that an expanded French role in the east would liberate American soldiers there to move south to help the Canadians.

If this is indeed the case, a final offer will likely be decided on by tomorrow. In two days Kouchner meets Canadian Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier at a separate NATO session in Brussels. It would be very ungentleman-like of him to come to those in need without aid...and I don't believe a sack of rice will do in this situation.
More on link


----------



## Panzer Grenadier (4 Mar 2008)

If they (France) do send troops to replace US troops, in the east, to allow US troops to move south, that would be a good start.  Better than nothing at all.


----------



## Mike Baker (4 Mar 2008)

Panzer Grenadier said:
			
		

> If they (France) do send troops to replace US troops, in the east, to allow US troops to move south, that would be a good start.  Better than nothing at all.


Very much better, indeed.


----------



## midget-boyd91 (4 Mar 2008)

Panzer Grenadier said:
			
		

> If they (France) do send troops to replace US troops, in the east, to allow US troops to move south, that would be a good start.  Better than nothing at all.



France sends troops to East Afghanistan so that U.S forces currently in the east can assist in the south. I can't help but wonder why France doesn't send troops to the south rather than having the U.S move.

Midget


----------



## Mike Baker (4 Mar 2008)

uncle-midget-boyd said:
			
		

> France sends troops to East Afghanistan so that U.S forces currently in the east can assist in the south. I can't help but wonder why France doesn't send troops to the south rather than having the U.S move.
> 
> Midget


Probably thinks it would be too costly(i.e. troop loss).


----------



## geo (4 Mar 2008)

...why would France move troops to Eastern Afghanistan?... so no French troops would be under Cdn or US Command - but under unified French command.
... If the US troops come into Kandahar Province... would they be put under effective Canadian Operational command?  Or would our AOR be reduced in size as the US shifts over for the french?


----------



## McG (4 Mar 2008)

> France pushing for focused NATO front against Taliban
> Peter O'Neil - Europe Correspondent ,  Canwest News Service
> Published: Tuesday, March 04, 2008
> 
> ...


http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=acfd4a90-1503-4386-a3cf-d3f909bfe4ba&k=58288


----------



## GAP (11 Apr 2008)

France says it will have 3,000 troops in Afghanistan
Reuters April 11, 2008 at 6:26 AM EDT
Article Link

DUSHANBE, TAJIKISTAN — French troops operating in Afghanistan will number about 3,000, France's Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said on Friday on a visit to the central Asian state of Tajikistan.

“I cannot give you an exact figure, because the military must make their own decision, but I can tell you that about 3,000 French troops will be placed in Afghanistan,” Mr. Kouchner said, speaking through an interpreter.

“This is the will of our President and his decision was not spontaneous. He sent a letter to all coalition members to inform them about it.”

President Nicolas Sarkozy announced this month France would dispatch up to 1,000 extra troops to Afghanistan. If the total contingent is to reach 3,000, that could indicate Paris is sending more new troops than initially thought.
More on link


----------



## geo (11 Apr 2008)

Who knew we'd be getting some fresh air out of France?

A French President who is a team player?.... who would have thought we'd ever see the day?


----------



## Kirkhill (11 Apr 2008)

Good on Sarkozy right enough.   He has an uphill battle at home though.  That makes it all the more impressive as a decision.


----------

