I would have thought it would have been a much larger contingent considering how invovled they wanted to be in the ceasefire deal between the two waring sides.
Playing it safe as usual...more bark than bite. I am guessing that is the french way.
2006-08-21 21:14:01 · 12 answers · asked by Madness_75 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Why should the U.S. /U.K. send any troops? It isn't like the French have anything else to do other than eat wine and cheese and have crapes for breakfast. You would have expected a little more effort than an over sized company strength of soldiers to go in there and establish peace. Lol. Especially after how much the France wanted to get involved.
2006-08-21 21:29:07 · update #1
tough as hell*** I do read the news. The contingent yes will be 2000-15000 strong but made up of different countries. It made up by only French troops.
2006-08-21 21:43:37 · update #2
tough as hell*** I do read the news. The contingent yes will be 2000-15000 strong but made up of different countries. The French have provided 200 so far. Thats like trying to put a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
2006-08-21 21:45:13 · update #3
France....
Thank God. They have such a strong backbone I am sure all the violence will stop. They will never give up....
Sarcasm.
In honesty this is a fairly meaningless gesture, as is most of Frances international moves. They are trying to give the 20% Muslim population in France reason to back them, instead of starting riots again.
2006-08-21 21:27:48 · answer #1 · answered by Jon H 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hezbollah has real guns, and France had no idea that Israel would agree to a ceasefire this soon. As usual the French thought they could sound good to the world, without fear of actual confrontation.
Now doing what they have done for years RETREAT!
2006-08-22 05:07:30 · answer #2 · answered by mark g 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
France has sent it's Peace Keepers to Lebanon,The force is expected to grow from the current 2,000 troops to 15,000 troops under a new UN resolution. Why dont you read the news before you post?
2006-08-22 04:30:29 · answer #3 · answered by tough as hell 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
At least france has sent some and fair enough they are engineers.Who would want to be in charge of the ground force operation? Germany ( always had the best military and tactics) dont want to be.I respect France for making the first move, maybe you should.
2006-08-22 04:26:40 · answer #4 · answered by tunachunks199 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If the country is neutral like France is, than it is 200 soldiers to much and express only a good will of France to send them. their country is not like USA or UK which destroy other country and then they have to send all soldiers to that occupied country.
France rules!!! Because they never agree with USA!!!
2006-08-22 04:53:25 · answer #5 · answered by nelli 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Countries like France have been reluctant to commit troops because they fear their soldiers might get drawn into conflict if they are required to disarm Hezbollah directly.
2006-08-22 04:57:23 · answer #6 · answered by erlish 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is still more than most countries are sending.
Also, thinking of how unclear the U.N. Mandate is, who blames them? I wouldn't send in troops if I don't get a clear picture of what they are supposed to do!
2006-08-22 04:22:19 · answer #7 · answered by Mathias H 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I just hope their sundresses don't billow up over their heads when the shooting starts!
Hey Debra - why don't you do some research before you start shooting your money maker off.
We've sent plenty - including MILLIONS in humanitarian aid to BOTH countries. Why don't we wait and see who sends what when the damn troops ARRIVE and set up shop?
2006-08-22 04:19:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
... At least France sent some.. how many is the U.S. sending? And why aren't they. Could it be because they were backing Israel and now the Israeli's have told them not to help?
2006-08-22 04:20:13 · answer #9 · answered by Debra H 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nice move but short in numbers.
2006-08-22 04:19:48 · answer #10 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋