Should we defend France in the future given it's latest wimpy response?

Question

After pledging to LEAD the "peace-keeping" force between Israel and Lebanon then subsequently waffling and only promising 200 troops (even Bangladesh has pledged 2000), maybe the next time France is in trouble, we should reciprocate in kind? Pledging 200 to bail out France in the future sounds fair to me. Too many of our boys died over there to bail them out in previous wars when they were unwilling to fight for themselves.
France's latest backout proves they are more willing to appease terrorists than stand with those who have given so much to preserve her sovreignty; all while they snub their noses at us.

When France comes crying because they've been defeated yet again, I'll have little sympathy.

retired afmil...
way to pay attention!

Logan...
I'M as dumb as they come? Son, go back and learn grammar and sentence structure...then a little history. Don't come to a battle of wits completely unarmed.

Mac...
EVERY country serves their own interests...including France. Some do so more than others. Some stab their "friends" in the back because they are too cowardly to serve the greater good for their own future in lieu of a temporary, but false, "peace".
Did they not back out of a promise to "help" Lebanon after Syria threatened them? I guess they aren't after they're own interests, now are they? Let's be intellectually honest. NO country would act to help another unless it would help protect themselves in some way, no matter how insignificantly, in the future.
As far as not helping you in your future hour of need, I'd love to oblige. Unfortunately, someday you WILL cry out to the "big, bad, ugly Americans" and we will save you yet again...
most likely from your women wearing burquas (sp?) by force or speaking Arabic instead of German.

oops...
used the wrong form of "their" in the 2nd paragraph...don't crucify me.

Answer 1

we should not help France, because they are ungrateful for us saving them in both world wars, (the first one with mostly supplies, second with troops and supplies), and for going in to try to fix the mess they caused in Vietnam.

Answer 2

When the Kaiser crossed into Belgium to pre-emptively attack France before they came to the aid of their Russian allies, the only help that came was an ill equiped British force of regular soldiers that had never known anything but suippressing the "natives" throughout the Empire. With a substantial industrial and population advantage it was figured the troops of the German Empire would be in Paris in days. Somehow the French pretty much alone managed to hold them back until the British first started arriving en masse in the spring of 1915. It took yet another two years for the United States to engage in April 1917 and another six plus months for any real military presence to appear. Althroughout that time the United States waffled and questioned the value of the war. Throughout American society there was voices that even spoke up for joining sides with the Germans. Despite all that there was no shortage of American interest in making money off the affair by selling munitions and supplies at extremely inflated wartime prices and lecturing the European powers on how they chose to solve their problems. In the end, the US, despite being represented by a smaller army in the field and having paid less in casualties than even Canada (which at the time had less than one tenth the populations of the US) demanded a primary role in re-defining the world order when negotiations started in Versailles.

IT REALLY SUCKS THAT THE SHOE IS ON THE OTHER FOOT NOW DOESN'T IT!

I don't condone France's choices in this matter. Just don't act like America's sh*t don't stink.

Answer 3

Well... There are already approx 1900 French soldiers in Lebanon.
And I think the 200 soldiers (Yeah, that's disappointing, after the involvement of French diplomacy) are temporary, many countries want the mandate, composition, mission of the international force... to be clear before sending their soldiers.

Italy announced to be able to send 3000 soldiers, but want all the rules to be precisely defined by the United Nations before sending them. Same for Spain (both your allies in Iraq war, no ?), Egypt, Belgium, Morocco, Poland, New Zealand, Turkey, Greece, China, and Portugal... Germany doesn't even want to send military troops at all. Maybe you consider also them as little uninteresting wimpy nations ??

This area has been at war or at least under tension since many years, not to mention Arabs hate everything that can represent a Western form of oppression, and the Lebanese govt itself, doesn't want to disarm Hezbollah...

And a massive troop sending against these kind of guerilla warriors is maybe not very great in terms of results (remember Vietnam ? remember the big Tsahal army failed to destroy Hezbollah and unwillingly gave them a "heroic resistant" status ?)

Huh, and by the away, there were Islamic terrorist attacks in France before USA (in the 90s in French subways, by an Algerian-islamist organization). And France is in Afghanistan involved with USA...

French bashing is a bit "out of fashion" trend, don't you think so ?

Answer 4

Next time France needs America we should send them Thousands of White flags attached to sticks: The French have never entered a war they didn't surrendor in.

Answer 5

Its because Syrian talked to them and said if they send a lot of support that terrorists would attack them in Lebanon. So France surrendered Whats new.

Answer 6

France would have been better off under German control.
France seem to have lost it's balls after Napoleon Bonaparte lost power. Premier Chirac has not balls!

Answer 7

I'm with you. I have zero sympathy and am still wondering why the world gives France so much attention and importance. It seems to be just above third-world status anyway!!

Answer 8

Boy Oh, boy, you're as dumb as they come,
try to look for the French Foreign Legion, and
you'll get the answer for your stupid question,
they only need 200, coz that's all they really need

Answer 9

I wouldn't defend france from a bucket of water or bar of soap. Sorry so graphic frenchies I know you hate that stuff.

Answer 10

Please PLEASE spare us your "help".The damage you did through Europe trying to "liberate" it ,was ten times worst than what the Germans did in BOTH World wars.And i am not counting the damage Germany suffered.And as for the French "being unwilling to fight for themselves" European history is a bit more complicated than cowboys and Indians.
Anyway you don't "help" ,you only serve your interests as a country.