Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html en-gb 30 Sat 23 Aug 2014 10:50:44 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html london Stock Exchange http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=99#comment794 sounds like a clear decision in not making any decision in times of war where the channels of decision must be clear and precise? Asking the French rioting students or socialist party to influence military decisions in the UK is idiotic thinking!This is of course a rerun of the invasion of France in WW2. Thu 04 Nov 2010 12:23:33 GMT+1 The Man From Utopia http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=99#comment793 678. At 10:16am on 03 Nov 2010, sonnybono wrote:I think this is a great idea, it's a counterbalance to US influence in UK foreign policy. The French were sensible enough not to go to war in Iraq. Enough said.For a Scot I am delighted at this, since the French have been our allies for over 800 years. The auld alliance continues... -------------------------------------------------------------------------It was never an alliance of equals though, was it? Thu 04 Nov 2010 12:20:45 GMT+1 Trendy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=99#comment792 Laine you will have to find out what John Nott is talking about because it was the Belgians who sent a Sqn of Mirages to an RAF Station for training ! I know, I was there ! I didn't see any Super-Etendard aircraft at all. The Belgians kept very quiet about it at the time, they just helped. Maybe because the aircraft were French, it was assumed that they came from the French Airforce.Anyway I still think that IF we should join forces with any foreign country, France would be a good choice. We should have asked how the Commonwealth countries feel about it though because they have been a far better support to us than the rest of the world's countries put together (including the USA) ! and we would be in deep s*** if we lost them ! Don't the politicians ever use their brains and think a little into the future ? Thu 04 Nov 2010 12:06:43 GMT+1 The Bloke http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=99#comment791 //788. At 10:11am on 04 Nov 2010, Some Guy wrote:"781. At 07:58am on 04 Nov 2010, Len Day wrote:It's the only way to go. I say onwards & upwards to a United States of Europe!"Yep I agree, and this as an Englishman who can trace his family back 500 years in the same location, who where yeomen farmers and carpenters and knowing that my direct ancestors down the paternal line fought and died in just about every conflict this country has had in that time.//I disagree. I'm as English as you, but I also spend a lot of time in mainland Europe and speak several European languages fluently.But I am absolutely against a United States of Europe. It's an idea with its future very firmly in the past, and now really popular only among the older generation, and the corrupt EU élite.Younger Europeans don't really seem, by and large, particularly enamoured of the EU.That being said, I am for European defence cooperation. Most of us have been in Nato for a couple of generations together, and we've already got the Eurofighter. Not the best example in some ways, admittedly.But it does seem to make sense for there to be a Euro-fighter, Euro-frigate, Euro-aircraft carrier, Euro-tank, along the same lines as Airbus.West European nations are long term allies,which need defence and an defence industry. None of us is really big enough to do that on our own, so we should cooperate on defence equipment. Thu 04 Nov 2010 12:03:05 GMT+1 laine http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=99#comment790 777. At 03:12am on 04 Nov 2010, effinuts wrote:734. At 2:17pm on 03 Nov 2010, laine wrote: "STOP TO LIE ABOUT FRANCE ! it s a pity that english poeple always lies about france , we should to do this deal with germany as usual and not with england ...you ll never change in UK ."----------------------Well, now you people have upset the French! So it's not just America that you make up lies about, huh? I admit, it's funny to joke about France waiving the "white flag" and all, but you people have made up lies about them providing assistance to your enemy.DON T WORRY I M NOT SO UPSET LOL . this deal is only for several scientist who will do the fiesta in their labratory with a lot of pc , laser , megatons , molecular ....you imagine the fiesta ! i just hope that the champagne will be french ...and the music english ! about william the conqueror ,guillaume le conquérant that 's right he was not french but NORMAND ! and i know it i m in the high normandy at rouen .see you for the next holidays in the trafic jam of rouen ! Thu 04 Nov 2010 11:43:29 GMT+1 Sue Denim http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=99#comment789 "Should Britain and France share defence strategy?"I don't think the British Army really wants or needs to know how to turn tail and flee. Thu 04 Nov 2010 11:33:38 GMT+1 PlanetEnglish http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=99#comment788 Britain indeed has no permanent enemies, only permanent interests.Dave & Nick want to go to bed with Napoleon & Hitler now.As they will one day surely go to bed with Lenin & Mao.Perhaps one day with Alqaeda & Osama, as well.Why cant we as the winning side stay with USA & The Commonwealth - that we created. Thu 04 Nov 2010 10:26:42 GMT+1 Some Guy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=98#comment787 "781. At 07:58am on 04 Nov 2010, Len Day wrote:It's the only way to go. I say onwards & upwards to a United States of Europe!"Yep I agree, and this as an Englishman who can trace his family back 500 years in the same location, who where yeomen farmers and carpenters and knowing that my direct ancestors down the paternal line fought and died in just about every conflict this country has had in that time.(including being striped of land for being on the wrong side of the civil war)It's time Europe United, we in the west have had it far to good for far to long... the world is starting to re-balance, and there is only one way we are going and that is down... It needs to happen if the billions of ultra poor in this world start to have their living standards raised.To offer the best protection from a runaway landslide and to retain most of the standard of living we currently enjoy, I think a United States of Europe is necessary for future prosperity and protection.We don't have an empire any more, it is unlikely we could even fight a Falklands type conflict on our own any more, France has been a strong ally for a long time now, I wish some of these "daily mail readers" would get over themselves already so we can move on. Thu 04 Nov 2010 10:11:42 GMT+1 Positive Thinker http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=98#comment786 Dreaming of an A-bomb-free world is ridiculous. What is important in all these decisions is that we (the EU) keep a step ahead of our potential enemies, and avoid total dependance on the US. This is the only realistic way to maintain some degree of world balance. The EU must strive to be the voice of reason in this insane "world order"... Thu 04 Nov 2010 10:09:11 GMT+1 BradyFox http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=98#comment785 I feel that this government is tearing this country to pieces. How on earth can they say the only threats we face is from terrorism. It's utter nonsense. Terrorism is the buzz word of the decade. And has been used to justify everything from spending billions on defense to cutting billions from defense. It's the same excuse!!!!The reality is that most of the terrorist attacks are carried out by people like David Copeland or small groups of friends who want to think they have some Al-Qaeda link, but they don't. How many Islamic extremist attacks has this country actually had? The real threat is an unstable Europe.With Europe in the age of austerity, and when people are beginning to hate their governments, and those that don't will when the real effect of the cuts hit next year. With southern Europe countries massively unstable, all it takes is for just one European country to elect the wrong type of government. It's happened before and it will undoubtedly happen again. This government has sold it's brains long long ago. Thu 04 Nov 2010 09:57:13 GMT+1 The Bloke http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=98#comment784 //104. At 09:48am on 02 Nov 2010, Icebloo wrote:This is just two extremist right wing governments clinging to each other for help because both are way out of their depths and need to be voted out of power.//They're not 'extreme right wing'. And they will be voted out of power, if that's what their electorates want. Thu 04 Nov 2010 09:28:07 GMT+1 panchopablo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=98#comment783 781. At 07:58am on 04 Nov 2010, Len Day wrote:"It's the only way to go. I say onwards & upwards to a United States of Europe!."No,non,nein. Thu 04 Nov 2010 08:44:57 GMT+1 David Horton http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=98#comment782 712. At 12:39pm on 03 Nov 2010, Some Guy wrote:I think it's a good thing... I am 30 and I hope that most of the anti-French sentiments are coming from the older generations, and therefore will be in decline or from the chavs that never really have a valid option on anything outside X-factor.As someone who is involved with the internet and computer games for a living, there is a definite trend for the younger generations to consider themselves European over and above being English, French or German etc.Especially as soon as you have competitions involving country's outside the EU, then you find EU citizens pulling together like squabbling siblings facing someone from outside the family.On-line in some communities you could be fooled into thinking we already have an EU superstate.-sigh-Where to start?In the real world, outside the fantasy world of internet gaming there are real people who do real things. These people are doing something that is colloquially known as 'living'. Rather than spend all their time glued to their Quad SLI, multi core, 22" 1080, hyper cooled computer; these people are frequently to be found in a place called 'the world'.In 'the world', real things happen. People use their legs for walking (not a joystick), things cost money (you don't click on a pulsing gold star for '1up's) and most importantly you can only be killed once (outrageous). Go to Tyne Cott and see for yourself what happens when you haven't a reset button.With this in mind, turn off your silly games and do some research. The constant in history is that your neighbours are the ones most likely to attack you. We have been allies and enemies of every single European (and most world) countries with the exception of those created recently. The marked exceptions to this are our oldest allies, Portugal. We have been friendly with them since 1139 when it became an independent kingdom, and have been allies since 1387.So with the exception of Portugal, England's relationship with Europe has been a litany of broken treaties, wars, alliances and trade disputes.The gaming community that you speak of that you assert considers itself to be European? Where are the figures? There are none. Your assertion is wholly anecdotal. So my point is this. Any English person who considers him or herself to be European, is either a dunce at history or a blinkered & blithe optimist.If I may:Aldous Huxley "That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history."George Santayana"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."Cicero"To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child." Norman Cousins"History is a vast early warning system."I love Europe and travel there frequently. I am not anti Europe per se, but I will always be English, never European. To my mind, any English person who chooses to give up his or her birthright, doesn't deserve to have it in the first place.And that means keeping our defence capability entirely and completely under the control of the democratically elected government at Westminster.Not Paris and certainly not Brussels. Thu 04 Nov 2010 08:31:51 GMT+1 Graham Harris Graham http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=98#comment781 Britain is a French word and since the English are fond of mixing up England & Britain as if they were the same place, then it should be quite comfortable for England to merge it's increasingly ineffective armed forces with the French.This is another reason for marching towards the re-independence for Scotland which we foolishly gave up in 1707.England & France can continue to become dependent on each other for all sorts of pointless bureaucracy & Scotland can free itself from the broken & corrupt Westminster shackles & manage it's resource rich assets without having to prop up a costly, pointless nuclear deterrent that England & France seem desperate to cling on to.So go on England, er Britain, sign up to French collaberation. Scotland shall have a good chuckle wathcing English soldiers donning berets when they can't afford proper helmets any more. Thu 04 Nov 2010 08:27:42 GMT+1 Len Day http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=98#comment780 It's the only way to go. I say onwards & upwards to a United States of Europe! Thu 04 Nov 2010 07:58:30 GMT+1 Neil Probert http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=97#comment779 Had Britain cooperated with France on military projects in the past, the U.K. may perhaps still have a credible aerospace industry, instead of flogging all the best ideas off to their so-called 'special friends' for peanuts. Like the harrier, for example. Thu 04 Nov 2010 07:46:00 GMT+1 panchopablo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=97#comment778 772. At 11:32pm on 03 Nov 2010, Adrian Swall wrote:, Kelvin wrote:How can the English and French work together. The two side can't even communicate properly without making mistakes. "Speak for youself. I'm educated enough to speak a few languages. Don't assume everyone else is as illeducated as you."Unless you are member of H.M.Armed forces and will be one those who communicate with French allies your snotty arrogant comment means nothing. Thu 04 Nov 2010 07:33:22 GMT+1 Chris http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=97#comment777 Definately not. Whats the point of sharing a defence strategy with a country whose only military victory comes form the French Civil War, which they also lost! Thu 04 Nov 2010 07:17:48 GMT+1 kevooo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=97#comment776 734. At 2:17pm on 03 Nov 2010, laine wrote: "STOP TO LIE ABOUT FRANCE ! it s a pity that english poeple always lies about france , we should to do this deal with germany as usual and not with england ...you ll never change in UK ."----------------------Well, now you people have upset the French! So it's not just America that you make up lies about, huh? I admit, it's funny to joke about France waiving the "white flag" and all, but you people have made up lies about them providing assistance to your enemy. Thu 04 Nov 2010 03:12:58 GMT+1 Jonn http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=97#comment775 Truly this has to be the funniest HYS ever. Thank-you BBC.Page after page of frothing at the mouth "daily-mail readers" who don't want a Franco-british armed forces as the basis for an inevitable future European army of the soon to be achieved United States of Europe. And - and this is the really funny bit - still trying to blame it all on Labour.Well, take a look at who's actually giving it to you - you all voted for this. So, shouldn't you all be really happy ? Thu 04 Nov 2010 01:09:28 GMT+1 Icebloo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=97#comment774 Maybe Cameron and Clegg could move to France if they like it so much ? That would make most people happy. It's a win-win situation ! Thu 04 Nov 2010 00:47:26 GMT+1 Ralphie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=97#comment773 705. At 12:14pm on 03 Nov 2010, reenie53110 wrote:Why not let them do with like with everything else and outsource to China. China and Russia must be rolling on the floor laughing at all of this.///Laughing at 2 considerable powers agreeing to military cooperation? Why would they laugh at that? Are they stupid? Wed 03 Nov 2010 23:37:35 GMT+1 Ralphie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=97#comment772 759. At 8:27pm on 03 Nov 2010, ProudEnglishman wrote:It is also embarrassing that not 100 years ago you would be told you were mad if you proposed this idea.///That's called progress,which is something that made this country great in the past. Wed 03 Nov 2010 23:34:07 GMT+1 Adrian Swall http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=96#comment771 , Kelvin wrote:How can the English and French work together. The two side can't even communicate properly without making mistakes. Speak for youself. I'm educated enough to speak a few languages. Don't assume everyone else is as illeducated as you. Wed 03 Nov 2010 23:32:30 GMT+1 Icebloo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=96#comment770 758. At 8:19pm on 03 Nov 2010, ProudEnglishman wrote:I think that for as long as England has been a country, we have fought to keep our neighbours out. This is just a conservative ploy to save money. It is embarrassing that we have to use another country's military to bolster our own. If we need military then why don't we ask our American "friends" who are already stationed here to help out. I'm sure they would be delighted to extend their influence even further.Unfortunately Americans only help themselves. They didn't "help" us in the war - we PAID them to work for us. We were still paying off that debt until about 5 years ago. It's all about the money with the USA. We can never rely on them to help us. Wed 03 Nov 2010 22:14:12 GMT+1 Icebloo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=96#comment769 Can we please have a new election this month ? Wed 03 Nov 2010 22:12:08 GMT+1 leoRoverman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=96#comment768 Teedoff no 366, I suppose that its quite understandable that the Scots would make yet another pact with the French. They always ran away there when they were beaten c 1745 and used french alliances to support Henry VII, Edward IV- you get my drift. Actually we English have had no sovreignty since 1066. In fact given the french desire to take Britain off the Normans I suppose you could call it the extra national French civil war. I work with French people as well and I can tell you that many have no liking for this any more than we do. Just remember this argument when the next election is being faught and any Plonker who votes Labour should be offered the possibility of doing a few weeks with the French foreign Legion. Why? because Labour got us into this mess.ENGLISH PARLIAMENT NOW!!! Wed 03 Nov 2010 22:07:42 GMT+1 Total Mass Retain http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=96#comment767 756. At 7:27pm on 03 Nov 2010, ian cheese wrote:French Victories. We can forget the Napoleanic battles because Napolean was a Corsican Italian, a gangster of his day, rather like Al Capone. And what 'appened to'im?Sure, and Wellington was Irish, Willian III Dutch and George II (last British monarch to lead troops into battle) German Wed 03 Nov 2010 22:02:34 GMT+1 Total Mass Retain http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=96#comment766 753. At 6:03pm on 03 Nov 2010, sirbarrbarr wrote:5.15 03/11/2010Comnios list of French battle wins is a bit off beam.1942 - This was an orderly retreat. 1809 - this was won by a coalition of three armies - just one of them French1690 - this was a battle between the French colony of New France and a New England colony. A bit much to say US.1066 - William the Conquerer was not French.Not much left is there ?Wellington's victories in Spain were coalitions and Waterloo was a coalition of Dutch, Belgian, German and Prussians. Malborough's victories against Louis XIV were also coalitions. During the period 1689-1815, Britian only acted against France in coalition with other European states and France also tended to build coalitions to fight wars. However, Napoleon's armies managed to conquer most of Europe in a 15 year period. To Comnios' list I could add Ulm (1805), Marengo, Borodino (1812) and many others. Napoleon also had several victories against the allies in the short period leading up to Waterloo. He nearly split the allies and defeated Wellington.One could also add the Battle of Yorktown: 1781. This was a French victory attributed to the USA, but they could not have beaten Britain without French help.However, the battle of Verdun (1916) was a victory for France against Germany but at the cost of half a million French casualties (and at least that number of Germans). A visit to Verdun is a humbling experience even today and anyone accusing the French of cowardice or weakness should visit there and ask themselves the question again. Wed 03 Nov 2010 21:59:07 GMT+1 comnios http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=96#comment765 i'll fight and die with US forces - not with the frenchFunny thing that the posts of service members I read here are all in favor of fighting with French army, while those of tabloids fed linvingroom rambos are about French surrendering... Wed 03 Nov 2010 21:01:29 GMT+1 comnios http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=96#comment764 The TWO biggest economys in the world are on the brink of COLLAPSE, thats a FACT, no matter how things are shuffled around to suggest that UK is ok, thats the REAL danger we are facing.Actually, the European Union is the biggest economy of the world and is far from collapsing.... Wed 03 Nov 2010 20:52:18 GMT+1 ProudEnglishman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=95#comment763 igloomansion wrote: I AM CANADIAN. If you are Canadian then it is not as much a worry for you than it is for a Brit who is sandwiched between trigger-happy USA and the equally dangerous Russians. And the idea of Europe uniting is absurd. The French and Germans have a historical dislike for starters and frankly, I don't want our country to be drawn into European politics because honestly, they don't care what we think. We are just "Perfidious Albion". Wed 03 Nov 2010 20:52:15 GMT+1 ProudEnglishman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=95#comment762 Another thing i have noticed is that a lot of the people that have agreed with this ahve stated that at one time they were servicemen/women. Doesn't that say something about our armed forces? Wed 03 Nov 2010 20:38:51 GMT+1 ProudEnglishman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=95#comment761 I like the quote: nationalism is the way backwards. Look at a map of Europe 200 years ago, and look at one now. You can see a lot more countries because of nationalism. And the nationality of Arthur Wellesley is usually called Anglo-Irish to be precise. Wed 03 Nov 2010 20:30:34 GMT+1 MacTurk http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=95#comment760 Typical - the first comment on a BILATERAL TREATY between Britain and France attacks something that did NOT happen; a European defence arrangement. It never ceases to amaze me how any topic, no matter how esoteric, can somehow be twisted to fit the anti-EU view. I was going to use the phrase "world view", but I realised that this was too broad a perspective.To go back to the topic, and getting away from all the jingoistic nonsense, I think the issue is quite simple. Is anyone in Britain(or France) willing to spend the money and time required for the fantasy armed forces desired? As far as I can see, the answer is a resounding "No". That being the case, how do you maximise your military power within the limits of the money available? And the answer is? Mmmmm, possibly exploring cooperation with the nearest comparable country in the EU, in terms of military capability, complementarity, and size. Which would be? France, because Germany is handicapped by its constitution and history, whereas France has, to quote General Wesley Clark, the most expeditionary army in Europe.In this case, as Benjamin Franklin might have put it, "The British and French Armed Forces will either hang together, or they will assuredly be hung out to dry individually".By the way, the French have got an independent nuclear deterrent, the British have a sort of leasing arrangement for an American system. Wed 03 Nov 2010 20:28:55 GMT+1 comnios http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=95#comment759 Perhaps they are remembering an idealised past that never quite existed in the way that they think it did. However, that falls a long way short of proving that those values were not present in the American psyche or reflected in their society.Maybe American should start to learn Histiry, study the mindset of their Founding Father at the time, and they will understand their constitution better.Franklin was a greta friend of France and came seek our help durin the Independence war.Jefferson said: Every man has two countries; its own and France.Tea baggers are just a bunch of ignorant nuts pretending coming back to roots they all ignore Wed 03 Nov 2010 20:28:21 GMT+1 ProudEnglishman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=95#comment758 It is also embarrassing that not 100 years ago you would be told you were mad if you proposed this idea. Wed 03 Nov 2010 20:27:20 GMT+1 ProudEnglishman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=95#comment757 I think that for as long as England has been a country, we have fought to keep our neighbours out. This is just a conservative ploy to save money. It is embarrassing that we have to use another country's military to bolster our own. If we need military then why don't we ask our American "friends" who are already stationed here to help out. I'm sure they would be delighted to extend their influence even further. Wed 03 Nov 2010 20:19:19 GMT+1 Ralphie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=95#comment756 748. At 4:51pm on 03 Nov 2010, mintman60 wrote:If one thing comes out of this forum it is how poor our grasp of history is.///Yes, and these people are allowed to vote. I'd let the next elections coincide with some important football games and offer everybody free tickets. Most can't tell difference anyway,but at football game at least they'd do less damage. Wed 03 Nov 2010 19:45:56 GMT+1 ian cheese http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=94#comment755 French Victories. We can forget the Napoleanic battles because Napolean was a Corsican Italian, a gangster of his day, rather like Al Capone. And what 'appened to'im? Wed 03 Nov 2010 19:27:25 GMT+1 wigan winge http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=94#comment754 it will be okay till we have a difference of opinion then the french will surrender Wed 03 Nov 2010 18:14:42 GMT+1 Pandora http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=94#comment753 79. At 09:19am on 02 Nov 2010, Biggeordie wrote:Would it be called sleeping with the enemy?-------------------------------------------------------I would modify this to sleeping with the neighbours. French are not in any terms enemy, come on! They are good neighbours and we enjoy their wine and cheese. (it's okay if they hate british beef or cheddar). (i am not French by the way!) Wed 03 Nov 2010 18:08:34 GMT+1 sirbarrbarr http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=94#comment752 5.15 03/11/2010Comnios list of French battle wins is a bit off beam.1942 - This was an orderly retreat. 1809 - this was won by a coalition of three armies - just one of them French1690 - this was a battle between the French colony of New France and a New England colony. A bit much to say US.1066 - William the Conquerer was not French.Not much left is there ? Wed 03 Nov 2010 18:03:36 GMT+1 ian cheese http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=94#comment751 This post has been Removed Wed 03 Nov 2010 18:00:17 GMT+1 rifak666 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=94#comment750 Oh how I wish we as a nation that didn't think it needs or has a right to go around the world trying to enforce it's stunted view of so called democracy on those who don't want it, we make more problems in doing so and in the process actually make our fears real, this in turn makes us paranoid so we feel the need to arm ourselves up to the teeth.Take rent a rocket, soory Trident, it is a weapon we can never really imagine using so why bother with it, and anyway any problems that do arise the yanks have bucket loads of missiles etc and will be more than happy to fire a few of them off to prove a point, so why don't we scrap all our nukes and just pay for advertising on the yanks ICBM's, cheaper way of doing things don't ya think!?. Wed 03 Nov 2010 17:38:17 GMT+1 doomjeffs http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=94#comment749 I don't see why this won't work. We could be in charge of the advance, & they could organize the retreat. Wed 03 Nov 2010 17:20:33 GMT+1 comnios http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=94#comment748 Can anyone recall a French military victory ?----------------------------------------------Here are ONLY some exmaples...1942 - Battle of Bir Hakeim, French forces defeated German under Romel and Italy, allowing Montgomery victory in El Alamein1809 - Battle of Wagram, France defeated Austrian Empire1806 - Battle of Jena, France defeated Prussia1805 - Battle of Austerlitz, France defeated coalition of Austrian Empire and Russia1796 - Battle of Lodi, France defeated Austrian Empire1690 - Battle of Quebec, France defeated US1427 - Joan of Arc defeated several time the English army1066 - France invaded England732 - Battle of Tours, France stopped Muslim invasion of Europe Wed 03 Nov 2010 17:14:21 GMT+1 mintman60 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=93#comment747 If one thing comes out of this forum it is how poor our grasp of history is. Its been mentioned the French surrendered yes in WW2 but not in WW1 when their losses were massive. In the second war they relied on an ill advised static fortification, the Maginot Line, which the germans flew over and went through Belgium to out flank leaving the troops in the forts cut off(some forts fought to the last man)and the local commanders were over ruled and asked to surrender. If the French had invested more in aircraft and tanks rather than in a WW1 static fortification the outcome of WW2 might have been different.We now need to get our defence policey sorted out, if it is not got right we could end up with our own "Maginot line" type of gross miscalculation to the equipment and type of forces needed in 10 or 20 years time. Wed 03 Nov 2010 16:51:08 GMT+1 Denisleeds http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=93#comment746 Sacre bleu - c'est n'est pas possible! Les rosbifs et les grenouilles! Quelle bon idee! Bravo monsieurs Dave et Nicolas! Wed 03 Nov 2010 16:50:14 GMT+1 ian cheese http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=93#comment745 100. At 09:44am on 02 Nov 2010, danixd wrote:Calling France surrender monkeys is the equivalent of calling all German's nazis. It is pathetic-------OK, the French are not cheese eating surrender monkeys (courtesy of George Bush Jnr.), but they certainly consume a vast amount of snails & frogs! And our dear friends the Germans today, I agree, are not Nazis, no way, but, certainly on a league of their own in being sausage guzzlers! Wed 03 Nov 2010 16:44:37 GMT+1 This is a colleague announcement http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=93#comment744 This is one of the few occasions when reason seems to have prevailed. Unlike, for instance, the BSE crisis when Britain was essentially the only country with a significant problem in that way, yet we bizarrely insisted on boycotting French beef, and demanded supermarkets only stocked British meat...hmmm. Wed 03 Nov 2010 16:37:23 GMT+1 ian cheese http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=93#comment743 95. At 09:38am on 02 Nov 2010, Kuradi Vitukari wrote:Only on issues of mutual interest.--------You are becoming vaguer & vaguer from post to post. Please specify what you mean by mutual interest! Wed 03 Nov 2010 16:36:49 GMT+1 squeezy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=93#comment742 This should have happened years ago. The French have a nuclear deterrant like ours, their airforce is strong, and they have the Foreign legion to match our SAS. I wish this had happened when I was in the RAF - sipping wine with my counterparts on exercise. Wed 03 Nov 2010 16:36:02 GMT+1 ann bennett http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=93#comment741 The man is clueless on how to run a government He just enjoys playing at being president and all the perks that go with it. Obama should have stuck with Rev. Wright (his mentor) he would have been great in that kind of church.Living in the US we see far more of who and what he is than you see over in the UK etc. Wed 03 Nov 2010 16:23:46 GMT+1 sirbarrbarr http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=93#comment740 It would seem from today's news that both nations could save a pound (or euro) or two if the countries shared an official photographer. Wed 03 Nov 2010 15:51:52 GMT+1 Alan B http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=92#comment739 This must make the anti europe brigade in the torie party really mad.They want the tories to withdraw from the EU and their torie/lib goverment is forging closer ties with europe. What a laugh. Wed 03 Nov 2010 15:36:24 GMT+1 ian cheese http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=92#comment738 100. At 09:44am on 02 Nov 2010, danixd wrote:re-mankind------You appear to have a rose tinted view of the goodness of Mankind. We cannot afford to let our guard down: others will always misinterprete our kindness for weakness & go for our throats! Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:48:11 GMT+1 Don http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=92#comment737 We seen to pretty good at reversing these days Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:46:43 GMT+1 Pandora http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=92#comment736 Yes they should. Will the controls on the nuclear system be converted to French language for their use? and converted back to English for us? Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:41:05 GMT+1 Total Mass Retain http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=92#comment735 693. At 11:20am on 03 Nov 2010, Sauron the Deciever wrote:I think sharing defense strategies between France and the UK is a fantastic idea. If Britain needs expert technical assistance on how to build tanks with 15 reverse gears, who better than the French to assist. And if Britain is ever in need of efficiency advice and assistance in the faster production of white flags, I can think of no better nation than France to seek that help from. And when it comes to training in the skilled arts of "Turn Tail and Run” tactical maneuvers or the good old reliable “We Surrender!”, there is no nation on earth that can provide such skilled techniques as the French. We Brits have been truly blessed with this agreement. Thank you France.I strongly suggest you visit the French city of Verdun, its battlefields, graveyards and ossuary. You may then form a very different opinion about the French and their courage in warfare. Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:29:46 GMT+1 comnios http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=92#comment734 France is notoriously weak when the time comes to stand up and be counted.I would expect such an ignorant comment to come froman American, not from an Englishman.France gave up once in History, and because of their government...it was in WWII.France is the country that fought and won most wars in History, you guys should know better considering the huge amount of time we kicked your asses :)Besides, France is the most advance nuclear power today, nobody can deny that.I wish English would stop their submission to the US, realize they are part of Europe. With a trio UK-France-Germany fully involved, US, China, India and Brazil would be far behind..... Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:27:01 GMT+1 laine http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=92#comment733 some english poeple say that france was aginst england during fakland war .IT S TOTALLY WONG THIS IS THE EVIDENCE : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1387576/How-France-helped-us-win-Falklands-war-by-John-Nott.htmlyou ll see this report of the telegraph co uk , Sir Jhon Nott has said : "In so many ways Mitterrand and the French were our greatest allies," Sir John says. As soon as the conflict began, France made available to Britain Super-Etendard and Mirage aircraft - which it had supplied to Argentina - so Harrier pilots could train against them.STOP TO LIE ABOUT FRANCE ! it s a pity that english poeple always lies about france , we should to do this deal with germany as usual and not with england ...you ll never change in UK . Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:17:50 GMT+1 Trendy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=92#comment732 Is this not similar to what we have with the US, on paper or not ! One thing is for sure, having had experience with French forces I would far prefer having a French soldier by my side in a conflict than an American. They can survive without a Cola machine as well.If we absolutely have to work together so closely with another country then France is not a bad choice. Not only that but the Exocete rockets would then be on our side ! Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:17:42 GMT+1 Wicked_Witch_of_the_West_Coast http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=91#comment731 [714. At 12:40pm on 03 Nov 2010, laine wrote:the messages say that france was against england during the faklands war vs argentina , it s totally wrong .the missiles exocet were sold in argentina before the war .do you know that the british air force has had a training period secretly vs the french vessels and french aircrafts " super etendart " because argentina had them .for the "jokes" about white flag ,surrender etc ....i think that the british humour is better than this !in 1914 the french army has never surrendered and in 1939 we have beginned the war vs hitler the first (not in 1941 after pearl harbor ) .germany has lost a lot of planes, tanks ,troops during 6 weeks and had not enough (planes ) to attack with efficiency england .thanks god england is an island to help vs germany .the french troops have continued the war until the general PETAIN ask to stop the war if not we could to continue in the south of france and to go in north africa to continue with the colonny and the most of the french army .finally 100000 french soldiers have continued to fight with de gaulle in north africa until 1945 in germany .this is the reality and fact . try to learn the history in UK !]And perhaps you could start by learning the difference between 'England' and 'UK/British'?My only issue with the French is the way de Gaulle cr@pped all over us after all the assistance we gave him and his people. Then again, he was a thoroughly unpleasant person, so it was only to be expected. Even the French tried to kill him! Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:16:13 GMT+1 deanarabin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=91#comment730 723. At 1:43pm on 03 Nov 2010, BaconandEgg2wice wrote:1, First step to an EU army/defence system which will be controlled by non elected EU president/foreign minister/government. 2. I thought the Tories were more savvy than this, I really did. For all of her faults, the one thing Maggy T always did in dealing on the EU and the world stage: put the UK first and not be naive or pushed about.-------------------------------------------------------------------------Can you produce any evidence (or even train of forward looking logic) for your Point1 above? Or do you just think that's what will happen? Your Point2 suggests that the Treaties we're discussing were something into which our Government was pushed. Why do you say that? Who do you believe did the pushing? and if we allowed ourselves to be pushed, for what reason? Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:15:42 GMT+1 Wicked_Witch_of_the_West_Coast http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=91#comment729 [596. At 11:09pm on 02 Nov 2010, zzgrark wrote:423. At 5:11pm on 02 Nov 2010, mintman60 wrote:The descendants of the Norman French invaders from 1066 are still in charge of the UK, so are they joining up with their very distant cousins again ? -------------------------------------Who are these descendants?My family name can be traced back to Normandy. I can assure you I am not even remotely in charge of the UK. [ 8000 Normans (Danish Vikings who had settled in France hence the name) would have been totally subsumed within the then existing population of England (about 1.5million Angles, Saxons, Danes & Celts) within a few centuries. ]The ordinary ones would have, but William made sure that he replaced the nobility with his own people. And they've continued to inter-breed with each other ever since. It wasn't until the latter days of the Plantagenets that the English had a king who spoke English as his first language, instead of French!Personally, as someone with Norman ancestry herself, I'm more than happy to have an excuse to sing the Marseillaise - probably the best antional anthem on the planet! Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:11:44 GMT+1 teedoff http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=91#comment728 I find myself filled with mirth at the ignorance of so many of the comments on this debate. I didn't realise that, in this age of PC and globalisation, that there were still so many people who hold racist grudges for assumed sleights, most of which happened before their birth. The introspection of these people leaves me sadder.I take my own name and see how it stretches across Europe, almost unscathed: from Eoin to Ian to Owen to John to Jan to Ivan, and probably many others, but the point is made. Throughout the centuries of our closeness we have not only fought, but have traded as well. Brave souls have crossed the huge gulf we call the English Channel and settled on the other side. We have truly been partners with the other countries of Europe for longer than we care to remember. America, Canada, Australia, India, South Africa, etc. on the other hand - these are (or were) territories we colonised, singly or with other European nations. They have never been partners, but sons and daughters, some breaking out independently and doing well, or not, while others have stayed closer to us, but our relationship with them is fundamentally different.And that is why we have a blind-spot for America. They have not been nearly as friendly as we make out, but we apologise and forgive them, forgetting their spite as most parents try to do. It doesn't matter if our child, now away from home, steals, kills, maims, and even takes advantage of us - we'll still want to show them that we care. We're not like that with our neighbours. Sure, we built the neighbourhood together and all live locally, but to ask us to take part in a neighbourhood watch scheme - that's just too much.Well, I've seen a neighbourhood watch scheme in action and when the (world) police aren't policing properly then I'd rather have that scheme than rely on the police to help me if I need it. They're very slow to respond these days. Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:07:00 GMT+1 igloomansion http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=91#comment727 "Trust the French, never. Our history has been spent fighting them or saving them."I AM CANADIAN. Just for the record, matey, I am 43 years old, and of Scottish, Irish descent.In all my years, I have met many, many Canadian French people and a few from France. A few I have been fortunate enough to call a true and trusted friend!I am a West Coaster.But Montreal rocks!My fine country is primarily First Nations, English and French, and a mix of people from every where else on this Planet!Pretty well every one of them I have met are good men and women!Yes there are some big issues here, as there is everywhere, but most I have met love Canada and have BIG HEARTS!I served a short time in the Canadian navy, serving alongside french speaking service members.Can the UK and France work together?Are shared defence strategies a good idea?Should more countries join forces on defence?From the many posts I have read, it appears that many of you do not want that to happen.But I say give it a chance.Remembrence day draws near here in Canada and elsewhere...I say we must do all we can to stop wars, to uphold human and animal rights, and respect and protect our planet! Wear your poppies proudly I say!And remember the old saying..."Never again". Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:06:16 GMT+1 Total Mass Retain http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=91#comment726 718. At 1:19pm on 03 Nov 2010, Mike Hall wrote:This is plain wrong. Put simply the French cannot every be trusted to support the UK's legitimate interests. During the Falklands War, French technicians, fitted French missiles to French made aircraft that subsequently attacked the British Fleet - not even a word of regret from the French, who could have at least played the neutral card and let the the Argentinians do the dirty work themselves. Err, wrong. The French did remain neutral in the Falklands War. So much so they banned French help for Argentina and export of resupplies. They gave Britain the secret codes and technical information on the Exocets they had supplied. Some neutral party, eh?The USA had provided Argentina the Skyhawk aircraft that sank HMS Antelope. Do you think we should stop our "special relationship" with the USA because of this? Wed 03 Nov 2010 14:00:03 GMT+1 Robin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=91#comment725 Yes it is a very good thing! Britain and France are both part of Europe and geographically adjacent. Recent history has shown all too clearly the folly of following the Americans everywhere especially into battle. Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:57:17 GMT+1 Total Mass Retain http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=91#comment724 708. At 12:21pm on 03 Nov 2010, PlanetEnglish wrote:The CONDEMs seem to be following the BlairBrown line in choosing the EU over alternatives - that needed to be created/revived.France & the EU are a road to nowhere.They cannot stand up to PlanetPutin, without Uncle Sam on their side, in any confrontation in Europe.I have news for you: Britain and France combined have been unable to defeat a dominant eneny in Europe on their own since 1914. In WW1 they needed US help and even then the German army was not defeated in the field. In WW2 they needed both the USA and USSR to defeat Germany. Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:55:30 GMT+1 Serendipo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=90#comment723 Lot of misinterpretation of history here. At least the French still have some national pride in being er... French. But for the English Channel and a few spitfires the same fate that befell the French in 1940 would have happened to us (and nearly did) so don't call the kettle black.For most of the Cold War we were (and still are) a member of NATO a mutual defence organisation whereby each member (including Germany and France) undertakes to come to another's aid. I don't seem to recall when the Warsaw Pact stood ready to swarm through the Iron Curtain any complaints that our defence was in the hands of Germany and France along with others.This is the 21st Century and our true friends are on this side of the Atlantic. Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:49:00 GMT+1 BaconandEgg2wice http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=90#comment722 First step to an EU army/defence system which will be controlled by non elected EU president/foreign minister/government. I thought the Tories were more savvy than this, I really did. For all of her faults, the one thing Maggy T always did in dealing on the EU and the world stage: put the UK first and not be naive or pushed about. Successive governments since have rolled over to have their belly tickled at every opportunity since. Good little doggys. Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:43:07 GMT+1 Autar Dhesi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=90#comment721 Britain and France indeed inked a significant dot in history by signing two treaties in London on November 2 on close cooperation between their armed forces in the field and shared access to each other's nuclear testing facilities. This development has been largely welcome in the two countries.Prime Minister David Cameron's assertion that agreements neither imply the creation of European army nor shared nuclear deterrence gives a clear diplomatic message to the contrary. In any case, understatement is a widely appreciated British virtue. However, one must say that David has been lucky in achieving what Prime Minister Harold Wilson,a brilliant statesman, earnestly tried to do under very difficult circumstances without success.Now with dismantling of Soviet Union,considered by President Ronald Reagon an evil empire indicating high level of mistrust between East and West,and friendly attitude of French President Nicolas Sarkozy to-wards Anglo- Saxons,the defence agreements seem to be a cake walk for the British Prime Minister and French President. In contrast,Prime Minister Harold Wilson, who equally meant well for his country and Europe, had to go overboard to convince skeptical General DeGaul of Britain's earnest desire to be a genuine partner of United Europe.But he had to pay a heavy personal price for it as the great General did not change his opinion about the Anglo-Saxons. The main reason for General's rigid stand was his perceived ill-treatment by the later during the Second World War.By quirk of fate,Harold came under the surveillance of his own intelligence for his efforts to do good for the country. What a shame! Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:36:13 GMT+1 Seqenenre http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=90#comment720 What's all this rubbish about the Falklands?Let them pay for their own defence. I can't see whe we want it anyway, being honest the only reason we do want it is because Atgentina invaded the place. If it hadn't been the subject of a minor spat dressed up as a war for political gain then it'd have been quietly given away like we did with the rest of the Empire.... Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:33:01 GMT+1 chrisk50 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=90#comment719 Are we talking about defence or attack systems. By the sound of some gun-ho war-mongers on here we need huge resources so we can attack countries.If one or the other Paris or London gets nuked guess what - Both cities feel it. If a missile is over Europe heading for USA and we knock it out, guess what Europe gets the radiation fallout.I want an European defence system built and controlled by Europeans to protect us not some other country.Most of our military equipment is designed and built by NATO countries, although BAE is the worlds biggest contractor it is only just over 50% UK owned, I suggest people look at who owns what and who makes the goods and where these companies are located. We are already in it together joining forces is just the next step. Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:32:43 GMT+1 Seqenenre http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=90#comment718 Why not?We need more money to fund MP's expenses etc, and the French need more money to pay their farmers and low age retirement funds...The problems in the Middle East can be solved by letting them get on with it, and by the Americans who seem to cause most of the grief there anyway. Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:26:06 GMT+1 Mike Hall http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=90#comment717 This is plain wrong. Put simply the French cannot every be trusted to support the UK's legitimate interests. During the Falklands War, French technicians, fitted French missiles to French made aircraft that subsequently attacked the British Fleet - not even a word of regret from the French, who could have at least played the neutral card and let the the Argentinians do the dirty work themselves. Their attitude has never altered and never will, Blair gave up part of our rebate to secure a reduction in CAP payments to France, we are still waiting. The French would sell cooking pots to cannibals and we party with them at our peril. Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:19:36 GMT+1 Tim in Singapore http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=90#comment716 Yes.Common sense.I realise that some people replying to this question are still fighting the Napoleonic wars but maybe they should drag themselves into the late 19th century. Er, sorry, the 20th. I mean the 21st.My only fear is that it will give the Sun a whole new opportunity to stereotype Johnny Foreigner, but it'll make a change from the Hun. Maybe the Daily Mail will adopt a more intelligent approach. But there again, maybe not ...Tim Wed 03 Nov 2010 13:16:15 GMT+1 noughter http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=89#comment715 This post has been Removed Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:51:03 GMT+1 in_the_uk http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=89#comment714 710. At 12:30pm on 03 Nov 2010, locust wrote:i'll fight and die with US forces - not with the frenchlook at them in the 'stan - REMF'sa few thousand troops doing what - wine tasting?-------------------------I would stand with any army on our side. But I would expert the french to run and the US to have a friendly fire accident. Standing shoulder to shoulder is for mutual benefit.However I wouldnt expect either to share military kit (testing is ok) although the US has shown it is a good friend to the UK. So I say god bless america (although I am athiest) and the french army has sunburnt armpits. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:49:47 GMT+1 laine http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=89#comment713 the messages say that france was against england during the faklands war vs argentina , it s totally wrong .the missiles exocet were sold in argentina before the war .do you know that the british air force has had a training period secretly vs the french vessels and french aircrafts " super etendart " because argentina had them .for the "jokes" about white flag ,surrender etc ....i think that the british humour is better than this !in 1914 the french army has never surrendered and in 1939 we have beginned the war vs hitler the first (not in 1941 after pearl harbor ) .germany has lost a lot of planes, tanks ,troops during 6 weeks and had not enough (planes ) to attack with efficiency england .thanks god england is an island to help vs germany .the french troops have continued the war until the general PETAIN ask to stop the war if not we could to continue in the south of france and to go in north africa to continue with the colonny and the most of the french army .finally 100000 french soldiers have continued to fight with de gaulle in north africa until 1945 in germany .this is the reality and fact . try to learn the history in UK ! Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:40:29 GMT+1 wvpTV http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=89#comment712 Did we ever get an apology and compensation for the French sinking the Rainbow Warrior?Wasn't this a relatively recent French special forces action against a British charities ship?How will the new agreement change French actions against us like this?Will it change French arms sales to those we are forced to fight (exocet misiles to Argentina used during Falklands war against us)?Will it change French militant action against the UK (eg: obstructing our freight)?Will it change Frances lack of immigrant control and assistance to such people to enter the UK (in essence an action against us)?This issue is opening a very big can of worms... Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:40:04 GMT+1 Some Guy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=89#comment711 I think it's a good thing... I am 30 and I hope that most of the anti-French sentiments are coming from the older generations, and therefore will be in decline or from the chavs that never really have a valid option on anything outside X-factor.In fact I think we should just go further sooner, go the whole way and get it over with...As someone who is involved with the internet and computer games for a living, there is a definite trend for the younger generations to consider themselves European over and above being English, French or German etc.Especially as soon as you have competitions involving country's outside the EU, then you find EU citizens pulling together like squabbling siblings facing someone from outside the family.On-line in some communities you could be fooled into thinking we already have an EU superstate. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:39:12 GMT+1 British Freikorps http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=89#comment710 If one more person mentions "you can't trust the French they sold missiles to the Argentinians during the Falklands War" I will scream.Please check the facts:1) At the outbreak of hostilities France immidiately stopped any arms supplies to Argentina.2) After the US, the UK was the second largest arms supplier to Argentina.3) The Argentine aircraft carrier, 25th of May, used to be HMS VENERABLE!4) We sold two modern Type 42 destroyers to Argentina just before the war started.What would people prefer? A relationship with an equal partner such as France or the role of a poodle who is sometimes allowed in the house by an American master? "Special realtionship" get real. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:36:46 GMT+1 locust http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=89#comment709 i'll fight and die with US forces - not with the frenchlook at them in the 'stan - REMF'sa few thousand troops doing what - wine tasting? Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:30:02 GMT+1 Mercianknight http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=89#comment708 I think the idea is a good one in principle, I was just shocked that it was with the French. When have we ever agreed militarily (unless it involved saving their asses)?It's a sad day. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:28:55 GMT+1 PlanetEnglish http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=88#comment707 The CONDEMs seem to be following the BlairBrown line in choosing the EU over alternatives - that needed to be created/revived.France & the EU are a road to nowhere.They cannot stand up to PlanetPutin, without Uncle Sam on their side, in any confrontation in Europe.In Asia, PlanetMandarin wouldnt blink either, unless the EU sided with Uncle Sam. And with both Russia & USA plus China & India inside the East Asian Community, the EU is irrelevant in that part of the globe.That leaves only the Arabs - who prefer Europe, as they have burnt their bridges with the USA.So it looks like THE FINAL IS : EURABIA vs CHINDERICA.300 years in building PlanetEnglish - and we are staring into oblivion...Not the way to go, Dave ! Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:21:05 GMT+1 teedoff http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=88#comment706 "613. At 00:01am on 03 Nov 2010, Spickle wrote:The last time that was tried was in 1776, and we lost. The U.S. also has more nules than the whole of Europe. And as history has proven (Japan in 1945), they are not afraid to use them.*******You don't say? REALLY? Wow. And "nules" too! Do you mean "mules"? Donkeys are pretty deadly."__________________________________________I was struck by what "nules" might be as well, but I eventually figured out they must be "nukes", short for nuclear bombs. The issue I have isn't with the spelling, but with the arithmetic, and possibly the geography as well.America and Russia agreed earlier this year to a follow-on from start that would reduce both countries' nuclear deployed arsenal to 1550 warheads and 700 deployed systems. Russia has more short-range nuclear weapons than USA, and also more overall weaponry, though this is very difficult to count accurately. Now add in the rest of Europe and, even with the new agreement, Europe has more deployed weapons than America. That's the arithmetic. Now the geography. Yes, despite many of its outlying territories forming a huge part of Asia, Russia itself is in Europe - both parts of it. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:19:07 GMT+1 Anthony Rat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=88#comment705 This post has been Removed Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:18:48 GMT+1 WhatsThis http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=88#comment704 Why not let them do with like with everything else and outsource to China. China and Russia must be rolling on the floor laughing at all of this. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:14:01 GMT+1 Larry http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=88#comment703 What Has Failed To End. On Our World .Is it War since when .After what World Wars.? Or is Our World Like in Another of such. Of What Wars Now.?So Countries Have what Nukes .So Does that Mean Testing of the Nukes.Would that Help Our World.? I Neither Say,, Yes or No .To What Country. That Could get Along Together . But I do Think That Countries .Should Try to Curb .Where of Their Aggressions .Towards what Other Countries.?If Countries Do Fail to Stop. Their Wars . What will the Outcome Be.In the End whom will suffer most .People ,or the World. People even what Rulers .Have no one to Blame but Themselves .From A Veteran .Larry. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:11:02 GMT+1 John McCormick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=88#comment702 The savings aren't as much as claimed. The cost of adding 10 reverse gears to everything will make this non-viable. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:07:51 GMT+1 Davy G http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=88#comment701 This smacks of ''Keep the British in Europe at any cost''. You cannot expect our Nation to ride cheek to cheek with any nation, when differant languages are spoken. The Conservatives have been anti Europe for decades, yet now they are sharing our security with them. Haven't we had more wars with France than any other nation ? Save me from bureaucrats who can't see past the end of their noses. I was brought up to believe that Governments planned for the future. Join with France.....Never. Wed 03 Nov 2010 12:05:24 GMT+1 colin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=88#comment700 well as i have said before this is not great Briton anymore,it should be called the land of Cameron.everything pointing in the same way as Zimbabwe. Wed 03 Nov 2010 11:52:41 GMT+1 locust http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=87#comment699 post 682 by Magi Tatcheryou say the us did not support 'us' during the falklands warRUBBISHthey provided intelligence inc satellite imagerythey supplied our aircraft with sidewinder missilesthey offered to 'lend' us a carrier under uk commandthats a hell of a lot on 'nothing' you muppet Wed 03 Nov 2010 11:48:44 GMT+1 powermeerkat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=87#comment698 "The British troops will have to learn the French words for surrender,and retreat."No they wouldn't have to.A simple white sheet waved feverishly would do the job. Wed 03 Nov 2010 11:44:01 GMT+1 powermeerkat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=87#comment697 "What short memories people have. During the Falklands war, french technicians were arming our enimes planes with their anti-shipping missiles that sank our ships and killed our forces."While Americans were supplying British Navy with their recon sats' pertinent imagery. Wed 03 Nov 2010 11:40:21 GMT+1 MrWonderfulReality http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=87#comment696 LEST WE FORGET - that the banking collapse has afflicted a detrimental domino effect FAR FAR beyond the comprehension of most people.We will actually be lucky to afford just one aircraft carrier, due to continueing growing UK national debts, even with cuts, we will be lucky to afford a navy whos main vessels are rowing boats.The consequences are gathering momentumn. The USA is on the verge of bankrupsy, it is ONLY being held up via further borrowings at present of £1TRILLION a year.If you think present UK expenditure and military cuts are bad, you aint seen nuthin yet!!!!Present cuts are just £80 billion.WE borrow nearly DOUBLE that each year at the moment, hence do a bit of arithmetic.In 2015, or even BEFORE, there will FACTUALLY be ANOTHER round of CUTS. There is NO ESCAPE from them.Cutting £80 billion over 4 years equates to just £20 billion cuts per year, which is MILES away from yearly debt borrowings of £150billion.People NEED to wake up to the MAGNITUDE of our situation.We EITHER need to increase UK tax income by a further £130 BILLION a year (£150billion yearly borrowings less £20 billion cuts = £130 billion borrowings) or CUT more public expenditure.Now work out the NEEDED £130 billion in taxes.To get an extra £130 billion in taxes, you are going to have to generate at least an extra £400billion to £500 BILLION of value in UK economy to enable it to be taxed to raise the £130billion.If this is NOT met, which in 4 years is a FACTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY, then FACTUALLY, more & even GREATER cuts than present ones are going to be IMPLEMENTED.Escape from Colditz was possible, escape from further UK expenditure cuts is an economic/debt impossibility and anyone who says otherwise is basically a liar, which is easily proveable in a court of law by available evidence of information/statistics/facts and reality.Hence this step of sharing aircraft carriers and nuclear facilitys, I DOUBT is the last step in combining military assets.In reality, it is MORE probable that in 5 years time UK military and other UK public employees will be paid LESS than today because as long as our TOTAL national debt continues to grow, there will be LESS & LESS money to pay for them.Ipersonally think that Europe and USA will take a fierce knock in wage levels across the board. it will be the ONLY way in which we can endemically compete with other nations who pay much less.This banking collapse will factually have a long term effect of equalising the world in respect of economic wages and costs etc. The preasure on the west is ONLY one way - DOWNWARDS. Wed 03 Nov 2010 11:37:29 GMT+1 Le Powerful http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_british_and_french_defe.html?page=87#comment695 The French don't call the English Channel the English Channel. They call it La Manche. Maybe we could try and agree the name of that stretch of water (La Mer Anglais or The Broomstick perhaps?) and see if that indicates how well we will do in military terms.We've got a 50 year agreement so after we've agreed the name of the English Channel / La Manche we'll have about 2 years left of the agreement to worry about planes and boats. Wed 03 Nov 2010 11:32:22 GMT+1