| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| France Was Ready to Send Troops to Iraq, Book Says |
| 2004-10-17 |
| Yeah. They were that close! French officials were prepared to provide as many as 15,000 troops for an invasion of Iraq before relations soured between the Bush administration and the French government over the timing of an attack, according to a new book published in France this week. The book, "Chirac Contre Bush: L'Autre Guerre" ("Chirac vs. Bush: The Other War"), reports that a French general, Jean Patrick Gaviard, visited the Pentagon to meet with Central Command staff on Dec. 16, 2002 -- three months before the war began -- to discuss a French contribution of 10,000 to 15,000 troops and to negotiate landing and docking rights for French jets and ships. French military officials were especially interested in joining in an attack, because they felt that not participating with the United States in a major war would leave French forces unprepared for future conflicts, according to Thomas Cantaloube, one of the authors. But the negotiations did not progress far before French President Jacques Chirac decided that the Americans were pushing too fast to short-circuit inspections by U.N. weapons inspectors. Chirac, the book says, was prepared to join in an attack if Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had not allowed inspectors into Iraq. "Up until December 2002, what everyone told us is that France thought Saddam Hussein was going to make a mistake and not allow inspections," Cantaloube said in an interview. After inspectors appeared to make progress in Iraq, Chirac's thinking changed, especially after polls in France showed vast opposition to an attack. White House officials declined to comment. Which I will leave up to you fine people. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #25 Lex-Do you recall how the Turks pulled the rug out from under us at the beginning of Operations Iraqi Freedom? One more false ally-we need them like we need the bubonic plague. |
| Posted by: Jules 187 2004-10-18 12:35:45 PM |
| #24 The very one. As Mrs D's link points out, aside from a few commandoes parachuting into central or west Africa, the prospect of French military assistance is a joke. The potential help of the Turks is/was far more valuable in Iraq than anything France could have offered. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-10-18 12:21:07 PM |
| #23 Do you mean this aircraft carrier, Lex? |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-10-18 12:16:16 PM |
| #22 Impossible. Recall that Chirac stated on camera that war is never justified. If war is never justified, why would they have sent troops? Where is Voltaire when you need him? |
| Posted by: Jules 187 2004-10-18 12:13:37 PM |
| #21 Whether France actually intended to send troops is less relevant to where, when and in what capacity. Mitterrand also sent a token French force to the Gulf in 1991. It remained far from the front and provided no real tactical help whatsoever. Purely a political stunt. I recall France sending its only aircraft carrier from the mediterranean base at Toulon (it's next to a big nudist colony) on maneuvers suddenly in early 2003. Don't know whether it ever came close to Suez, though. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-10-18 12:02:02 PM |
| #20 The french army is modern, well equipped and well trained. It consists of several branches; Army (includes Marines, Foreign Legion, Army Light Aviation), Navy (including naval air), Air Force (including Air Defense) and they spend 45 thousand million Euros on it a year. So yes, i think they could easily have fielded the troops. And before the uber patriots kick in its not because the US gives them money (they don't) and its not because they are worse equipped or trained than US forces (they aren't). |
| Posted by: AthiestSocialist!! 2004-10-18 12:09:33 AM |
| #19 Have they done anything decent in combat over the last 25 years? Various operations in Africa and Gulf War I. They did quite well in the latter. do they speak proper English? Probably no worse than any other non-English speaking country. They're supposed to be able to work with NATO units. are they equipped to fight alongside with anglo-saxon forces? It used to be that they were like the USMC in that they got the cast-off stuff. I gather they are pretty much equipped as any other French Infantry or Paratrooper unit. They're certainly more hard-core than any other French unit. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2004-10-17 11:55:33 PM |
| #18 France was ready to send troops to Iraq? But for which side? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-10-17 11:43:46 PM |
| #17 The US Army was attacking through a sandstorm as things were. |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2004-10-17 11:16:29 PM |
| #16 I concour, 10-15k is almost all French operational combat army , and after 1 month in field from where it will came the refresh troops and equipment? If this was true a brigade was more likely. They have send the Daguet division in 1991 streching all their forces even without cold war cuts. |
| Posted by: Anonymous6361 2004-10-17 10:58:30 PM |
| #15 Oopsie! I guess the French did disband their rapid deployment force in 1996 and just maintain headquarters for maintenence of those forces. Sorry for the error. |
| Posted by: badanov 2004-10-17 10:58:14 PM |
| #14 I'll believe it when they wrap up the turmoil in the Sudan; or did they take back their offer to help? |
| Posted by: smn 2004-10-17 10:53:16 PM |
| #13 I am not taking issue with anything except to say France does maintain a rapid reaction force. Not talking about the quality of the troops but pointing out that the level of readiness is unknown. |
| Posted by: badanov 2004-10-17 10:50:29 PM |
| #12 Remember how various French generals went public before the liberation of Iraq, claiming that the Coalition did not have enough troops and would certainly suffer terrible losses at the hands of Saddam's mighty army. Would you want such "soldiers" on your side? |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2004-10-17 10:42:51 PM |
| #11 The French do have a Rapid Deployment element, an airborne regiment and an armored corp (division) Their level of readiness is another matter, but they do maintain such a force. |
| Posted by: badanov 2004-10-17 10:39:12 PM |
| #10 Yes, I'd complain about the not-so-French Legionnaires. Have they done anything decent in combat over the last 25 years? do they speak proper English? are they equipped to fight alongside with anglo-saxon forces? |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2004-10-17 10:35:24 PM |
| #9 Should'a, would'a if they could'a, can't so they ain't. I doubt the Euro-weenie blo-fish could field 1.5k, much less than 15k, lol. |
| Posted by: Atropanthe 2004-10-17 10:34:25 PM |
| #8 "Ooh, ooh, we were going to help, but Mssr. deVillepin's little poodle ate our deployment plans. Tres tragique!" |
| Posted by: Matt 2004-10-17 10:15:16 PM |
| #7 SPoD, spot on! Pure, unadulterated fecal matter. |
| Posted by: Memesis 2004-10-17 9:33:58 PM |
| #6 hey! Where is the bull on the toilet graphic? |
| Posted by: 2b 2004-10-17 9:31:13 PM |
| #5 I call "bullshit" |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-10-17 9:29:28 PM |
| #4 Would you complain about the Legionnaires? |
| Posted by: Edward Yee 2004-10-17 9:25:17 PM |
| #3 The French do not have 10-15k well-trained and equipped soldiers that they can field in a distant war theater. They can send a few hundred soldiers at a time, usually Legionnaires at that. |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2004-10-17 9:20:26 PM |
| #2 IFF stands for Identify Friend or French? |
| Posted by: SteveS 2004-10-17 9:03:31 PM |
| #1 What would they have done? Supported the Brits? With our IFF gear turned on, the battlefield would have been a very dangerous place for the frogs. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-10-17 8:53:45 PM |